From Vietnam, we have a new poetic writer. His words sing, and sting. His name is Sony Thang. He is not alone.
This new vector of resistance can be seen from China as well. The resistance consists of a bedrock belief that the current empire cannot be allowed to flower again, along with resistance, in the cracks of the concrete. It must now take its licks and do penance. This resistance is one of individuals, and it aims at taking down individual by individual, those that support the empire in ways of empire, even though they are professing innocence. One by one, empirical soldiers are being taken on and emaciated. This is part of our resistance, but it is expressed in words that sing of what is deep in heart and soul.
Sony Thang has taken on a few, and the latest is Scott Ritter, who happens to be a litmus empire soldier for me (nothing personal). Scott, in one of his latest interviews, expressed exactly how empire deals with what it cannot deal with. They kill it, as they have no other methodology and their philosophical and ethical standards are paper thin. The conversation in this interview was about Zelensky, and Scott said that he must be taken out (removed, one way or the other. What he called for was clear but he said it in an acceptable manner). The US is excellent at such work, and they should do it (like the cat killing the mouse and bringing it back home as a gift to the world).
Let that sink in for a moment.
Russia did not take him out. Nobody took him out. There is a reason, as we are not amateurs, and he has to be allowed to come to his own punitive phase, just like Netanyahu and his cohorts. Otherwise, the empire removes its problem that it is unable to deal with and announces it was a gift to the world (do remember the killing of General Suleimani) to make themselves the winner. In reality, what they think they killed, flowers again, and General Suleimani will never leave our consciousness. The rot that they think they killed, flowers again, as we see now Nazism flowering in Europe and Zionism in Israel. It never really gets killed because empire steals a few of those and makes them flower. (The list is long, ISIS, Nazis from Germany, etc.)
Sony Thang does not allow this. Let’s take a look. The conversation is on the surface about war with Iran, but under the surface, it becomes clear what it is about.
Scott:
Witkoff admitted that if a Russian tactical nuclear weapon was used in Ukraine, the markets would crash because of the fear of a larger US-Russian nuclear conflict. It’s a different scenario with Iran. There would be no general life-ending nuclear war, just the end of Iran and our traditional understanding of speculation-based oil markets. But the markets would adopt.
Sony: ʙᴏʀɴ ɪɴ ᴠɪᴇᴛɴᴀᴍ ɢʀᴇᴡ ᴜᴘ ɪɴ ᴇᴜʀᴏᴘᴇ ʟɪᴠᴇ ɪɴ ᴀꜱɪᴀ
Scott, I see you’re still mistaking escalation for strategy and delusion for analysis. You think the markets will “adapt” to a nuclear strike on Iran? You think empire can simply “belt tighten” its way through Armageddon?
That’s not realism. That’s imperial hubris dressed as game theory. You speak like someone who’s never felt history close its jaws.
Let me tell you plainly: If the U.S. uses nuclear weapons against Iran—even “tactical” ones—the spell breaks. Forever. The myth of Western restraint dies in the open. The lie of rules-based order evaporates in radioactive dust.
What follows won’t be “market adaptation.” It’ll be irreversible fragmentation. China won’t wait to be next. Russia will tighten its alliance with Tehran. The Global South will turn its back for good.
And every nation not under Washington’s boot will know the truth: if you don’t arm yourself, you will be annihilated.
That’s not proliferation. That’s inevitability. You say, “Only one nation walks away.” No, Scott. No one walks away from nuclear war. Not cleanly. Not economically. Not morally.
But let’s entertain your scenario. Iran is wiped out. Oil hits $500 a barrel. The Strait of Hormuz is a graveyard. The global economy implodes—not just Europe and Asia, but the dollar itself, because trust dies when empire burns its last moral pretense.
And here’s the part your Pentagon fantasies never compute: It’s not just bombs that bring nations to their knees. It’s legitimacy. Once lost, never regained. And the U.S.? Already staggering from endless wars—it won’t rise from the ashes of another charred country. It’ll sink into them.
You claim you “assess the world as it is”? Then look again. The American empire is not ascending. It’s cornered. It’s flailing. It’s threatening annihilation not out of strength, but fear. Fear that the world it dominated is slipping away. Fear that Iran refuses to kneel. And fear that history, which you once claimed would hold America accountable, is no longer on your side.
So keep listing your bombers, your submarines, your low-yield fantasies. Because beneath all that steel and strategy lies a single truth:
You’ve already lost the moral war. And when that goes? Everything else follows.
Scott:
That’s a lot of words to make my point: war must be avoided. So why don’t you apply your affinity for prolixity to explain to Iran why holding onto a capability that brings them nothing is a foolish move that threatens global peace and security?
Sony:
I see you’ve retreated to your favorite maneuver—pretending that your argument is about “avoiding war,” while laying the intellectual groundwork for one. Let me be blunt. You’ve spent paragraphs rationalizing why the U.S. might need to nuke Iran, detailing weapons platforms, deployment strategies, and doctrinal frameworks.
That’s not an argument against war. That’s war with a PowerPoint.
Now you ask why Iran would “hold on” to a capability that brings it “nothing.” Nothing? No, Scott. It brings them survival. It brings them deterrence in a world where Western “security” means permanent subjugation, and Western diplomacy means: disarm, then die.
Ask yourself: North Korea has a nuclear deterrent. Libya gave theirs up. One got summits. The other got sodomized on camera. That’s the real equation.
That’s the law your “rules-based order” is too cowardly to admit. You want to lecture Iran on “global peace and security,” when the very structure of that “peace” is a pyramid of corpses, built on lies, sanctions, assassinations, and shattered nations.
You say a bomb brings them “nothing”? No. It brings them the one thing your empire fears:. Leverage. The ability to say no. That’s what threatens “global peace,” by which you mean: Western control.
Let me put it in Jungian terms since you fancy yourself rational: Your worldview projects the shadow—your own will to domination—onto the Other, then calls their resistance a threat. But the danger isn’t Iran wanting a bomb. It’s the West believing only it should ever have them. Iran doesn’t threaten the world. It threatens the illusion that the world must remain chained to the U.S. boot. And that illusion is cracking. So no, I won’t “explain” to Iran why it should disarm while Israel stockpiles warheads in silence and the U.S. reserves the right to annihilate whoever steps out of line.
Because peace without sovereignty is not peace. It’s occupation with better PR.
And if Iran survives by refusing to kneel, then so be it. Better a sovereign nation that stands ready—than a graveyard that once obeyed.
A commentator:
With respect: Why don’t you explain to your government that its foolish to threaten global peace and security for a nuclear program which (TO DATE) is peaceful!!!
Scott:
I tried. They deployed bombers. Next?
Seven B-2 bombers deployed to Diego Garcia. Numerous C-17 flights into Diego Garcia. Ten KC-135 tankers to Diego Garcia. An Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine in the Indian Ocean. And there are those who still argue Iran shouldn’t negotiate to reduce its nuclear profile. This is literally becoming a question of Iran’s existential survival.
Sony:
What you’ve just said is exactly what empire wants you to believe.
That domination is proof of destiny.
That deception is a sign of superiority.
That the more people are fooled, the more righteous the one holding the whip must be.
But that’s not wisdom. That’s just predator logic—confusing power with truth, and submission with virtue.
You ask what it says about people who fall for it? It says they were wounded. Colonized not just by armies, but by ideas. Taught to worship what they fear, and doubt what they are. That’s not a flaw of their character. That’s a symptom of psychological war.
The West didn’t win because it was better.
It won because it lied better.
It rewrote gods.
Buried languages.
Erased ancestors.
Then called the rubble “civilization.”
It didn’t civilize the world. It shattered it. And then sold the broken pieces back as “freedom.” You think conquest proves moral superiority?
Then by that logic:
Every abused child is inferior to their abuser.
Every bombed village deserved it.
Every enslaved person was “less evolved.”
That’s not philosophy. That’s pathology.
Jung said, “The most dangerous things are unconscious.” And what could be more unconscious than believing genocide is a gift? I’m not ashamed that people fell for it. I’m furious that someone designed it that way. So no, Luke (to another commentator).
The West was not “meant” to colonize the globe. It just got away with it for a while. And now, as the old order crumbles. The mask slips.
Because those who remember—those who see through the slogans and shame—are no longer silent.
They are no longer obedient.
And they are no longer alone.
Empires don’t fall because they’re defeated from without. They fall because people remember who they are.
From Saigon to Donetsk. From Gaza to Bamako. Memory is rising. And history is coming home.
—
This resistance (and Sony is not alone, is growing flowers in the concrete and is bubbling up everywhere) will not take any more because it will take out the footsoldiers. This resistance will expose empire actions mercilessly. This resistance will assist China to take down empire economically without a question. This resistance will support Russia in its current effort to shave the skin off empire, negotiation after negotiation. This resistance gave one more opportunity and saw that peace was yet another lie. You and I are part of this resistance. Do not stop writing!
“I see you’ve retreated to your favorite maneuver—pretending that your argument is about ‘avoiding war,’ while laying the intellectual groundwork for one. Let me be blunt. You’ve spent paragraphs rationalizing why the U.S. might need to nuke Iran, detailing weapons platforms, deployment strategies, and doctrinal frameworks. That’s not an argument… Read more »
We are not alone !
Merci sony thang..merci global south
Ho chi minh power !
Sony Thang: “Western diplomacy means: disarm, then die.” That is precisely what is currently demanded of Hamas in Gaza, and Iran. That both disarm. Hamas en toto, and Iran of its highly deterrent ballistic missiles. It was explicitly stated in amendments brought by Witkoff to Hamas, and in Trump’s letter… Read more »
hear hear … well stated