Korean Peace Process

[Phil Titola]

Full throat support from dax....

Why is it hard to understand that the concept of being "Libya'd" or "Iraq'd" or "Syria'd" by the United States and its partners is a very real thing? 

What does the most technologically advanced military in the world, with decades worth experience in war or preparation for war on the Korean Peninsula stand to gain by yet another drill during these times?

Nothing.

[steve dave]

https://twitter.com/markmackinnon/status/1006659006671278081?s=21


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[steve dave]

Nvm, sys already posted


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sonofdaxjones]

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/white-house/article212960759.html

There are at least a few rational ProgLibs.

What was Chuckie's stance on the utterly meaningless Iranian Nuclear unsigned MOU?

[Phil Titola]

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/white-house/article212960759.html

There are at least a few rational ProgLibs.

What was Chuckie's stance on the utterly meaningless Iranian Nuclear unsigned MOU?

You voted for the guy whose only claim was make good deals and he did this to you vs a vastly inferior country. For shame dax...for shame.

[sonofdaxjones]

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/white-house/article212960759.html

There are at least a few rational ProgLibs.

What was Chuckie's stance on the utterly meaningless Iranian Nuclear unsigned MOU?

You voted for the guy whose only claim was make good deals and he did this to you vs a vastly inferior country. For shame dax...for shame.

By using the term "Vastly Inferior" are you talking militarily?

[chum1]

It's a good thing Trump likes KJU well enough to be willing to tolerate this stuff.

https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1006660179281235968

[Phil Titola]

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/white-house/article212960759.html

There are at least a few rational ProgLibs.

What was Chuckie's stance on the utterly meaningless Iranian Nuclear unsigned MOU?

You voted for the guy whose only claim was make good deals and he did this to you vs a vastly inferior country. For shame dax...for shame.

By using the term "Vastly Inferior" are you talking militarily?

In any way you want to take it. What a disappointment.

[sonofdaxjones]

It's quite clear you don't understand U.S. history of the last 30-40 years relative to these situations.    Anything less than the eventual total collapse of the NK regime either under the weight of it's own (insert whatever you want here) with some solids pushes from the U.S./West or via U.S./U.S. partner military power would be a first.

It appears you would prefer the latter, Phil.  Sad, but not surprising from the New NeoCons.

Your guy completely caved on a meaningless MOU which paid out in plane loads of cash, and the thing didn't even get signed. 

[Phil Titola]

It's quite clear you don't understand U.S. history of the last 30-40 years relative to these situations.    Anything less than the eventual total collapse of the NK regime either under the weight of it's own (insert whatever you want here) with some solids pushes from the U.S./West or via U.S./U.S. partner military power would be a first.

It appears you would prefer the latter, Phil.  Sad, but not surprising from the New NeoCons.

Your guy completely caved on a meaningless MOU which paid out in plane loads of cash, and the thing didn't even get signed.

You are very good bbsr with your ability to rehash the same 5 things ad naseum and completely ignore news of the day .....great job. Very insightful.

[sonofdaxjones]

It's quite clear you don't understand U.S. history of the last 30-40 years relative to these situations.    Anything less than the eventual total collapse of the NK regime either under the weight of it's own (insert whatever you want here) with some solids pushes from the U.S./West or via U.S./U.S. partner military power would be a first.

It appears you would prefer the latter, Phil.  Sad, but not surprising from the New NeoCons.

Your guy completely caved on a meaningless MOU which paid out in plane loads of cash, and the thing didn't even get signed.

You are very good bbsr with your ability to rehash the same 5 things ad naseum and completely ignore news of the day .....great job. Very insightful.

Your recent responses are nonsense.

I'm trying to think of one situation since WWII that the U.S. entered into negotiations with another country, and the other side of the table was superior to the United States economically and militarily and I cannot think of one.

But it sounds like you want diplomacy at the tip of a Nuclear Warhead, Phil.   Which is sad.  Unless of course it's a situation where your guy actually gets nothing and/or kicks the can down the road, all-the-while ensuring that a terror state is well funded. (not to mention producing no document that could actually be called a treaty or even gets presented for approval to the people's representatives).

[420seriouscat69]

Just so everyone is on the same page, trump had absolutely nothing to do with this

Gold!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Phil Titola]

It's quite clear you don't understand U.S. history of the last 30-40 years relative to these situations.    Anything less than the eventual total collapse of the NK regime either under the weight of it's own (insert whatever you want here) with some solids pushes from the U.S./West or via U.S./U.S. partner military power would be a first.

It appears you would prefer the latter, Phil.  Sad, but not surprising from the New NeoCons.

Your guy completely caved on a meaningless MOU which paid out in plane loads of cash, and the thing didn't even get signed.

You are very good bbsr with your ability to rehash the same 5 things ad naseum and completely ignore news of the day .....great job. Very insightful.

Your recent responses are nonsense.

I'm trying to think of one situation since WWII that the U.S. entered into negotiations with another country, and the other side of the table was superior to the United States economically and militarily and I cannot think of one.

But it sounds like you want diplomacy at the tip of a Nuclear Warhead, Phil. 

“I will have a military that’s so strong and powerful, and so respected, we’re not gonna have to nukeanybody

"As part of our defense, we must modernize and rebuild our nuclear arsenal, hopefully never having to use it, but making it so strong and so powerful that it will deter any acts of aggression by any other nation or anyone else," 

You voted for the guy who wants to be unpredictable with nukes and rebuild them....and now is giving an audience to a reclusive dictator committing horrible things to his own people....and gave up war games...but didn't have time for the other stuff. Lol, dax....lol

Maybe you'll get a free stay in the new Trump North Korea resort for your efforts.

[sonofdaxjones]

It's quite clear you don't understand U.S. history of the last 30-40 years relative to these situations.    Anything less than the eventual total collapse of the NK regime either under the weight of it's own (insert whatever you want here) with some solids pushes from the U.S./West or via U.S./U.S. partner military power would be a first.

It appears you would prefer the latter, Phil.  Sad, but not surprising from the New NeoCons.

Your guy completely caved on a meaningless MOU which paid out in plane loads of cash, and the thing didn't even get signed.

You are very good bbsr with your ability to rehash the same 5 things ad naseum and completely ignore news of the day .....great job. Very insightful.

Your recent responses are nonsense.

I'm trying to think of one situation since WWII that the U.S. entered into negotiations with another country, and the other side of the table was superior to the United States economically and militarily and I cannot think of one.

But it sounds like you want diplomacy at the tip of a Nuclear Warhead, Phil. 

“I will have a military that’s so strong and powerful, and so respected, we’re not gonna have to nukeanybody  (how many billions of dollars did the military budget increase?  Sadly)

"As part of our defense, we must modernize and rebuild our nuclear arsenal, hopefully never having to use it, but making it so strong and so powerful that it will deter any acts of aggression by any other nation or anyone else,"  (the problem here friend, is that your guy already signed off on the most expensive nuclear modernization program the world has ever seen). 

You voted for the guy who wants to be unpredictable with nukes and rebuild them....and now is giving an audience to a reclusive dictator committing horrible things to his own people....and gave up war games...but didn't have time for the other stuff. Lol, dax....lol (fascinating considering your guy legitimized 2 brutal regimes:  One in Tehran, and another in Havana.  One of which now has troops on the border of the only secular non-Muslim ally the United States has left in the Middle East). 

Maybe you'll get a free stay in the new Trump North Korea resort for your efforts.

[Phil Titola]

It's quite clear you don't understand U.S. history of the last 30-40 years relative to these situations.    Anything less than the eventual total collapse of the NK regime either under the weight of it's own (insert whatever you want here) with some solids pushes from the U.S./West or via U.S./U.S. partner military power would be a first.

It appears you would prefer the latter, Phil.  Sad, but not surprising from the New NeoCons.

Your guy completely caved on a meaningless MOU which paid out in plane loads of cash, and the thing didn't even get signed.

You are very good bbsr with your ability to rehash the same 5 things ad naseum and completely ignore news of the day .....great job. Very insightful.

Your recent responses are nonsense.

I'm trying to think of one situation since WWII that the U.S. entered into negotiations with another country, and the other side of the table was superior to the United States economically and militarily and I cannot think of one.

But it sounds like you want diplomacy at the tip of a Nuclear Warhead, Phil. 

“I will have a military that’s so strong and powerful, and so respected, we’re not gonna have to nukeanybody  (how many billions of dollars did the military budget increase?  Sadly)

"As part of our defense, we must modernize and rebuild our nuclear arsenal, hopefully never having to use it, but making it so strong and so powerful that it will deter any acts of aggression by any other nation or anyone else,"  (the problem here friend, is that your guy already signed off on the most expensive nuclear modernization program the world has ever seen). 

You voted for the guy who wants to be unpredictable with nukes and rebuild them....and now is giving an audience to a reclusive dictator committing horrible things to his own people....and gave up war games...but didn't have time for the other stuff. Lol, dax....lol (fascinating considering your guy legitimized 2 brutal regimes:  One in Tehran, and another in Havana.  One of which now has troops on the border of the only secular non-Muslim ally the United States has left in the Middle East). 

Maybe you'll get a free stay in the new Trump North Korea resort for your efforts.

So not for legitimizing NK. Great to hear. Hard to pull that out of you.

[sonofdaxjones]

It's quite clear you don't understand U.S. history of the last 30-40 years relative to these situations.    Anything less than the eventual total collapse of the NK regime either under the weight of it's own (insert whatever you want here) with some solids pushes from the U.S./West or via U.S./U.S. partner military power would be a first.

It appears you would prefer the latter, Phil.  Sad, but not surprising from the New NeoCons.

Your guy completely caved on a meaningless MOU which paid out in plane loads of cash, and the thing didn't even get signed.

You are very good bbsr with your ability to rehash the same 5 things ad naseum and completely ignore news of the day .....great job. Very insightful.

Your recent responses are nonsense.

I'm trying to think of one situation since WWII that the U.S. entered into negotiations with another country, and the other side of the table was superior to the United States economically and militarily and I cannot think of one.

But it sounds like you want diplomacy at the tip of a Nuclear Warhead, Phil. 

“I will have a military that’s so strong and powerful, and so respected, we’re not gonna have to nukeanybody  (how many billions of dollars did the military budget increase?  Sadly)

"As part of our defense, we must modernize and rebuild our nuclear arsenal, hopefully never having to use it, but making it so strong and so powerful that it will deter any acts of aggression by any other nation or anyone else,"  (the problem here friend, is that your guy already signed off on the most expensive nuclear modernization program the world has ever seen). 

You voted for the guy who wants to be unpredictable with nukes and rebuild them....and now is giving an audience to a reclusive dictator committing horrible things to his own people....and gave up war games...but didn't have time for the other stuff. Lol, dax....lol (fascinating considering your guy legitimized 2 brutal regimes:  One in Tehran, and another in Havana.  One of which now has troops on the border of the only secular non-Muslim ally the United States has left in the Middle East). 

Maybe you'll get a free stay in the new Trump North Korea resort for your efforts.

So not for legitimizing NK. Great to hear. Hard to pull that out of you.

Sadly, the era of "no engagement and/or facilitation" (aka Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2, Obama)  only allowed NK to develop more nuclear weapons, more powerful nuclear weapons, more missiles and eventually intercontinental ballistic missiles.  The last of which they were firing all over the South China Sea and over the heads of our allies.   

But judging by your bent, you would have preferred war, which would have killed tens of thousands of people. 

Not a good look, Phil.

[Kat Kid]

I am kind of concerned that the MSNBC line that Trump is "weak on dictators" will just mean that all the usual neo-con/nat sec crap heads will just find a new permanent home in the Democratic party in perpetuity.

[Phil Titola]

It's quite clear you don't understand U.S. history of the last 30-40 years relative to these situations.    Anything less than the eventual total collapse of the NK regime either under the weight of it's own (insert whatever you want here) with some solids pushes from the U.S./West or via U.S./U.S. partner military power would be a first.

It appears you would prefer the latter, Phil.  Sad, but not surprising from the New NeoCons.

Your guy completely caved on a meaningless MOU which paid out in plane loads of cash, and the thing didn't even get signed.

You are very good bbsr with your ability to rehash the same 5 things ad naseum and completely ignore news of the day .....great job. Very insightful.

Your recent responses are nonsense.

I'm trying to think of one situation since WWII that the U.S. entered into negotiations with another country, and the other side of the table was superior to the United States economically and militarily and I cannot think of one.

But it sounds like you want diplomacy at the tip of a Nuclear Warhead, Phil. 

“I will have a military that’s so strong and powerful, and so respected, we’re not gonna have to nukeanybody  (how many billions of dollars did the military budget increase?  Sadly)

"As part of our defense, we must modernize and rebuild our nuclear arsenal, hopefully never having to use it, but making it so strong and so powerful that it will deter any acts of aggression by any other nation or anyone else,"  (the problem here friend, is that your guy already signed off on the most expensive nuclear modernization program the world has ever seen). 

You voted for the guy who wants to be unpredictable with nukes and rebuild them....and now is giving an audience to a reclusive dictator committing horrible things to his own people....and gave up war games...but didn't have time for the other stuff. Lol, dax....lol (fascinating considering your guy legitimized 2 brutal regimes:  One in Tehran, and another in Havana.  One of which now has troops on the border of the only secular non-Muslim ally the United States has left in the Middle East). 

Maybe you'll get a free stay in the new Trump North Korea resort for your efforts.

So not for legitimizing NK. Great to hear. Hard to pull that out of you.

Sadly, the era of "no engagement and/or facilitation" (aka Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2, Obama)  only allowed NK to develop more nuclear weapons, more powerful nuclear weapons, more missiles and eventually intercontinental ballistic missiles.  The last of which they were firing all over the South China Sea and over the heads of our allies.   

But judging by your bent, you would have preferred war, which would have killed tens of thousands of people. 

Not a good look, Phil.

I'm bent because the dealmaker went to Asia and got taken by lil rocket man. It's one thing I hoped Trump could do...make deals.  All he has shown is to make a mess of deals we have and legatimize NK and not get anything in return. Farce.

War is your thing...that's pretty obv

[DQ12]

I'm not sure what "legitimizing" NK means.  Like, the Kim dynasty has been ruling for 70 years.  They're pretty legitimate regardless of whether Trump meets with them.

[Phil Titola]

I'm not sure what "legitimizing" NK means.  Like, the Kim dynasty has been ruling for 70 years.  They're pretty legitimate regardless of whether Trump meets with them.

By the fact of a meeting with the American president for the first time, in full view of a media blitz and the world public, Kim Jong-un will have legitimized North Korea (also known as the DPRK) internationally, something no North Korean leader has achieved since 1950. If Kim gets nothing else from such a meeting, that is already a huge achievement for the leader of the world’s most isolated, repressive, and sanctioned state.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/03/12/understanding-the-big-downsides-and-potential-benefits-of-the-proposed-trump-kim-meeting/

[DQ12]

I'm not sure what "legitimizing" NK means.  Like, the Kim dynasty has been ruling for 70 years.  They're pretty legitimate regardless of whether Trump meets with them.

By the fact of a meeting with the American president for the first time, in full view of a media blitz and the world public, Kim Jong-un will have legitimized North Korea (also known as the DPRK) internationally, something no North Korean leader has achieved since 1950. If Kim gets nothing else from such a meeting, that is already a huge achievement for the leader of the world’s most isolated, repressive, and sanctioned state.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/03/12/understanding-the-big-downsides-and-potential-benefits-of-the-proposed-trump-kim-meeting/

Pardon my curtness, but so what?

The previous strategy led us to the brink of nuclear war and kept SK in a state of perpetual paranoia.  Maybe it was time to have a talk.

[Phil Titola]

I'm not sure what "legitimizing" NK means.  Like, the Kim dynasty has been ruling for 70 years.  They're pretty legitimate regardless of whether Trump meets with them.

By the fact of a meeting with the American president for the first time, in full view of a media blitz and the world public, Kim Jong-un will have legitimized North Korea (also known as the DPRK) internationally, something no North Korean leader has achieved since 1950. If Kim gets nothing else from such a meeting, that is already a huge achievement for the leader of the world’s most isolated, repressive, and sanctioned state.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/03/12/understanding-the-big-downsides-and-potential-benefits-of-the-proposed-trump-kim-meeting/

Pardon my curtness, but so what?

The previous strategy led us to the brink of nuclear war and kept SK in a state of perpetual paranoia.  Maybe it was time to have a talk.

[chum1]

https://twitter.com/mikehfuchs/status/1006518879034757120

[star seed 7]

I'm not sure what "legitimizing" NK means.  Like, the Kim dynasty has been ruling for 70 years.  They're pretty legitimate regardless of whether Trump meets with them.

By the fact of a meeting with the American president for the first time, in full view of a media blitz and the world public, Kim Jong-un will have legitimized North Korea (also known as the DPRK) internationally, something no North Korean leader has achieved since 1950. If Kim gets nothing else from such a meeting, that is already a huge achievement for the leader of the world’s most isolated, repressive, and sanctioned state.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/03/12/understanding-the-big-downsides-and-potential-benefits-of-the-proposed-trump-kim-meeting/

Pardon my curtness, but so what?

The previous strategy led us to the brink of nuclear war and kept SK in a state of perpetual paranoia.  Maybe it was time to have a talk.

I agree... But...

I think most people are apprehensive that the person representing the US in that talk is a blow hard moron that has no idea what he's doing.

[DQ12]

https://twitter.com/mikehfuchs/status/1006518879034757120

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/07/28/north-korea-united-states-relations/87659264/

Published 12:00 p.m. ET July 28, 2016
PYONGYANG, North Korea — North Korea’s top diplomat for U.S. affairs told The Associated Press on Thursday that Washington “crossed the red line” and effectively declared war by putting leader Kim Jong Un on its list of sanctioned individuals, and said a vicious showdown could erupt if the U.S. and South Korea hold annual war games as planned next month.

DPRK has always been shouting rhetoric at the US and "declaring war."  The difference over the last year or so is that they were actually (or at least on their way to becoming) a viable nuclear threat. 

I agree... But...

I think most people are apprehensive that the person representing the US in that talk is a blow hard moron that has no idea what he's doing.

Sure - me too.  But that's a separate issue.