Well, you're not wrong, but to be fair, the US is known to engage in covert activities and it's foreign (and some domestic) activities are often diametrically opposed to what the US claims to stand for.

> Because TikTok is a software asset of a foreign adversary known to engage in covert activities and which is diametrically opposed ideologically with nearly everything the U.S. (however flawed) stands for.

You can make the same argument to ban Facebook because of its use by the GRU, and it would be equally silly.

What is the GRU? Do you understand that Facebook is in fact an American owned and operated entity?

See here: https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

FB is a American owned an operated, but clearly if state actors have access (as they did at Twitter [0]) it hardly matters.

[0]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/former-twit...

This makes sense from the US standpoint, but not necessarily for people living in, say, EU.

At this point, after four years of unprecedented corruption and ignorance-as-official-policy, it's extremely hard to see what the US "stands for". I'm saying that with all sincerity, and it is blatantly clear during the current banana-republic actions of the administration and its enablers that the US does not represent democracy.

Find actual abuses by the application or its data and then there are credible arguments. Simply alluding to some notion of evil-by-association is a dangerous game for the US to play given PRISM, FISA warrants, etc.

And let's be real -- you're typing on your made in China computer full of components made in China, your data traversing made in china routers and relays, etc. This never had anything to do with any imagined security risk, and had to do with the corrupt manchild targeting a platform for carrying content unfavorable to him. It is just another demonstration that the US doesn't "stand for" much [1].

[1] - The only saving grace right now is effectively the so called "Deep State". The career judges and civil servants who don't twist every norm and rule and precedent because of this corrupt tinpot dictator and his pathetic army of deplorables. They may not be enough, though.

If you understand PRISM, NSA, and CIA, how can you not understand the decision of banning TikTok. It is like the drug dealer tells you not to do drugs.

The drug dealer is telling you not to do other dealers' drugs.

Exactly. This drug dealer is family, what is the reason not to trust him. He knows how dirty drug can be.

You seem to be implying that a nation has no right to make policy aimed at defending itself from foreign threats (perceived or material)... because the nation has had a buffoon for POTUS for the last 4 years...?? The number of logical fallacies that you've bundled up in that statement is impressive.

Would you feel different if TikTok were software of Russian origin? I suspect you would.

While your argument may not necessarily wrong, the same logic is applied by China and some other countries to suppress foreign media, social or not, companies, and is viewed as suppression of free speech. A value many deemd defining to these United States.

I don't know why you suspect that, I don't think that Russia is quite the American boogeyman you think it is, outside of attempts to use them to make Trump look bad/worse.

I didn't imply that whatsoever. But given that the US is awash in Chinese equipment and software, using that argument for this pernicious attempt at a ban is foolish sophistry. It is a farcical foundation for a justification.

It's telling that one of the most common, and earliest, comments to justify a TikTok ban is "well China banned/blocked XXXX". It is similar to this administration repeatedly justifying super-spreader events by citing looters. Is that really the standard you are striving towards?

"Would you feel different if TikTok were software of Russian origin?"

No, I wouldn't at all. That is absurd. Russia actually has a fairly healthy software industry, including many games and even security tools like Kaspersky.

The US which in the view of the rest of the world mostly stands for financial slavery and murdering children (as long as it's abroad! Unless they're not "caucasian"). At this point in time it is fair to say not standing for "everything the U.S. stands for" is the humane option and anything else is essentially a (war) crime.