https://www.foxnews.com/world/trump-kim ... eader-says

I am very hopeful that talks continue, and that they go well. I’m sure there will be bumps along the way, but I’m just so hopeful that someday soon, the Korean War will end.

I am very aware that the vast majority of people here do not like President Trump, but no other POTUS has been able to pull this off, and he entered North Korea — moments I’m sure the Secret Service and military were very, very anxious.

Marc

Marc, it is naive. Sure he entered North Korea, sure he has had talks with Kim, what did it actually achieve? Nothing. Perfectly logical: North Korean regime needs to survive and the atom bomb just makes sure of that.

So President Trump had his photo opp, good for his narcissistic personality, but the situation doesn't change, perhaps officially the Korean war will end, but the situation doesn't change. Nothing is done for the poor North Koreans whom defacto are a prisoner in their own country. And there are many prisoners kept in inhuman circumstances. So all President Trump has done is give the Kim regime some legitimacy and that's the reason no other US president wanted to talk to the Kim regime, despite being invited there.

Cadet985 wrote:

https://www.foxnews.com/world/trump-kim-will-meet-at-dmz-on-sunday-south-koreas-leader-says
I no other POTUS has been able to pull this off, and he entered North Korea

To be fair, Kim would've killed to meet Obama. A meeting with the US President gives him legitimacy, which is why no sitting US President has met with any North Korean leader.

I'm also all for discussions and hopeful that their personal camaraderie does achieve a solution that's been too elusive for too long, but I'm highly doubtful as no meaningful progress has been made by the meetins towards denuclearise or reunification - it's just further legitimised Kim's leadership and put him in an even more powerful position if things full apart.

dredgy wrote:

Cadet985 wrote:

https://www.foxnews.com/world/trump-kim-will-meet-at-dmz-on-sunday-south-koreas-leader-says
I no other POTUS has been able to pull this off, and he entered North Korea

To be fair, Kim would've killed to meet Obama. A meeting with the US President gives him legitimacy, which is why no sitting US President has met with any North Korean leader.

I'm also all for discussions and hopeful that their personal camaraderie does achieve a solution that's been too elusive for too long, but I'm highly doubtful as no meaningful progress has been made by the meetins towards denuclearise or reunification - it's just further legitimised Kim's leadership and put him in an even more powerful position if things full apart.

Watched the live feed on Fox - there was a lot of chaos between security and press pool as the moment was unscripted. Secret Service looked nervous as hell when 45 set off to DPRK soil. Tucker Carlson could be seen being kicked out with the US pool at the end of the impromptu table meeting indoors....will be interesting to see his comments later. Pompeo was there, did not see Bolton. Probably the last thing Bolton wanted to see was a US leader being played by Kim in this manner.

Aaron747 wrote:

dredgy wrote:

Cadet985 wrote:

https://www.foxnews.com/world/trump-kim-will-meet-at-dmz-on-sunday-south-koreas-leader-says
I no other POTUS has been able to pull this off, and he entered North Korea

To be fair, Kim would've killed to meet Obama. A meeting with the US President gives him legitimacy, which is why no sitting US President has met with any North Korean leader.

I'm also all for discussions and hopeful that their personal camaraderie does achieve a solution that's been too elusive for too long, but I'm highly doubtful as no meaningful progress has been made by the meetins towards denuclearise or reunification - it's just further legitimised Kim's leadership and put him in an even more powerful position if things full apart.

Watched the live feed on Fox - there was a lot of chaos between security and press pool as the moment was unscripted. Secret Service looked nervous as hell when 45 set off to DPRK soil. Tucker Carlson could be seen being kicked out with the US pool at the end of the impromptu table meeting indoors....will be interesting to see his comments later. Pompeo was there, did not see Bolton. Probably the last thing Bolton wanted to see was a US leader being played by Kim in this manner.

First thing I said to my dad when I read that he set foot in North Korea was that the Secret Service and our military personnel must have been extremely nervous.

Marc

So Trump is looking for another international "victory" after his Iran plan failed spectacularly. What exactly is he going to offer North Korea now?

Shame it wasn't a one way trip.

Funny how the same people praising Obama for taking a picture in front of a mural with the face of a mass murderer in Cuba, sheet giving them everything they wanted and getting exactly zero in return, are so hung up on this when so far North Korea has received nothing they wanted.

Whether this will go down in history as Nixon's trip to China or something else, who knows, but so far it is at least some sort of (random, chaotic) progress.

There is no good reason for the embargo on Cuba, that's the main difference. And Obama never claimed to have a great relationship with the Castros, or to exchange nice letters with them.

Pyrex wrote:

Funny how the same people praising Obama for taking a picture in front of a mural with the face of a mass murderer in Cuba, sheet giving them everything they wanted and getting exactly zero in return, are so hung up on this when so far North Korea has received nothing they wanted.

Whether this will go down in history as Nixon's trip to China or something else, who knows, but so far it is at least some sort of (random, chaotic) progress.

Another of the usual red herrings. Nobody actually cares about the mass murder in DPRK (or Cuba), because human rights violations don't make anyone in DC formulate action plans or strategy - so nice try with that canard. Obama got praise for Cuban de-escalation because continuing the embargo into the 21st century is patently illogical. DPRK has never ended their war with ROK, has numerous strange bedfellows for allies, and is precarious to both neighbors and China - all economic heavyweights to boot - so DC naturally cares about the element of uncertainty there. There are so many other things to get on 44 for, that these mental gymnastics on display here are simply nonsensical.

Aaron747 wrote:

Pyrex wrote:

Funny how the same people praising Obama for taking a picture in front of a mural with the face of a mass murderer in Cuba, sheet giving them everything they wanted and getting exactly zero in return, are so hung up on this when so far North Korea has received nothing they wanted.

Whether this will go down in history as Nixon's trip to China or something else, who knows, but so far it is at least some sort of (random, chaotic) progress.

Another of the usual red herrings. Nobody actually cares about the mass murder in DPRK (or Cuba), because human rights violations don't make anyone in DC formulate action plans or strategy - so nice try with that canard. Obama got praise for Cuban de-escalation because continuing the embargo into the 21st century is patently illogical. DPRK has never ended their war with ROK, has numerous strange bedfellows for allies, and is precarious to both neighbors and China - all economic heavyweights to boot - so DC naturally cares about the element of uncertainty there. There are so many other things to get on 44 for, that these mental gymnastics on display here are simply nonsensical.

Cuba actually has much more of a history of exporting their own brand of authoritarianism to their neighbors (and even further than that) than North Korea has. Just ask Venezuela, for starters.

Kim Jung Un and the DPRK propaganda machine will now go into full celebration over how they are close to defeating the western devil. Good job! Such strong leadership! Praising and bowing to dictators!

Oh my, listen to you all seething with rage. Calm down. Trump made history today.

Dutchy wrote:

Marc, it is naive. Sure he entered North Korea, sure he has had talks with Kim, what did it actually achieve? Nothing. Perfectly logical: North Korean regime needs to survive and the atom bomb just makes sure of that.

The atom bomb is needed not to preserve the “regime”, but to preserve the very statehood and lives of millions. Ask Syria, Libya, Iraq - those did not have the bomb - and what’s the result? It’s just a necessity in today’s conditions of “democratic leadership”.

MaverickM11 wrote:

What exactly did he “pull off”? He’s accomplished nothing other than normalizing arguably the most brutally repressive dictator on the planet. But congrats on a third meeting I guess? Hope he got some more beautiful letters.


North Korea has nothing to offer the world other than the threat of their bombs. And now they can tell themselves that thanks to their nuclear program the evil USA has come crawling to their doorstep, showering Dear Leader with praise not once, not twice, but three times—with zip in return.

Assuming this approach is "wrong", what did 8 years of the last administration accomplish? Exactly, NK developed its weapons and left Trump with the hot potato. History did not begin in 2016 and the FACT is, Trump has implemented even more sanctions. Would you rather we went to war? Snap.

One thing it has handed Kim is a 'trump' card in dealing with China. This is not a bad thing, he could decide he doesn't feel the need to report to Bejing.

anrec80 wrote:

The atom bomb is needed not to preserve the “regime”, but to preserve the very statehood and lives of millions. Ask Syria, Libya, Iraq - those did not have the bomb - and what’s the result? It’s just a necessity in today’s conditions of “democratic leadership”.

And there was no greater example than that provided in Libya. Sweet talked him out of his nuclear ambitions and then killed him.

mham001 wrote:

MaverickM11 wrote:

What exactly did he “pull off”? He’s accomplished nothing other than normalizing arguably the most brutally repressive dictator on the planet. But congrats on a third meeting I guess? Hope he got some more beautiful letters.

North Korea has nothing to offer the world other than the threat of their bombs. And now they can tell themselves that thanks to their nuclear program the evil USA has come crawling to their doorstep, showering Dear Leader with praise not once, not twice, but three times—with zip in return.

Assuming this approach is "wrong", what did 8 years of the last administration accomplish? Exactly, NK developed its weapons and left Trump with the hot potato. History did not begin in 2016 and the FACT is, Trump has implemented even more sanctions. Would you rather we went to war? Snap. One thing it has handed Kim is a 'trump' card in dealing with China. This is not a bad thing, he could decide he doesn't feel the need to report to Bejing.

Perhaps you missed the timeline; North Korea withdrew from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in 2003. That was not during the "8 years of the last administration".

Perhaps you also missed out on knowing North Korea admitted having nuclear weapons in 2005 - which was not during the "8 years of the last administration".either.

And you might have also missed the fact that North Korea announced it had successfully conducted its first nuclear test in 2006 - which, believe it or not, did not fall not during the "8 years of the last administration".

The Obama administration inherited a world in which North Korea already had nuclear capabilities. There is no denying that they did not - or could not - convince Kim to give up his nuclear ambitions. But then, neither has the current administration. The only difference so far is that Obama never went to Korea to kiss Kim's ass... only the current narcissistic man-child in the White House choses to go that path...

alfa164 wrote:

Perhaps you missed the timeline; North Korea withdrew from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in 2003. That was not during the "8 years of the last administration".

Perhaps you also missed out on knowing North Korea admitted having nuclear weapons in 2005 - which was not during the "8 years of the last administration".either.

And you might have also missed the fact that North Korea announced it had successfully conducted its first nuclear test in 2006 - which, believe it or not, did not fall not during the "8 years of the last administration".

The Obama administration inherited a world in which North Korea already had nuclear capabilities. There is no denying that they did not - or could not - convince Kim to give up his nuclear ambitions. But then, neither has the current administration. The only difference so far is that Obama never went to Korea to kiss Kim's ass... only the current narcissistic man-child in the White House choses to go that path...

And after all that huffing and puffing, my original comment still stands true - what did 8 years of the last administration accomplish? Exactly, NK developed its weapons and left Trump with the hot potato.

I can't wait to see the day North Korea becomes free and the Golden Arches rise in Pyongyang.

North Korea will be a magnificent place for Samsung, Hyundai or Apple with well disciplined laborers working for peanuts. It can be a paradise.

casinterest wrote:

mham001 wrote:

So what has decades of delegitimizing the Kim regimes accomplished?

And so how and why is Trump going to treat NK differently than Iran?

The lying racist coward couldn't even have a meeting with Iran before abandoning a treaty?
Why incentive does NK have for agreeing to anything with such a lying racist coward as Trump?

To start, outside of killing his brother, NK is not exporting terror across its borders.

And I agree with you, Kim has little incentive, he can just look back at the recent example set in Libya. And since you are intent to get into partisanship, in that case, a Republican administration made a nuclear disarmament deal and a Democratic administration then killed the man.

But back to the question, what has decades of delegitimizing the Kim regimes accomplished? And what would YOU do?

mham001 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

mham001 wrote:

So what has decades of delegitimizing the Kim regimes accomplished?

And so how and why is Trump going to treat NK differently than Iran?

The lying racist coward couldn't even have a meeting with Iran before abandoning a treaty?
Why incentive does NK have for agreeing to anything with such a lying racist coward as Trump?

To start, outside of killing his brother, NK is not exporting terror across its borders.

And I agree with you, Kim has little incentive, he can just look back at the recent example set in Libya. And since you are intent to get into partisanship, in that case, a Republican administration made a nuclear disarmament deal and a Democratic administration then killed the man.

But back to the question, what has decades of delegitimizing the Kim regimes accomplished? And what would YOU do?

North Korea has no existence or need to exist outside of being North Korea. Trump has nothing to offer them, and they will offer nothing in return other than to use the meetings as propaganda to further prop up the Kim Regime.

As for Libya, that issue was not a part of Nuclear disarmament, it seems so fitting how you forget about the Arab Spring.

KLDC10 wrote:

Oh my, listen to you all seething with rage. Calm down. Trump made history today.

What was Trump's objective, and has he accomplished it ?

casinterest wrote:

North Korea has no existence or need to exist outside of being North Korea. Trump has nothing to offer them, and they will offer nothing in return other than to use the meetings as propaganda to further prop up the Kim Regime.

Hmm, if that is true, explain this...

Barack Obama Warns Donald Trump on North Korea Threat - WSJ
Search domain http://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-faces ... 1479855286
White House says new president's top foreign priority should be nuclear Pyongyang. The Obama administration considers North Korea to be the top national security priority for the incoming administration, a view it has conveyed to President-elect Donald Trump's transition team, according to people familiar with the conversations.

I really don't have a dog in this hunt, I only know previous approaches obviously failed, but the sheer ignorance expressed by the obsessed Trump-haters is sometimes just too tempting for any moderate contrarian..

SCQ83 wrote:

I can't wait to see the day North Korea becomes free and the Golden Arches rise in Pyongyang.

Free from whom and from what? Have someone from North Korea asked to be freed from something? There have been a lot of “freeing” lately - Iraq, whole Middle East, Ukraine.

casinterest wrote:

As for Libya, that issue was not a part of Nuclear disarmament, it seems so fitting how you forget about the Arab Spring.

Then what else? Had Qaddafi had nuclear weapons, nobody would have had any thought of using military force against them. And that “Arab Spring” will be echoing for decades all over Europe. Nobody will forget that easily.

It amazes me how you leftist warmongers advocate for war instead of talking out differences. The only way to avoid or end a war with a hostile enemy is to communicate...something you people don’t seem to comprehend.

Then again, all you people do is cry on social media daily instead of doing something useful with your time.

mham001 wrote:

alfa164 wrote:

Perhaps you missed the timeline; North Korea withdrew from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in 2003. That was not during the "8 years of the last administration".

Perhaps you also missed out on knowing North Korea admitted having nuclear weapons in 2005 - which was not during the "8 years of the last administration".either.

And you might have also missed the fact that North Korea announced it had successfully conducted its first nuclear test in 2006 - which, believe it or not, did not fall not during the "8 years of the last administration".

The Obama administration inherited a world in which North Korea already had nuclear capabilities. There is no denying that they did not - or could not - convince Kim to give up his nuclear ambitions. But then, neither has the current administration. The only difference so far is that Obama never went to Korea to kiss Kim's ass... only the current narcissistic man-child in the White House choses to go that path...

And after all that huffing and puffing, my original comment still stands true - what did 8 years of the last administration accomplish? Exactly, NK developed its weapons and left Trump with the hot potato.

You could have just as easily - and more correctly - asked, "What did the Bush administration accomplish? Exactly, NK developed its weapons and left Obama with the hot potato.

As previously noted, NK's nuclear development came between 2003 and 2006 - and they have been determined to maintain their status as a nuclear nation since. It didn't change during the Obama administration, but it hasn't changed under Trump, either. That's no "huffing and puffing"; that's a fact.

mham001 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

North Korea has no existence or need to exist outside of being North Korea. Trump has nothing to offer them, and they will offer nothing in return other than to use the meetings as propaganda to further prop up the Kim Regime.

Hmm, if that is true, explain this...

Barack Obama Warns Donald Trump on North Korea Threat - WSJ
Search domain http://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-faces ... 1479855286
White House says new president's top foreign priority should be nuclear Pyongyang. The Obama administration considers North Korea to be the top national security priority for the incoming administration, a view it has conveyed to President-elect Donald Trump's transition team, according to people familiar with the conversations.

I really don't have a dog in this hunt, I only know previous approaches obviously failed, but the sheer ignorance expressed by the obsessed Trump-haters is sometimes just too tempting for any moderate contrarian..

Fareed Zakaria's take was pretty even-handed - sometimes impulsiveness works with intractable foreign policy issues, and that remains to be seen, but what has actually been accomplished other than three photo-ops? DPRK has received 'rewards' - legitimacy for Kim, reduction of ROK-US military drills, proposals for future economic relief - in exchange for....what? The stop-start of missile testing has occurred in the past with re-application of sanctions, just as now, so that's not new.

LittleSprocket wrote:

It amazes me how you leftist warmongers advocate for war instead of talking out differences. The only way to avoid or end a war with a hostile enemy is to communicate...something you people don’t seem to comprehend.

Then again, all you people do is cry on social media daily instead of doing something useful with your time.

What was Trump's objective, and has he accomplished it ?

alfa164 wrote:

mham001 wrote:

alfa164 wrote:

Perhaps you missed the timeline; North Korea withdrew from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in 2003. That was not during the "8 years of the last administration".

Perhaps you also missed out on knowing North Korea admitted having nuclear weapons in 2005 - which was not during the "8 years of the last administration".either.

And you might have also missed the fact that North Korea announced it had successfully conducted its first nuclear test in 2006 - which, believe it or not, did not fall not during the "8 years of the last administration".

The Obama administration inherited a world in which North Korea already had nuclear capabilities. There is no denying that they did not - or could not - convince Kim to give up his nuclear ambitions. But then, neither has the current administration. The only difference so far is that Obama never went to Korea to kiss Kim's ass... only the current narcissistic man-child in the White House choses to go that path...

You can roll your eyebrows all you want but your depiction is entirely disingenuous without the role Bill Clinton played at a very pivotal time in North Korea nuclear ambitions.

And after all that huffing and puffing, my original comment still stands true - what did 8 years of the last administration accomplish? Exactly, NK developed its weapons and left Trump with the hot potato.

You could have just as easily - and more correctly - asked, "What did the Bush administration accomplish? Exactly, NK developed its weapons and left Obama with the hot potato.

As previously noted, NK's nuclear development came between 2003 and 2006 - and they have been determined to maintain their status as a nuclear nation since. It didn't change during the Obama administration, but it hasn't changed under Trump, either. That's no "huffing and puffing"; that's a fact.

You can roll your eyebrows all you want but your depiction is entirely disingenuous without the role Bill Clinton also played at a very pivotal time in North Korea nuclear ambitions - which did not start in 2003, that's just silly talk. https://www.history.com/news/north-kore ... -framework

And after all that, you STILL left unanswered - what did any of them accomplish in the last 30 years that makes Trump's pivot any worse?

mham001 wrote:

what did any of them accomplish in the last 30 years that makes Trump's pivot any worse?

Obama had kept up the pressure up on North Korea. Trump has now legitimized the Kim regime and has gotten nothing in return. Trump loosened the leverage that had been used to force North Korea back under control; that was the strategy that had been previously agreed upon by all the adults. Currently, both Kim's missile and nuke programs are proceeding unhindered.

Clinton had the nuke program on hold when he left office, he also had an agreement that put North Korea's long-range missile testing on hold. The Shrub ended both of those agreements. (Much like trump has ended the Iranian pause in nuke development.) Now Trump has thrown in the towel completely on reining North Korea in.

Clinton had it right, when you give up something, you get something in return.

mham001 wrote:

alfa164 wrote:

mham001 wrote:

You can roll your eyebrows all you want but your depiction is entirely disingenuous without the role Bill Clinton played at a very pivotal time in North Korea nuclear ambitions.

And after all that huffing and puffing, my original comment still stands true - what did 8 years of the last administration accomplish? Exactly, NK developed its weapons and left Trump with the hot potato.

You could have just as easily - and more correctly - asked, "What did the Bush administration accomplish? Exactly, NK developed its weapons and left Obama with the hot potato.

As previously noted, NK's nuclear development came between 2003 and 2006 - and they have been determined to maintain their status as a nuclear nation since. It didn't change during the Obama administration, but it hasn't changed under Trump, either. That's no "huffing and puffing"; that's a fact.

You can roll your eyebrows all you want but your depiction is entirely disingenuous without the role Bill Clinton also played at a very pivotal time in North Korea nuclear ambitions - which did not start in 2003, that's just silly talk. https://www.history.com/news/north-kore ... -framework

And after all that, you STILL left unanswered - what did any of them accomplish in the last 30 years that makes Trump's pivot any worse?

You seem obsessed with - or determined to deflect to - Barack Obama, and now Bill Clinton. This topic is about Trump and Kim, and yes, Trump's "pivot" (which might more objectively be called "capitulation") to Kim is worse. Take it from someone with more knowledge than you or I have:

https://www.nbcrightnow.com/national/co ... 4f9f6.html
.

Spar wrote:

mham001 wrote:

what did any of them accomplish in the last 30 years that makes Trump's pivot any worse?

Obama had kept up the pressure up on North Korea. Trump has now legitimized the Kim regime and has gotten nothing in return. Trump loosened the leverage that had been used to force North Korea back under control; that was the strategy that had been previously agreed upon by all the adults. Currently, both Kim's missile and nuke programs are proceeding unhindered. Clinton had the nuke program on hold when he left office, he also had an agreement that put North Korea's long-range missile testing on hold. The Shrub ended both of those agreements. (Much like trump has ended the Iranian pause in nuke development.) Now Trump has thrown in the towel completely on reining North Korea in. Clinton had it right, when you give up something, you get something in return.

This. Despite all the Russian trolls self-proclaimed Trumppuppets on this topic, basic diplomacy cannot be denied, and you said it well: when you give up something, you get something in return.

It looks like to great "deal-maker" is nothing but a snake-oil salesman...

The NYT is reporting that Trump is mulling over recognizing NK as a nuclear power. That seems like he is capitulating to a dictator to me.

Pyrex wrote:

Funny how the same people praising Obama for taking a picture in front of a mural with the face of a mass murderer in Cuba, sheet giving them everything they wanted and getting exactly zero in return, are so hung up on this when so far North Korea has received nothing they wanted.

Trump gave him legitimacy. Expect the NK propaganda machine to play this to death.

casinterest wrote:

The NYT is reporting that Trump is mulling over recognizing NK as a nuclear power. That seems like he is capitulating to a dictator to me.

He likes Chairman Kim...probably because Kim (like Erdogan, Putin, and MBS) has total control over his people and what they say is law.

LittleSprocket wrote:

It amazes me how you leftist warmongers advocate for war instead of talking out differences. The only way to avoid or end a war with a hostile enemy is to communicate...something you people don’t seem to comprehend.

Then again, all you people do is cry on social media daily instead of doing something useful with your time.

You know who tried diplomacy and got flack at home? A certain Black president who used diplomacy to reengage with Cuba and Iran. In fact, during the Iran negotiations, 47 GOP Senators directly meddled in foreign policy.

But as always, when a Republican does it, it's to be admired, celebrated, and honored. When a Democrat does it, he's selling out his country and should be immediately removed from office.

Cry me a river. You'd have a much coherent argument if Republicans actually respected diplomacy and deferred to the presidency when it's occupied by a Democrat.

casinterest wrote:

The NYT is reporting that Trump is mulling over recognizing NK as a nuclear power. That seems like he is capitulating to a dictator to me.

Even if Trump doesn’t recognize NK as a nuclear power - what will change? What’s taken into account is the reality, not whether someone recognizes that or not. He recognized it last year, when he sent to NK’s shores “not 3 carriers, but 2, and not to North Korea but to South one, and he was misunderstood”.

anrec80 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

The NYT is reporting that Trump is mulling over recognizing NK as a nuclear power. That seems like he is capitulating to a dictator to me.

Even if Trump doesn’t recognize NK as a nuclear power - what will change? What’s taken into account is the reality, not whether someone recognizes that or not. He recognized it last year, when he sent to NK’s shores “not 3 carriers, but 2, and not to North Korea but to South one, and he was misunderstood”.

What changed in Iran when Trump removed the us from the Treaty?

I just had this come across my social media feed and it is stunning

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/7 ... RllMFCykjs

State media in DPRK played along side the White House propaganda machine and, also, the White House propaganda machine in 2008 vs. today.

agill wrote:

This must be the weakest an American president ever have looked. Just amazing. And people who call themselves patriots still love him.

And he will undoubtedly go down in history as the worst. James Buchanan will be elevated to second place!

alfa164 wrote:

agill wrote:

This must be the weakest an American president ever have looked. Just amazing. And people who call themselves patriots still love him.

And he will undoubtedly go down in history as the worst. James Buchanan will be elevated to second place!

Worst I don't know. It's up to the voters of the US. But this was so weak it was odd. The president of America is just over the moon to give the dictator of North Korea what he wants, and almost seem to beg for it.

seb146 wrote:

I just had this come across my social media feed and it is stunning

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/7 ... RllMFCykjs

State media in DPRK played along side the White House propaganda machine and, also, the White House propaganda machine in 2008 vs. today.

I have seen those videos before. It just shows you how those on the right are hypocrites!

agill wrote:

The president of America is just over the moon to give the dictator of North Korea what he wants, and almost seem to beg for it.

An interesting commentary - "A Small Step for Trump, A Giant Leap for North Korea" - from the Takeaway (one of my favorite podcasts):

https://www.wnycstudios.org/story/small ... orth-korea

Interesting comment: "A lot of show, and no results."

I don't think Korean unification is possible without blood shed. That said we should let it implode from within. Trump is by no means my favorite person but ive always been in the camp in order for (at least) more stable relations, that leaders of adversarial countries should meet with each other face to face. Its time to face reality that a civil uprising is the way to go for the Kim regime to go if we dont want to see Seoul or a Japanese or US city wiped off the map.

My view on Korea reunification - "be fearful of your wishes, they sometimes come true". The million dollar question here is - whose elites are stronger and more "predatory" - Pyongyang or Seoul ones? Seoul ones are totally under American umbrella and are capable for little on their own. Pyongyang ones - they are elite of a strong sovereign state, with track record of achievements (ballistic and nuclear programs anyone?). So it very well may happen that Pyongyang ones will successfully eat Soul ones, and reunited Korea will be run by the Great Leader, and not a president. It doesn't even matter where the capital will be, and whether or not there will be a dude called President or Prime Minister.

Pity he didn’t try to nab a banner while he was over there. Im sure it would’ve made a great souvenir.

anrec80 wrote:

My view on Korea reunification - "be fearful of your wishes, they sometimes come true". The million dollar question here is - whose elites are stronger and more "predatory" - Pyongyang or Seoul ones? Seoul ones are totally under American umbrella and are capable for little on their own. Pyongyang ones - they are elite of a strong sovereign state, with track record of achievements (ballistic and nuclear programs anyone?). So it very well may happen that Pyongyang ones will successfully eat Soul ones, and reunited Korea will be run by the Great Leader, and not a president. It doesn't even matter where the capital will be, and whether or not there will be a dude called President or Prime Minister.

What about Kim's family becoming some sort of royal family and the parliament can continue to be elected by people, under supervision by the state? That seems more likely