I mentioned 4 countries in response to someone known for talking about a fifth. There's comfortably a dozen conflicts you could be referring to - but if I had to guess, you're volunteering as a case study proving that the only thing sloshing around in the empty heads of tankies is American diabolism.

You're enemies of communism - you're too busy licking the arsehole of your autocrat leaders to satiate your hate boner for the US to see that you're defending the elimination of worker enfranchisement, the advancement of genocide, and the centralisation of resources into a system that no sane person wants, and sure as shit isn't communism. You tarnish the name of communism, and turn people that would otherwise advocate for it against the concept - and with dipshits like you peddling your Nazi-tier brain worms, I can't blame them.

Anarchy79... China - anarchist? USSR - anarchist? DPRK - anarchist? Vietnam anarchist after what - fucking 1930? Fuuuuck you.

...please tell me I've missed and that you're not a goddamned tankie.

3 questions:

What definition of communism do you use that has no regard for worker enfranchisement, worker control of the means of production, or decommodification?

Why would anyone want socialism if it looks like the USSR, China, or DPRK? The socialistic characteristics of those countries are weaker than what you'd find in the US, let alone a social democracy.

Why is an active move away from communist principles required to transition to communism, and how many decades should workers expect to live under those comparatively (or absolutely) shitty conditions before actual communism is achieved.

This is why tankies are the enemy of actual communists - you defend fascist regimes, with worse conditions and fewer rights than we have, then hold them up as a glorious example of what we can achieve under communism, then when issues are pointed out, you invariably blame the US. The CIA has pulled some bullshit, but they're not responsible for the state of China, the USSR, or the DPRK.