Might it not just be that it’s Trump’s “petulant behaviour” which has brought this meeting about? An event, the like of which has evaded the attempts of numerous US Presidents for decades?
Were it Obama/Clinton/Carter/Kennedy, et al, in Singapore tonight I suspect the same people who pour scorn on Trump’s every act would be singing their praises.
It's more likely that China brought the meeting about, IMHO.
Despite his boasts about being a great deal maker, he hasn't managed to get any through (except a temporary tax reduction for middle earners and a permanent tax reduction for business) despite a Republican majority in both houses.
The Affordable Care Act is still in place, no money put up for a wall, 'Crooked Hillary" still at large.
He appears to lack a basic knowledge of defence and international trade with his claims that America 'pays' for NATO and being the "piggy bank that everyone is robbing."
BTW, Thanks to new Statesman 'Morning Call' blog for "Jong Un meets Wrong 'Un"
_________________ When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. - Socrates
Might it not just be that it’s Trump’s “petulant behaviour” which has brought this meeting about? An event, the like of which has evaded the attempts of numerous US Presidents for decades?
Well it has been, for some decades, the stated aim of NK to meet one on one
with any US President but none wanted to, believing that he wasn't serious
about changing NK policy or meeting preconditions.
Is it Trump forcing Kim to meet or rather the progress of NK on the nuclear
missile front that has elevated the status of Kim as an equal to Trump?
It's certainly a gamble and Trump is probably betting on the fact that he
can make a difference as he believes he is the ultimate deal maker.
I have my doubts though and if it does all fall apart who will come out better?
Time will tell and it would certainly be the best possible outcome if this
is a serious attempt by NK to make changes.
So, it seems that the meeting which took place in Singapore today is really down to the wiley K J-U and it was always going to happen, as a result of recent events in his country? It's a pure coincidence that Trump happens to be in the WH at this moment in history. In fact, the loathsome man should be regarded as an encumbrance to the process. Obama (IMO the most inept POTUS since Carter) could have been there and would most probably have handled it much better.
I'm sure all would agree that the denuclearisation of Korea would be a significant event in advancing world peace? Let's not forget though, if it comes about it will be because one of the planet's most loathsome dictators "skillfully played" Trump.
Last edited by Mr Tibbs on Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:21 am; edited 1 time in total
So, it seems that the meeting which took place in Singapore today is really down to the wiley K J-U and it was always going to happen, as a result of recent events in his country. It's a pure coincidence that Trump happens to be in the WH at this moment in history. In fact, the loathsome man should be regarded as an encumbrance to the process. Obama (IMO the most inept POTUS since Carter) could have been there and would most probably have handled it much better.
I'm sure all would agree that the denuclearisation of Korea would be a significant event in advancing world peace. Let's not forget though, if it comes about it will be because one of the planet's most loathsome dictators "skillfully played" Trump.
I wonder how Trump managed this great victory that 11 previous presidents failed to achieve a meeting and shake the N. Korean leaders' hand (although they did back out of talks about denuclearization with Bush Jnr's administration)?
Now North Korea (and others) perceive Kim Jong-Un as a leader perceived to be equal of the world's most powerful nation.
I agree - the man is loathsome.
_________________ When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. - Socrates
I'm sure all would agree that the denuclearisation of Korea would be a significant event in advancing world peace?
Indeed it would.
Cheers
Steve
Realpolitik.
I imagine a deal would have been difficult, if Trump had pointed out the reality, that K J-U is the second, nepotistic generation of a dynasty which has headed probably the most repressive and brutal regime on Earth. Ohh and reminding him that his family has been responsible for the deaths of up to 3.5 million of their own people (total population 22 million). Not to mention how he has had some of his own relatives brutally murdered, in order to “reinforce his position”.
TBH I think talking as though Trump actually had nothing to do with bringing about these events is absurd. Moreover, the man seems to attract more condemnation in these matters than Kim. That’s surely taking the anti-Trump line up into the obsession stratosphere?
Whilst I truly believe that Trump is a complete idiot, I think he will try and pull something together from this meeting.... Even if he can use it to spin how wonderful he is and how capable he has been where other presidents have failed!
Whilst I truly believe that Trump is a complete idiot, I think he will try and pull something together from this meeting.... Even if he can use it to spin how wonderful he is and how capable he has been where other presidents have failed!
I agree.
Kennedy was a serial adulterer. Entertaining bevies of prostitutes and having a string of affairs. That, whilst actually in the White House. Clinton, little better. Even as far as not having sex with a young intern - in the Oval room. Nixon was a pathological liar. LBJ a foul-mouthed red neck. Carter, grossly naive and inept. W? A cowboy. Obama? A good autocue man: period. People like Putin walked all over him.
Some of the above directly or indirectly brought about the deaths of hundreds of thousands.
So, what makes Trump such a target for contempt. Answer? He’s the liberal, progressive left’s nightmare. Which is odd, given they created him.
TBH I think talking as though Trump actually had nothing to do with bringing about these events is absurd.
It's probably no more absurd than suggesting that just because Trump made a
few nasty comments and added a few threats that KJU suddenly decided to
agree to a peace deal
TBH I think talking as though Trump actually had nothing to do with bringing about these events is absurd.
It's probably no more absurd than suggesting that just because Trump made a
few nasty comments and added a few threats that KJU suddenly decided to
agree to a peace deal
Cheers
Steve
Good example Steve.
KJU illegally develops nuclear weapons and missiles, some capable of reaching most cities on the planet. He’s fired 90, 24 last year alone. Furthermore, NK regularly makes blood curdling threats to use them (NK TV routinely shows a composite picture of them raining down on the US). Said missiles have been fired over neighbouring countries. But ........... you highlight Trump’s threats.
Trump doesn’t scare me but a single, paranoid, brutal dictator, who’s treated as a Demi-God in NK (or else) with those weapons under his sole control? That bothers me a bit.
Do you truly believe that Trump has played no part in bringing NK to the table? If so, would you honestly have said the same had it been Obama?
As always I think. Anything good that happens on Trump’s watch is “despite”. However, everything bad is “because of”.
We didn’t have social media in Reagan’s day of course but I would bet my shirt that if so we’d have witnessed the same phenomena.
From the usual tone and direction of your AT posts, far more so than KJU it sounds. Which of course, given their track records, is utterly ridiculous.
It does though I think succinctly illustrate my point. Western Liberals have become utterly obsessed with Trump. Beyond all sensible reasoning. That, whilst not even seeing that people all across the West have had a belly full of their creed and that the reaction against it is growing relentlessly. Latest, Italy? Because of course Trump is their focal point.
That is your prerogative, the same as it is mine to dislike him.
Of course!
Actually, I’m generally indifferent to ambivalent about the man. I’m just fascinated at all the fuss about somebody who, as Kwacka often points out, hasn’t actually done much. As opposed to the lack of input about people who have the blood of a vast number on their hands.
I add the quoted comment in deference to my colleague. Currently resting on the subs bench. Not for too long I hope.
Regarding 'sensible reasoning' - I don't like liars, rapists (according to his first wife), people who tell us how smart/rich/intelligent they are without backing it up, employ and then con illigal workers out of wages, lie 6 times a day on average (that we know about), publicly mock people with physical disabilities, claim the achievements of others were their own, men who brag about grabbing women by the p**sy',deride people of other races/religions.
How's that for starters?
Meanwhile:
Quote:
The North Korean playbook looks something like this: Make a lot of threats, snarl like a mad dog in a cage, insult foreign leaders in the colorfully stilted style we’ve come to associate with North Korean propaganda, and generally escalate tensions in a theatrical manner. Then suddenly wow everyone with conciliatory gestures.Appeal to the vanity of the latest round of politicians and diplomats by dangling the prospect of getting that elusive peace deal no one has ever gotten before. Extract what you can from them in terms of money, sanctions relief, and internal and external propaganda. Then let the whole thing slowly fall apart, and start the cycle over again.
and
Quote:
This is why so many on the right opposed meeting Kim’s father without preconditions back when Barack Obama proposed it.
Links only visible to Registered Members Register for Free or Login to the forum.
The Federalist, 12/03/2018 (plus similar stories in other publications)
Quote:
After Bush, President Barack Obama was open to talks, but never became convinced that North Korea would meet his preconditions or seriously intended to give up its nuclear weapons. “This is the same kind of pattern that we saw his father engage in and his grandfather before that,” Obama said of Kim Jong Un in 2013, who took over the country from his father in 2011 and had been making threats against the U.S. and South Korea. “Since I came into office, the one thing I was clear about was, we’re not going to reward this kind of provocative behavior. You don’t get to bang your spoon on the table and somehow you get your way.”
Links only visible to Registered Members Register for Free or Login to the forum.
Time, 09/03/2018[/quote]
Trump, according to reports, is hoping that N. Korea will give up its weapons, close down establishments and allow UAEA inspections - totally unlike the 'disastrous' treaty with Iran.
Quote:
From the usual tone and direction of your AT posts, far more so than KJU it sounds. Which of course, given their track records, is utterly ridiculous.
That is what is known as a straw man fallacy.
Last edited by Kwacka on Tue Jun 12, 2018 3:02 pm; edited 1 time in total
_________________ When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. - Socrates
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Post: 
VIEW MORE PHRASES...
