What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

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.

North Korea thread (1 Viewer)

It’s a good day for diplomacy and a bad day for Trump haters no matter how the haters spin
It could be HT. It could be. 

But let’s break it down rather than simply discuss the peripherals. What is it we want out of North Korea? An end to their nuclear program, and a commitment to peace in the region. What are we wiling to give them for it? Recognition, money, trade. 

What is it North Korea wants out of us? An end to our military presence in South Korea, OR acceptance of North Korea as a nation with nuclear weapons. What are they willing to give us for it? A promise of peace. No more nuclear testing. 

These are very different goals and they’re not exactly reconcilable. We’ve already seen that all of the pomp and circumstances of summits haven’t been able to achieve anything. Why should this be any different? Again, I hope it is. But is it unreasonable for us to fear that, in order to win a “victory” that might help him in the election, President Trump makes some sort of concession in the direction that North Korea wants? And if so, will you approve of it? 

 
I'm trying to imagine the outrage from the conservative media machine if Obama went to North Korea to shake hands with a murderous dictator.
Conservatives were all outraged in 2007 when candidate Obama said that we should have heads-of-state level meetings with Iran.  I remember that, because I was one of those people.  

But now, oh what the heck let's just hand some legitimacy to a communist regime that systematically murders its own people.  Why not?

 
Conservatives were all outraged in 2007 when candidate Obama said that we should have heads-of-state level meetings with Iran.  I remember that, because I was one of those people.  

But now, oh what the heck let's just hand some legitimacy to a communist regime that systematically murders its own people.  Why not?
I wasn’t outraged then and I’m not outraged now by the principle of it. FDR shook hands with Stalin, who is my opinion the worst person in the history of human civilization. Nixon shook hands with Mao Tse Tung, also pretty high on that same list. 

In principle, such actions are OK, if they serve the best interests of the United States and the world. But you had better be sure that they do. In this case I’m not sure at all; in fact I have very strong, reasonable doubts. 

 
Bad things are only bad when the American government does them. 
Don’t forget Israel. 

In this attitude ren is only following a long line of radical leftists dating back decades. Herbert Marcuse, Tom Hayden, Noach Chomsky, the cast and crew of Democracy Now: attack the United States and Israel at every opportunity. Find excuses for the rest of the world’s bad actors especially if the government in question is either leftist in origin, nonwhite, or both (both is the most preferable.) 

 
I learned of this from CNN. They email me important headlines. 
I’m talking about the channel.  Still nothing about this milestone in history.  CNN now talking and lamenting the fact that Democrats didn’t mention Robert Mueller by name the other night.

 
I’m talking about the channel.  Still nothing about this milestone in history.  CNN now talking and lamenting the fact that Democrats didn’t mention Robert Mueller by name the other night.
Reliable Sources is scheduled programming and it’s taped. 

 
I wasn’t outraged then and I’m not outraged now by the principle of it. FDR shook hands with Stalin, who is my opinion the worst person in the history of human civilization. Nixon shook hands with Mao Tse Tung, also pretty high on that same list. 

In principle, such actions are OK, if they serve the best interests of the United States and the world. But you had better be sure that they do. In this case I’m not sure at all; in fact I have very strong, reasonable doubts. 
I agree with you about the need for a certain level of realpolitik in our foreign policy, which is why I always roll my eyes a little when people get all indignant about our friendly relationship with Saudi Arabia.  But in this case, North Korea hasn't done anything meriting this type of reward.  I'm sure you and I probably agree on that point -- just mentioning it for the record.

 
I’m talking about the channel.  Still nothing about this milestone in history.  CNN now talking and lamenting the fact that Democrats didn’t mention Robert Mueller by name the other night.
Also- while it’s breaking news for sure, it’s not a historical milestone. It will become that if real peace is achieved. But there is every reason to doubt that will be the case, as I pointed out in my earlier post. 

 
I agree with you about the need for a certain level of realpolitik in our foreign policy, which is why I always roll my eyes a little when people get all indignant about our friendly relationship with Saudi Arabia.  But in this case, North Korea hasn't done anything meriting this type of reward.  I'm sure you and I probably agree on that point -- just mentioning it for the record.
Exactly. If the Nazis invaded North Korea with the goal of world conquest, then of course we get friendly with North Korea. 

 
Also- while it’s breaking news for sure, it’s not a historical milestone. It will become that if real peace is achieved. But there is every reason to doubt that will be the case, as I pointed out in my earlier post. 
Also, it happened already and some hours ago. Is Fox News doing breaking news on it? I mean, that is what wildbill thinks should happen, or am I getting that wrong?

 
I seem to recall you being really concerned about "racist concentration camps" in another thread around here somewhere.  And now you're apologizing for the North Korean regime?  Hmmm.
I'm not apologizing for anybody.  This is the sort of chestpounding that leads to 60-year stalemates.  If you want to make those people's lives worse, then keep the status quo.  If you want to make them better, lift the sanctions on NK, declare an end to the war and open them up to international trade.  This, these meetings with Trump right here, is what actual Koreans want.  They want peace, even if it means good faith talks before tangible concessions.  Maybe we should listen to them instead of being arrogant jackasses about what we "get" out of it.  

I don't know if you noticed, but we are US citizens living in a somewhat democratic society.  We have a say in how racist concentration camps where children die, which our tax dollars pay for, operate and the existence thereof. 

There is no direct path to ending concentration camps in NK, unless you are talking about regime change, which will almost certainly make their lives worse, or even harder sanctions, which will further isolate NK and make their lives worse still.  KJU is what we got- there is no magical pill that will change that.  Let NK have their nuclear deterrent, and let the Koreans decide for themselves how to move forward on a matter in which they have infinitely more at stake than armchair imperialists sitting 6,000 miles away.  

 
It is amazing what constitutes a “victory” under the Trump years. A third photo-op with a murderous dictator with nothing to show for it. 

Obama gets the Iran deal down which included the likes of Russia and China. That was a “failure.”
Oh, don't forget crossing into NK as in KJU got the US president to come to him...

 
@HellToupee and @Widbil83 are cheerleaders for Trump, which is fine, but cheerleaders are not great for nuanced conversation, because they cheer for everything. If Trump were to threaten North Korea they would cheer. If Trump were to threaten South Korea they would cheer. It really doesn’t matter what Trump does, their job is to do handstands and chants and get the crowd excited. 

@ren hoek is not a cheerleader; his job is to attack the established order. Whatever happens is the fault of the United States and it’s Zionist ally. (It’s difficult to blame Israel for actions in the Korean Peninsula, but a creative person can always find a path.) 

 
I wondered how much lower the bar would go when "they arent shooting missiles" couldn't be achieved...... now i know

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't know if you noticed, but we are US citizens living in a somewhat democratic society.  
Careful. You’re close to losing your Wikileaks fan club membership. 

What you’re supposed to say is “We are US citizens living with the pretense of a democratic society but in reality we are controlled by evil corporations and imperialist politicians who are subservient to the demands of their Zionist masters”. 

 
It’s a good day for diplomacy and a bad day for Trump haters no matter how the haters spin
No spin necessary in my eyes. I don’t exactly know what to make of the meeting / photo op and what consequences might come. But, opining on behalf of myself, my trust level and confidence level in this president is zero. In the short run and in the long run, my confidence is that Trump will screw this up and not make America better or improve our relationship with North Korea. He has done nothing over the past 30 months to make me feel differently.

 
  • Smile
Reactions: Ned
Yuuuge

VATICAN CITY, June 30 (Reuters) - Pope Francis praised on Sunday the meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and said he hoped it would lead to peace.

"In the last few hours we saw in Korea a good example of the culture of encounter. I salute the protagonists, with a prayer that such a significant gesture will be a further step on the road to peace, not only on that peninsula, but for the good of the entire world," he told thousands of people in St. Peter's Square for his weekly address and blessing.

Trump became the first sitting U.S. president to set foot in North Korea on Sunday when he met its leader, Kim Jong Un, in the Demilitarised Zone (DMZ) between the two Koreas and agreed to resume stalled nuclear talks..

 
pecorino said:
No spin necessary in my eyes. I don’t exactly know what to make of the meeting / photo op and what consequences might come. But, opining on behalf of myself, my trust level and confidence level in this president is zero. In the short run and in the long run, my confidence is that Trump will screw this up and not make America better or improve our relationship with North Korea. He has done nothing over the past 30 months to make me feel differently.
Do you always argue with the cheerleaders at every football game? “So what if we recovered that fumble? We’re still down by 3 touchdowns!” 

@HellToupee isn’t even listening to you. He’s busy being lifted up by @Widbil83; they’re attempting a special handstand trick they learned last week. 

 
timschochet said:
@ren hoek is not a cheerleader; his job is to attack the established order. Whatever happens is the fault of the United States and it’s Zionist ally. (It’s difficult to blame Israel for actions in the Korean Peninsula, but a creative person can always find a path.) 
Contrast this with Trump's approach to Iran, which has been an international embarrassment, a foreign policy failure in every way, which I've been extremely critical of.  I don't think the Iran Deal was great- it opened the doors for SA to unleash the world's worst humanitarian disaster in Yemen- but I prefer that by a great measure over Trump's approach (which REALLY gave it away to Saudi Arabia, for nothing at all). 

I don't remember mass media pearlclutching about Trump "handing the Saudi dictator a PR victory" or "shaking hands with a murderous dictator" then.  In fact I remember glowing editorials about the 'Saudi reformer' in NYT/WaPo, and softfocus interviews on CBS.  Funny how the narrative shifts when it's an official bad guy.

You could say I preferred "the established order" with the Iran Deal.  Like I said it wasn't perfect, but it's a damn sight better than what we have now.  I'd prefer the US president meet with every leader, with zero preconditions or pretense.  I have condemned the Trump administration's sanctions and hawkish approach everywhere.  

I don't wish to 'attack' the order of things just for the sake of attacking it- I think the cold war mentality is obsolete and we need to choose durable peace over multitrillion dollar military industrial complexes.  In a sane world, I'D be the centrist.  And yeah, sorry, but the US/Israel relationship in its current form has turned the middle east into a wasteland, amplified terrorism in that part of the world, doesn't serve the US public interest at all, and debased everything the US might have once stood for.  

 
Widbil83 said:
:goodposting:

A great day for America and peace around the world.  Even the Pope is gushing about it.  Maybe someday the handful of people living with a pre 2016 mindset will wake up.
Not sure how it will work out but the old saying "Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer" might hold true.

 
Henry Ford said:
The President of the United States walked into North Korea from South Korea because a brutal dictator wanted him to come shake his hand. 
Then the president of the United States invited said brutal dictator to the White House

 
Sounds like there was also a scuffle with North Korean security and the new press secretary was slightly injured. What an eventful first week on the job.

 
Why the DMZ Meeting Between Trump and Kim Matters

President Trump met with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un on Sunday and became the first sitting U.S. president to step foot into North Korea by stepping over the demarcation line at the demilitarized zone separating the two Koreas. It was the third time Trump met Kim, and he took the opportunity to announce that U.S.-DPRK nuclear talks would resume. Kim and Trump also met privately for 50 minutes after they shook hands at the DMZ. The event on Sunday was longer than Trump had earlier indicated at the G20 meeting in Osaka, Japan. 

The impromptu, unconventional meeting, which was partly initiated via Twitter, was significant because it can foster trust between the two leaders. The failure to achieve an agreement in Hanoi in February was likely in part due to weak trust between the two countries. Insiders have speculated that the two sides asked too much from one another at that meeting but lacked the trust needed to facilitate a big step. 

It is notable that John Bolton, Trump's National Security Adviser, was not in attendance on this trip. It's also notable that South Korean President Moon Jae-in was present and appeared to help broker the meeting despite the DPRK's claim that South Korea is meddling in its affairs. Recent U.S. tensions with Iran only make personal trust between Trump and Kim more critical.”

The photo-op gives both Kim and Trump domestic political cover to stave off calls from hawkish advisers for a more hostile approach toward the relationship. It gives the two countries time to set up a third summit, perhaps early next year, with a reduced risk of provocations in the meantime that could throw diplomacy off track. 

Some commentators are mocking the meeting as a publicity stunt but politics are often about symbolism, messaging, and framing and a return to friendlier terms are certainly better than a return to the 2017 threats of nuclear war. An act like this one can be both political theater and helpful in reducing the risk of war. 

Trump called his walk with Kim over the demarcation line “a great honor” and Kim called it significant “because it means we want to bring an end to the unpleasant past” and that it was “a courageous and determined act.” The two leaders appeared smiling together.

The whole episode upends several US foreign policy conventions. Diplomacy-by-tweet has been criticized as sloppy yet it has proven effective, and Twitter may be regarded years from now as the telegraph or fax machine are seen today. Twitter allows the president to circumvent the media and float informal proposals. 

The walk across the demarcation line breaks what has been regarded as a taboo. It also calls into question the basis for the nearly-70 years of hostility since the Korea War. The two countries are technically still at war. Yet, a majority of the American public supports diplomacy with North Korea and rejects war with the country. In the context of calls for ending America’s endless wars, the extension of conflict with North Korea, Iran, and Cuba might appear anachronistic. 

Finally, complaints that Trump is only talking with Kim to get a Nobel Peace Prize misunderstands that such a prize would only be given if it was deserved. Moreover, peace is an intrinsic virtue worth supporting on its own. 

 
What’s funny is if Kim declined the meeting, the media would have tomahawk jammed on Trump about what an international disgrace it is.  There’s no framing of this issue that doesn’t wipe out the South Koreans’ existence and goad Trump into being more of a hawk on NK.  

 
That article avoids any detailed discussion of exactly how peace is going to be achieved. Are we to withdraw our forces from South Korea and recognize North Korea as a nuclear power? That is what they are demanding. If we’re unwilling to do that, what’s the play here? 

 
Some commentators are mocking the meeting as a publicity stunt but politics are often about symbolism, messaging, and framing and a return to friendlier terms are certainly better than a return to the 2017 threats of nuclear war. An act like this one can be both political theater and helpful in reducing the risk of war. 
I don’t have a problem with it, but it’s another chit we’ve given away with nothing in return.

 
What’s funny is if Kim declined the meeting, the media would have tomahawk jammed on Trump about what an international disgrace it is.  There’s no framing of this issue that doesn’t wipe out the South Koreans’ existence and goad Trump into being more of a hawk on NK.  
Imagine a North Korean advisor saying this out loud and you can see how they’d obviously believe probably rightly that they have enormous leverage over Trump personally.

 
 There’s no framing of this issue that doesn’t wipe out the South Koreans’ existence 
It seems to me that wiping out the South Koreans’ existence is what we have spent the last 70 years trying to avoid. 

Consider the official positions of the two sides, which has been consistent since 1950: 

South Korea is in favor of unification of Korea but only under a constitutional, free republic in which the democratic and individual rights that exist in South Korea continue to be protected. 

North Korea is in favor of unification of Korea but only under their dictatorship ; they regard the South Korean government as illegitimate and Kim Jong Un as the legal ruler of all of Korea. 

Difficult to decide which side we should be on here...

 
I don’t have a problem with it, but it’s another chit we’ve given away with nothing in return.
The irony is amazing.

In 2007 Obama was widely criticized by the right for pledging to engage in talks with Iran "without any preconditions." Several years later the Iran-U.S. nuclear deal was in place.

Cue the "yeah but this is Trump that was Obama" refrain...

 
The irony is amazing.

In 2007 Obama was widely criticized by the right for pledging to engage in talks with Iran "without any preconditions." Several years later the Iran-U.S. nuclear deal was in place.

Cue the "yeah but this is Trump that was Obama" refrain...
Do you feel like the situations are similar enough to draw a comparison?  I can give you a laundry list of reasons i think they are different. Can you tell me how they are more similar to outweigh that list to warrant legit comparison?

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top