Youre a fool. Obama did this for 8 years and you didnt care. Trump ends the practice and you ridicule him?
So consistent.
Maybe you and 8188 can get together and grouse about me not following you down the rabbit hole.
Accept the article I offered or don't.
it was nothing more than a photo op and a legitimization of the Kim regime.
Specifically, your post:
I'm asking something very simple. What specifically legitimized his leadership of North Korea? Was he not the legitimate leader of North Korea before the summit?
Or are you just parroting what you heard on the news? That, I could accept even though it makes you look like a tool. But at least it's an honest answer.
Specifically, your post:
I'm asking something very simple. What specifically legitimized his leadership of North Korea? Was he not the legitimate leader of North Korea before the summit?
Or are you just parroting what you heard on the news? That, I could accept even though it makes you look like a tool. But at least it's an honest answer.
The link never actually mentioned the topic. But good try.
The article specifically addressed "the topic" of why legitimization matters, yet you seem to be asking why the meeting legitimized Kim's regime.
I can't explain the common sense of what this photo represents.
![]()
If you aren't able to connect the dots then you're either a complete idiot or are intentionally being obtuse. These are the last remaining options.
Our conversation was specific to trumps meeting. Your link never mentioned meeting with dictators as legitimizing him. Honestly, this is just the left trying to find something to complain about.
His legitimacy is not in question.
Meeting with them legitimizes them. That's about as basic as I can explain it otherwise - I can't understand it for you.
Okay, I got un-lazy and found it.
Not a real good explanation on the subject in why Trump meeting with Kim makes him somehow " legitimate" at this point. But far be it from me to bring up the point the horse has left that barn a long time ago. And furthermore, if such regimes are "illegitimate" how else are we supposed to negotiate with them?
No, that article doesn't really support your argument as much as you think it does. I mean, it does reference Castro which was met by Obama, no? Did that make that regime more "legitimate" than others?
It's not meant to support an argument, other than the authors. Which is, that there are three pillars than an authoritarian dictator needs to survive. One of which is legitimacy or for 8188, "the topic."
As I've stated before, it's up to you to accept it or not.
I keep asking the question thoughof how Trump meeting with Kim makes him more "legitimate."
Something you fail to answer. Because you're just parroting what you heard on TV. Which makes you a tool.