Trump believes Kim Jong-Un

#77
#77
hog88 said:
China has always undermined international sanctions against NK until NK really starts acting a fool then they reel them back in a little.

Nothing is stopping us from placing more sanctions on NK. Where are you getting the idea we can't?
Click to expand...

My point is bringing China in as the broker and being in their interest so they do honor the sanctions is the best approach. I'm sorry, we aren't getting Lil Kim to do anything unless China is on board. It just ain't happening.

I'm not saying we can't impose more sanctions. I'm assuming Trump won't, given the tenor coming from the latest meeting. Trump, after all, "trusts him".
 
#79
#79
  • Like
Reactions: W.TN.Orange Blood
#82
#82
No sanctions.

To no new sanctions.

To now no new sanctions, maybe, I don't know.
 
#83
#83
37L1 said:
No sanctions.

To no new sanctions.

To now no new sanctions, maybe, I don't know.
Click to expand...

You asked for an explanation, I gave it, politely I might add. And by the way, was stated in other posts as well.
 
#84
#84
rjd970 said:
My point is bringing China in as the broker and being in their interest so they do honor the sanctions is the best approach. I'm sorry, we aren't getting Lil Kim to do anything unless China is on board. It just ain't happening.

I'm not saying we can't impose more sanctions. I'm assuming Trump won't, given the tenor coming from the latest meeting. Trump, after all, "trusts him".
Click to expand...
And because Trump is so eager to portray NK negotiations as a success, he pushes back against any intel (from Coats) which suggests they are still making upgrades to their nuclear reactor despite their summit pledges. Trump's ego comes first.
 
#85
#85
rjd970 said:
You asked for an explanation, I gave it, politely I might add. And by the way, was stated in other posts as well.
Click to expand...
I also politely pointed out how you have changed the tenor and meaning from your original post on this subject.

The sanctions are still in place. Trump wouldn't budge on them until Kim proceeds to dump the nukes in a meaningful and total manner.

All the naysayers were freaking out that he would cave and give away the farm just to get a "win."

Guess not, but are they happy, not so much. Instead there's a freak out, oh my, no sanctions anymore.

Psshhhh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Obsessed and W.TN.Orange Blood
#86
#86
rjd970 said:
My point is bringing China in as the broker and being in their interest so they do honor the sanctions is the best approach. I'm sorry, we aren't getting Lil Kim to do anything unless China is on board. It just ain't happening.

I'm not saying we can't impose more sanctions. I'm assuming Trump won't, given the tenor coming from the latest meeting. Trump, after all, "trusts him".
Click to expand...

We have tried that approach for decades without any success, every POTUS since the Korean war has gone down that route and you think we should just continue on?

Again I ask, what did a different approach cost us?
 
  • Like
Reactions: tennvols77 and AM64
#90
#90
hog88 said:
Bush, Obama and their predecessors were wrong. Working through China empowers China to use NK as leverage. With that approach regime change was the only possible way we could see progress. With direct engagement with NK we are not dependent on China.
Click to expand...

After the first meeting, Kim went to Beijing; I believe "recalled" would be the operative word. After that meeting in Beijing, NK apparently changed it's tune a bit and waffled on the agreement with Trump. This time Kim rode the train through China probably to get oriented before meeting Trump; the debriefing and post summit "review" and to include goals and vision statement will happen on the way home. Apparently Kim learned not to over promise. It's pretty clear NK is China's puppet and stooge. China can play the good cop bad cop all day long ... demand that NK be the regional bully threatening nuclear war, and then good cop by offering to "tame" NK to the rest of the world. That's the way you keep tensions high without being the culprit; China and Russia have done it for years and years; you just need "independent" satellites ... ex western colonies are the prime choices.

As to disarmament, NK really had no incentive to unilaterally disarm; it was a raw deal for them.
 
#91
#91
hog88 said:
We have tried that approach for decades without any success, every POTUS since the Korean war has gone down that route and you think we should just continue on?

Again I ask, what did a different approach cost us?
Click to expand...

At the moment, nothing. In the future, I don't know. Maybe still nothing, maybe more.

Honestly, if Obama had sat down with Kim and even further said he trusts him, how would you have taken that?
 
#92
#92
Hmm. Not the description I would have gone with. I think dog (Trump) and dog-walker (Un) is a more apt description of the relationship.

 
#93
#93
BowlBrother85 said:
Kim Jong Un has written Trump some flowery letters which flattered him with praise. That wins you favor when it comes to dealing with an egocentric personality such as Trump.
Click to expand...

You are thinking in western terms. Effusive praise and flowery speech is an eastern thing. They smile and make the enemy feel like the victor as they slip the knife in deep. Things are rarely as they seem in the eastern world. Treaties are broken before the ink is dry, and only western fools keep their side of the bargain.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol
#94
#94
So Democrats bashed the President because they thought he was going to give North Korea everything and get nothing.

He instead walks away from the discussions because North Korea wasn't giving up anything and they now bash him for not giving up anything to North Korea?🤔
 
  • Like
Reactions: 37L1, AM64 and davethevol
#95
#95
There is a very strong parallel between Nixon/N Vietnamese and Trump/N Korean negotiations. NV knew Nixon was in trouble back at home, the peace movement was strong, and the next congress would almost certainly be dominated by antiwar and anti Nixon Dims. All they had to do was string the talks out a few months and the Dims would sell out NV's enemies. In the end Nixon got the US out of Vietnam and turned the war over to the friendly allies in VN, Cambodia, and Laos; congress then cut off all funding so there was no chance of their survival.

Congress is undermining all Trump's foreign negotiations in precisely the same way. It was likely no coincidence at all that the Cohen hearing and exposure coincided with the Trump/Kim talks. Why come to an agreement with someone you think won't last, when the other guys will offer a better deal?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RavinDave, davethevol, hog88 and 2 others
#96
#96
AM64 said:
There is a very strong parallel between Nixon/N Vietnamese and Trump/N Korean negotiations. NV knew Nixon was in trouble back at home, the peace movement was strong, and the next congress would almost certainly be dominated by antiwar and anti Nixon Dims. All they had to do was string the talks out a few months and the Dims would sell out NV's enemies. In the end Nixon got the US out of Vietnam and turned the war over to the friendly allies in VN, Cambodia, and Laos; congress then cut off all funding so there was no chance of their survival.

Congress is undermining all Trump's foreign negotiations in precisely the same way. It was likely no coincidence at all that the Cohen hearing and exposure coincided with the Trump/Kim talks. Why come to an agreement with someone you think won't last, when the other guys will offer a better deal?
Click to expand...
It really helps to be old enough to know what actually went on almost 50 years ago, instead of having to learn by reading revisionist history. Thanks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RavinDave and AM64
#97
#97
1972 Grad said:
It really helps to be old enough to know what actually went on almost 50 years ago, instead of having to learn by reading revisionist history. Thanks.
Click to expand...

There are some good books that reasonably discuss the US/Vietnam history, but they were written years ago. My own memory to a great extent is probably more a general remembrance of what went on during those years, and often the disgust I felt with how many things went. Seeing on TV the helicopters evacuating the Embassy in Saigon was particularly heartbreaking when thinking of all the lives wasted and the dramatic cultural shift in the US for really nothing. A couple of good books on the history are Setup: What the Air Force Did in Vietnam and Why (Earl H. Tilford, Air University Press) and Street Without Joy (Bernard B. Fall, Stackpole Books). The first is primarily about the air war ... what went right and what didn't, but it is very good at explaining in the end how Nixon's attempt at a peace treaty failed ... you also see that even that treaty at it's best was selling out Vietnam because Nixon was so weakened politically. The second is a good account of the French war in Vietnam and how it led to our involvement. To understand how the Chinese operate and negotiate Stilwell and the American Experience in China: 1911-1945 (Barbara W. Tuchman, Random House) ... it's very dated, but fascinating in explaining the duplicity that was and still likely is a part of Chinese culture. None of these books are by authors with an ax to grind or an agenda, and their footnotes and bibliographies are great sources for other books.

I quit UT in my junior year (1967) and enlisted in the Army, I spent almost two years on Okinawa (after training), and eventually returned to UT in 1975, so I guess my interest in Vietnam tends to stem from the fact that it was the big thing going on at an impressionable point in my life. Armed Forces Radio and TV was probably as biased in one direction as the media at home was in the other ... coming back home was a real culture shock. I fully expected to wind up in Vietnam (and about half my class in Hawk missile radar repair did); however several of those guys wound up on Okinawa a few months later after Hawks were removed from Vietnam.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RavinDave and 1972 Grad
#99
#99
CagleMtnVol said:
So Democrats bashed the President because they thought he was going to give North Korea everything and get nothing.

He instead walks away from the discussions because North Korea wasn't giving up anything and they now bash him for not giving up anything to North Korea?🤔
Click to expand...
We are bashing him because, once again, he publicly stated that he was taking the word of a ruthless dictator.
 
  • Like
Reactions: roosterjbh
#100
#100
evillawyer said:
Here's the video. Proud of our president! This is what being respected again by the world looks like!

Click to expand...


What should he have said? Would saying kim is a liar have done anything to help get rid of the NK nuke problem? Also, if he did and kim walked away from the talks because of it would you be here praising the president?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top