ALF Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 14 minutes ago, /dev/null said: I wonder how the Nobel Peace Prize selection committee would treat Trump for denuclearizing North Korea? That would be a great accomplishment for a nuke free N Korea , no sanctions, outside investors and better conditions for the citizens there . They just need China to guarantee no regime change and future security against any attack. The North is sitting on massive natural resources that could be mined and exported. 1
DC Tom Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 1 hour ago, /dev/null said: I wonder how the Nobel Peace Prize selection committee would treat Trump for denuclearizing North Korea? Give Kim Jong Un a Nobel Peace Prize for preventing the out-of-control Trump from starting a war, of course. 5
Nanker Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 5 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: Case in point: Comments are great. Samantha reveals all of BO’s negotiating bullet points: Prep, prep, prep for months Rely completely on establishment “subject matter experts” Endure analysis paralysis for months Gain CONSENSUS! Plan for a showy meeting within a year or two Give the opponent 99% of their demands Get a most precious Photo Op Claim great moral victory Trump’s bullet points: Decide what you want Dont waiver publicly in your position Negotiate behind the scenes Secure the deal you want Announce meeting Seal the deal Move on to the next issue
DC Tom Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 5 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: Case in point: Comments are great. She is right on one point: one-on-one talks with Kim Jong Un provide him much more credibility than he or his father have ever had. It's why the Bush administration was always adamant about six-party talks. But on all other points, she's either obviously incorrect or lying.
snafu Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 N. Korea isn't the problem. China is the problem. This may end well short-term, but it will get ugly later on. 2 minutes ago, DC Tom said: She is right on one point: one-on-one talks with Kim Jong Un provide him much more credibility than he or his father have ever had. It's why the Bush administration was always adamant about six-party talks. But on all other points, she's either obviously incorrect or lying. Not ot only that, but Kim can't make agreements that China won't stand for.
row_33 Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 CNN declares everything the GOP tries for the next 500 years to be a failure and evil how bold they think they are....
GG Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 12 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: I'll say this: The deal is already done. No way Trump would agree to meet without an assurance that it was a done deal. I say, they've already had talks. This will be ceremonial. *imo of course Well in that case, he'll just be taking credit for something where the Obama administration did all the heavy lifting. 44 minutes ago, DC Tom said: She is right on one point: one-on-one talks with Kim Jong Un provide him much more credibility than he or his father have ever had. It's why the Bush administration was always adamant about six-party talks. Ghosts of KRC's diplomacy? 1
Nanker Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 59 minutes ago, GG said: Well in that case, he'll just be taking credit for something where the Obama administration did all the heavy lifting. Ghosts of HRC's diplomacy?
row_33 Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 Nobody is mighty enough to pick up that purse that Obama almost swung at North Korea, Putin, Syria 1
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 Wondering if the NK arsenal is completely trash and it’s a ploy to get concessions. Man. CNN is like crack to some of you guys. Step away from the table and detox.
row_33 Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 10 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said: Wondering if the NK arsenal is completely trash and it’s a ploy to get concessions. Man. CNN is like crack to some of you guys. Step away from the table and detox. we are mocking CNN and everyone in goosestep with it's insanity better than my daily joke from Jackie Martling
dpberr Posted March 9, 2018 Author Posted March 9, 2018 I think NK's intentions are authentic. They will show up and talk and it'll go better than most think it will. Love him or hate him, Trump has managed to do something both Bushes, Clinton and Obama couldn't and he may be more strategic than he appears. Is it possible he's the right man for the times? I think NK is being *significantly* pushed by the Chinese for the first time - as their olive branch to the United States to avert a trade war they'd definitely lose and one that'd have significant consequences for their fragile economy. (It's even more fragile than ours.) 1
snafu Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 1 hour ago, dpberr said: I think NK's intentions are authentic. They will show up and talk and it'll go better than most think it will. Love him or hate him, Trump has managed to do something both Bushes, Clinton and Obama couldn't and he may be more strategic than he appears. Is it possible he's the right man for the times? I think NK is being *significantly* pushed by the Chinese for the first time - as their olive branch to the United States to avert a trade war they'd definitely lose and one that'd have significant consequences for their fragile economy. (It's even more fragile than ours.) I think it is a dog and pony show. I wonder how much Trump can accomplish without Congressional input, South Korean input, and Chinese input -- probably Japan, too (especially China and especially after he blasted China with steel and aluminum tariffs). Trump's got a long, loud history of making other countries "pay their fair share". I doubt he's going to concede to prop up the Kim regime solely at U.S. expense -- and if he does then he comes across as a hypocrite.
Deranged Rhino Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 (edited) 4 hours ago, snafu said: N. Korea isn't the problem. China is the problem. This may end well short-term, but it will get ugly later on. Not ot only that, but Kim can't make agreements that China won't stand for. Correct to a degree, and absolutely correct within the old paradigm. I'll argue this though... we are in a new paradigm. Old rules don't apply. China, and also Iran and Russia are the biggest sponsors of the DPRK. Hence the Steel and Aluminum tariffs (China and Russia respectively). There's no way Trump agreed to this without the framework for a deal already in place. I'm betting that deal has China's approval (remember his visit to the Forbidden Palace last year, remember the targeted sanctions and exposure of illegal Chinese fuel tankers breaking the sanctions being exposed). DPRK will denuclearize (possibly this year), China will sign off on it. Russia has no choice in the matter. And the domino effect will hasten the Mullah's exit from Iran. Let's not forget how this started: KSA. They gutted puppet masters and their bankrolls, cut the strings from the puppets across the globe, and for the past four months we've seen organizations collapse from within. This isn't a coincidence. It isn't happenstance. It's part of a larger war going on behind the scenes. 40% public, 60% classified. 3 hours ago, GG said: Well in that case, he'll just be taking credit for something where the Obama administration did all the heavy lifting. 1 hour ago, ShadyBillsFan said: Wondering if the NK arsenal is completely trash and it’s a ploy to get concessions. We'll find out, but I'm almost certain it's not a ploy for the reasons listed above. 1 hour ago, dpberr said: I think NK's intentions are authentic. They will show up and talk and it'll go better than most think it will. Love him or hate him, Trump has managed to do something both Bushes, Clinton and Obama couldn't and he may be more strategic than he appears. Is it possible he's the right man for the times? I think NK is being *significantly* pushed by the Chinese for the first time - as their olive branch to the United States to avert a trade war they'd definitely lose and one that'd have significant consequences for their fragile economy. (It's even more fragile than ours.) 29 minutes ago, snafu said: I think it is a dog and pony show. I wonder how much Trump can accomplish without Congressional input, South Korean input, and Chinese input -- probably Japan, too (especially China and especially after he blasted China with steel and aluminum tariffs). Trump's got a long, loud history of making other countries "pay their fair share". I doubt he's going to concede to prop up the Kim regime solely at U.S. expense -- and if he does then he comes across as a hypocrite. While I have a different opinion, you could end up being right, we'll see soon enough. Edited March 9, 2018 by Deranged Rhino
billsfan89 Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 China is the key to any talks, not sure if Donald is the guy to pull this off but this is a way better approach than !@#$ing with their leader on Twitter (albeit in a hilarious way.) I think for the longest time China has been protecting North Korea just enough to make them a problem for the Japanese, the South Koreans, and the USA. Russia has also helped North Korea on the international stage since it is a game that messes with America's interest. But not that the North Korean's actually have nukes and a leader that is less of a rational actor than his father you are looking at a situation where China has to bend somewhat and de-escalate the situation before they end up flipping the whole chess board over. If China can promise the safety of the North Korean regime I think that goes a long way into getting the situation a bit more stable.
row_33 Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 it's nice to have a President that doesn't grovel and beg for forgiveness for the US wanting to exist
snafu Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 5 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Correct to a degree, and absolutely correct within the old paradigm. I'll argue this though... we are in a new paradigm. Old rules don't apply. China, and also Iran and Russia are the biggest sponsors of the DPRK. Hence the Steel and Aluminum tariffs (China and Russia respectively). There's no way Trump agreed to this without the framework for a deal already in place. I'm betting that deal has China's approval (remember his visit to the Forbidden Palace last year, remember the targeted sanctions and exposure of illegal Chinese fuel tankers breaking the sanctions being exposed). DPRK will denuclearize (possibly this year), China will sign off on it. Russia has no choice in the matter. And the domino effect will hasten the Mullah's exit from Iran. Let's not forget how this started: KSA. They gutted puppet masters and their bankrolls, cut the strings from the puppets across the globe, and for the past four months we've seen organizations collapse from within. This isn't a coincidence. It isn't happenstance. It's part of a larger war going on behind the scenes. 40% public, 60% classified. We'll find out, but I'm almost certain it's not a ploy for the reasons listed above. While I have a different opinion, you could end up being right, we'll see soon enough. Sorry -- I took out the dominoes. They were making my eyes hurt! Sticking to China (and I hope you're right about the effects on Iran -- I don't see Russia's needle moving much with this, though). I just think that getting China on board in 15 months of this Presidency is unlikely. This is the "silk road" China who's pushing always into the Himalayas and India and even Pakistan. This China who's constantly complaining about their rights to the sea and building bases. This China who's trying to make colonies out of Australia and parts of Africa for their raw materials. This China who needs to feed and employ billions of people. They're going to let the U.S. come in and dictate what happens on the Korean Peninsula. I suppose my opinion is that the old paradigm won't die so easily. And if you're right that China is already on board then they have to have been given something really very big to agree.
Deranged Rhino Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 7 minutes ago, billsfan89 said: China is the key to any talks, not sure if Donald is the guy to pull this off but this is a way better approach than !@#$ing with their leader on Twitter (albeit in a hilarious way.) I think for the longest time China has been protecting North Korea just enough to make them a problem for the Japanese, the South Koreans, and the USA. Russia has also helped North Korea on the international stage since it is a game that messes with America's interest. But not that the North Korean's actually have nukes and a leader that is less of a rational actor than his father you are looking at a situation where China has to bend somewhat and de-escalate the situation before they end up flipping the whole chess board over. If China can promise the safety of the North Korean regime I think that goes a long way into getting the situation a bit more stable. China is key. And they're almost assuredly on board already. They'd almost have to be, because as you and Snafu have said, without their support any deal is bunk. 2 minutes ago, snafu said: Sorry -- I took out the dominoes. They were making my eyes hurt! Sticking to China (and I hope you're right about the effects on Iran -- I don't see Russia's needle moving much with this, though). I just think that getting China on board in 15 months of this Presidency is unlikely. This is the "silk road" China who's pushing always into the Himalayas and India and even Pakistan. This China who's constantly complaining about their rights to the sea and building bases. This China who's trying to make colonies out of Australia and parts of Africa for their raw materials. This China who needs to feed and employ billions of people. They're going to let the U.S. come in and dictate what happens on the Korean Peninsula. I suppose my opinion is that the old paradigm won't die so easily. And if you're right that China is already on board then they have to have been given something really very big to agree. I took them out I hear you. I don't think China is going to agree that the US dictates what happens on the penninsula. I think what they've agreed to is to let the Korean people - north and south - decide their own fate. In return, I expect to see the US draw down forces that have been there since the 50s. That alone would be a big carrot for China.
Deranged Rhino Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 I had to see if he made a comment... wasn't disappointed:
sodbuster Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 5 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: I had to see if he made a comment... wasn't disappointed: I have images running through my head of CNN covering a ceremonial meeting between Kim and Trump mediated by Rodman.
Recommended Posts