Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Yep, pre-Trump KJU was basically the maniac, nut job dictator of a tiny sad country. Thanks to Trump he's been given the world stage from which his national propaganda network can deliver the "news" to his people about how he's increasing NK's status in the world. Do you think Putin would have met with him if Trump hadn't first?
And I don't think the term is describing his position within his country. I don't think anyone is questioning that he's the ruler of his country. What people are questioning is whether or not he deserves a seat at the table with all the other leaders of the countries of the world and whether he deserves to be treated with the mutual respect they treat each other with. It's tough to argue "yes" given his behavior towards other countries and the fact he has virtually no regard for the lives within his country. That's not something you give oxygen to.
meh...they can make their own deals
It probably is. Truth is, S. Korea would wipe the floor with N. Korea in a conventional war. The nuclear threat is a different animal, though.
Agreed....and giving the slightest indication of approval while not amping up sanctions for the poor behavior is like giving the kid throwing a temper tantrum because you won't buy him x toy, $50 so he can buy x toy. It's beyond logical
When you look at the staged photos of Kim why won`t one of the guys sitting behind him take one for the team and country and just take him out?
I seem to remember Madeleine Albright tripping the light fantastic with his father on a diplomatic trip there in the nineties. Whilst they danced and negotiated, Il got nukes, likely from China. That worked well.
This is the first post in this thread. What has really changed from a NK standpoint in 6 years?
I heard a NY Times podcast about 6 or 8 months ago, I think, about the NK situation. Basically, it was pretty dire about the fact that NK looked like it was headed to get nukes, and it was incredibly complicated, and it was hard to see a path to stop them, and that the US has been trying to stop them for a while, and it is a huge clusterf*ck.
I probably wouldn't criticize past administrations since I couldn't get #### done either.
Hope vs expectations. (Hope comes without disappointment if something is not achieved. Expectations believe that a certain outcome will be achieved. And is disappointed when it is not.)
Really has no bearing on the end result? I get it, it's a personality issue.
Its unpresidential, like most things this guy does. If the 3rd string CB trash talked than couldn't make the play, he looks like an idiot.
Correct. Trump looks like an idiot. Not the first time, or the last.
Are we sure that Trump hasn't taken over for KJU? Seems like something Trump would tweetmsommer said:
Maybe because Trump was trying to make his meetings with NK as being Nobel-worthy when the whole time KJU playing him like a fiddle. North Korea was never serious about negotiating in good faith and while that is not Trump's fault I find it disturbing that he is still kissing KJU's behind.KCitons said:
Who cares? Firing missiles into the sea means nothing. When they hit something of relevance, then we can talk about how things are being handled.
So did President Moon Jae-In. It was overwhelmingly popular with actual Koreans. They supported the Trump/Kim summits as well. They didn't cry about how Kim was "legitimized"- whatever the #### that's supposed to mean. The only people up in arms about this are hardcore natsec people in the Koreas and the Trump-obsessed demographic in USA.
And how do they feel today with what NK is saying.
You should probably get out of your anarchist wormhole here and actually listen to what other nations are saying about this new relationship to get the proper gauge of how they feel about the relationship as outsiders looking in.
Both sides wanted a declaration of an end to the war. NK was on board with it, SK was on board with it, and the USA wasn't. Why? Why didn't the US simply declare an end to the war- like the Korean people wanted- and begin the delicate peace process from there? Trump could have done that. That would have been the best show of respect for the Koreans.
But NK wasn't really in board...because a condition of that deals with their nukes who h they aren't going to give up.
They were both "on board" in the sense that each were "on board if......xyz conditions are met"....each had their version of xyz conditions and they don't agree, especially on the nuclear weapons part.
Some of us see fit to care about what the world thinks in the sense we can actually practice a workable foreign policy based in give-and-take diplomatic relations. When the rest of the world decides that Yassar Arafat needs a Nobel Peace Prize, a general distrust of world opinion is required for a hegemony like ourselves.
I often wonder if there is ANY pause in hitting the "Submit Reply" button on some of these posts....though I am not really sure what you are talking about specifically.Thank you for ignoring the stinky bait laid elsewhere
That's tough. Isn't the rest of the world also making a calculus over domestic and international allied lives lost in the event of a nuclear attack or war and assessing the value of a life, etc.?
So, it seems we need to back up. The comment I was replying to was:
That's simply false. All eyes are on Trump and his handling of Kim. And most of them have made clear where they stand. The reasons why they stand where they do aren't really material to the point being made. His statement would be false regardless of the rest of the world agreeing with Trump's handling or if they disagreed with his handling. What you're talking about is the actual opinions. Personally, I will stand with those that think it's a bad idea for the leader of the free world to be gushing over a dictator who murders his own people, but that wan't the point of my comment and is a different conversation. I tend to take notice of the countries and people who dismiss Trump's actions here as if they aren't significant. If there was ever a black/white, moral issue in our politics, this is it.
Okay, I backed up. Allow me to apologize for jumping in, actually. I wasn't aware I had done that. That said, I have -- and I mean this -- very little idea about what the #### you guys are talking about in this particular instance at this particular time. So I'll ask if you'll kindly let me walk away from an issue I obviously created by jumping in (which is unlike me) the middle of debate whose premises I can't suss out and whose conclusions are colloquial and obvious to the speaker and the listener but not to the reader.
Thank you for ignoring the stinky bait laid elsewhere
You two make a cute couple.I often wonder if there is ANY pause in hitting the "Submit Reply" button on some of these posts....though I am not really sure what you are talking about specifically.
No worries....just wanted to make sure it was clear what we were talking about. Always enjoy the perspective. In this particular case, I'm not sure I care about the motives behind disagreeing with Trump and his fawning over the murderous dictator. I just care that they reject that approach.
I don’t disagree that out of the box thinking Re NK is a good thing.
It doesn't matter. It's lost on the average Trump supporter.
I thought we weren't going to use this term?
