PDA

View Full Version : War with North Korea?


Andrew NDB
09-05-2017, 11:49 AM
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02955/kim-the-interview_2955366b.jpg

Do you think it is an inevitability at this point? Do you think we should keep at them diplomatically and talk some more, or is it time for Trump's "fire and fury"?

CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy
09-05-2017, 11:52 AM
We need our nations to bond. Preferably over our mutual love of Katy Perry. Pre-"Miley Cyrus Makeover" Katy, of course.

The Deadman
09-05-2017, 11:53 AM
There's gonna come a time where one of those missiles he keeps shooting off is actually going to hit land, and the time for talking will be over.

IndigoErth
09-05-2017, 12:34 PM
I can't even guess at this point. I feel like it's two childish men waving their you-know-whats around at each other while citizens on either side are caught in the middle and at the mercy of whatever these idiots end up doing, which is unfortunate.

I feel for the average citizens in that CULT of a country that they didn't ask to be born into, and probably don't want this nonsense anymore than most over here in this one.

Honestly, as much as little Kimmy (and his relatives before him) love to parade around those missiles and whatnot, it's a wonder no one in their country has, to our knowledge, tried to stage anything that would, I dunno...cause some to explode in an effort to free their country?

If it does result in war at some point, I hope the surrounding countries jump them faster than we even can. Take out that so-called leader, their military, and any possible successors from his family or others who that "goverment" would try to put in power. Spare the citizens and let them rebuild a new way of life.

Powder
09-05-2017, 04:42 PM
If it does result in war at some point, I hope the surrounding countries jump them faster than we even can. Take out that so-called leader, their military, and any possible successors from his family or others who that "goverment" would try to put in power. Spare the citizens and let them rebuild a new way of life.

This.

My heart aches for those people, I hope that whatever happens will make it so they can finally know freedom & happiness.

snake
09-05-2017, 05:05 PM
It's gonna be f*cking nuts if China invades.

Utrommaniac
09-05-2017, 05:09 PM
Yeah, I'm also in the "take out the government" camp too. The civilians are suffering enough; they don't need to be caught in the crossfire of their "leaders" being taken down.

Andrew NDB
09-05-2017, 05:18 PM
It's gonna be f*cking nuts if China invades.

Invades who? Us? No way they care about North Korea that much. They may sanction the hell out of us and huff and puff, though... though even that depends on how it turns out. If it's just surgical strikes with no/little collateral damage in North Korea, I doubt they'd even do that.

ToTheNines
09-05-2017, 05:20 PM
I really really hope not. Countless innocent people are there who don't even know about the outside world.

Not saying I have the answer to this, but I hope there's no invasion or bombing. I don't think Un means business, so I hope we don't do something brash based on his probably hollow threats.

Andrew NDB
09-05-2017, 05:23 PM
I don't think Un means business, so I hope we don't do something brash based on his probably hollow threats.

Oh yes, they are 100% hollow... for now. But there would definitely come a time in the next 3 or 4 years, at North Korea's current level of missile deployment and tech, where they will develop the ability and tech to launch countermeasure-resistant nuclear missiles that can strike our coast. And then it might not be so hollow.

Katie
09-05-2017, 06:53 PM
My 2 cents which is worth about that.

Kim Jong Un has one motivation: to stay in power. I feel like he's pretty insecure about (or paranoid about) how the senior party members and military in DPRK see him. (As evidenced by the high level executions he's done)

He knows that no matter who the US president is, he'd get stomped pretty quick if he fired a missle, much less a nuke, at the US. He has been taken aback by Trump's angry rhetoric.

The thing is, he never wants to use those missle and be put out of power. He just wants to wave them around for his own people's sake and to prove he's tough to them. He'd be a fool to actually use them.

The WORST thing that could happen is if Trump actually starts something preemptively. That compells China to act because of treaties with DPRK and we definitely don't want to fight China.

The best thing is to leave the baby alone and let him bluster all he wants.

snake
09-05-2017, 06:56 PM
Invades who? Us? No way they care about North Korea that much. They may sanction the hell out of us and huff and puff, though... though even that depends on how it turns out. If it's just surgical strikes with no/little collateral damage in North Korea, I doubt they'd even do that.

They said they'll invade NK by september 11th if they suspect NK actually has the bomb.

http://www.trunews.com/article/if-north-korea-has-nuclear-icbm-china-will-invade-by-9-11

Mayhem
09-06-2017, 02:20 AM
To North Korea, the Korean war never ended, it's still going on, that's the end game really in his mind. To make sure not to lose that battle.

turtle1237
09-06-2017, 06:17 AM
I don't think we go to war with NK. To much is at stake, No one wants to see South Korea or Japan get nuke or missle in the process. But at the same time, I don't think much will change, NK will still try to push it to the edge short of war, and America will either opt for peace talks or put sanctions. The only way for a war to happen is if NK attacks one of our Allies, but China will intervene sooner or later on the side of the North as they did in the 1950's.

TurtleWA
09-06-2017, 11:20 AM
Seems like China might be the most powerful component in this entire mess. Most likely China likes to keep US distracted with NK and also doesn't want NK and SK united because then they would have another competitor.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/china-response-us-first-strike-north-korea-2017-3

The above article raises several points including "If China unilaterally denuclearized North Korea to head off a US strike, this would only vindicate that claim, and raise questions as to why China allowed North Korea to develop and export dangerous technologies and commit heinous human rights abuses." And that "China could bring forces into North Korea to act as a tripwire." You know, stuff that makes you shake your head.

A side note not directly related to the article: I'm not sure how debt works exactly when is comes to what the USA owes China. The U.S. debt to China is $1.102 trillion, as of May 2017. According to Google. I mean if China does not have the US back 100% could we not just say forget about ever seeing one cent of what we owe you?

CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy
09-06-2017, 11:25 AM
A side note not directly related to the article: I'm not sure how debt works exactly when is comes to what the USA owes China. The U.S. debt to China is $1.102 trillion, as of May 2017. According to Google. I mean if China does not have the US back 100% could we not just say forget about ever seeing one cent of what we owe you?

That's called crashing the national--if not global--economy, bubba. We try to avoid that.

plastroncafe
09-06-2017, 11:27 AM
Let's face it, whether we go to war with Korea depends on largely whether China will allow it.

Don't they have the largest standing army on earth right now?

1 China 2,333,000
2 United States 1,492,200
3 India 1,325,000
4 North Korea 1,190,000
http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/29-largest-armies-in-the-world.html

TurtleWA
09-06-2017, 11:38 AM
That's called crashing the national--if not global--economy, bubba. We try to avoid that.

Yeah I know zero about economics. I'll be the first to admit that. So it's not as simple as what I'm thinking most likely. I just figured if the US says to China no more money whatsoever, including debt payments and buying goods, China would hurt deeply. A war with dollars and not bullets. That might be more intimidating to some leaders than a nuke. Also less casualties.

The Deadman
09-06-2017, 11:39 AM
China's already said that if the US hits North Korea first, they're jumping in...but if North Korea hits us first, they're staying neutral.

plastroncafe
09-06-2017, 11:47 AM
Yeah I know zero about economics. I'll be the first to admit that. So it's not as simple as what I'm thinking most likely. I just figured if the US says to China no more money whatsoever, including debt payments and buying goods, China would hurt deeply. A war with dollars and not bullets. That might be more intimidating to some leaders than a nuke. Also less casualties.

Not doing business with China would hurt us more than it would hurt them.
We uh...don't exactly make a whole lot of stuff in the US anymore.

TurtleWA
09-06-2017, 11:59 AM
Not doing business with China would hurt us more than it would hurt them.
We uh...don't exactly make a whole lot of stuff in the US anymore.

We could start making what we need in the States if the time comes. And to offset the higher costs of American manufacturing have the debt payments that would have gone to China go to the wages/benefits of the US workers now making the products.

plastroncafe
09-06-2017, 12:03 PM
We could start making what we need in the States if the time comes. And to offset the higher costs of American manufacturing have the debt payments that would have gone to China go to the wages/benefits of the US workers now making the products.

That would be nice, wouldn't it?
But it won't happen, because we like our stuff cheap here, but we don't like working for the low wages one would have to pay to keep the retail cost down to say...Walmart levels.

TurtleWA
09-06-2017, 12:10 PM
That would be nice, wouldn't it?
But it won't happen, because we like our stuff cheap here, but we don't like working for the low wages one would have to pay to keep the retail cost down to say...Walmart levels.

This is just like a plan B or even plan D. If China decided to completely back NK. I think 1.1 trillion of money no longer going to China would be enough to keep retail prices down and pay US workers a living wage with nice benefits. But let's hope it doesn't come to anything like this. Let's hope everything can be worked out as peacefully and mutually beneficial for everyone.

CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy
09-06-2017, 12:16 PM
Yeah I know zero about economics. I'll be the first to admit that. So it's not as simple as what I'm thinking most likely. I just figured if the US says to China no more money whatsoever, including debt payments and buying goods, China would hurt deeply. A war with dollars and not bullets. That might be more intimidating to some leaders than a nuke. Also less casualties.

Sad to say, it is not.

The good news is, China likes buying on credit as much as the US does. Uncle Sammie ain't the only nation with a ton of debt.

Andrew NDB
09-06-2017, 12:53 PM
North Korea's EMP threat:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/understanding-north-koreas-emp-threat_us_59ae115de4b0bef3378cdad9

CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy
09-06-2017, 12:59 PM
North Korea's EMP threat:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/understanding-north-koreas-emp-threat_us_59ae115de4b0bef3378cdad9

Yeah. That's a thing.

We've known about this vulnerability for how many years now, and we've done what to overcome it?

plastroncafe
09-06-2017, 01:00 PM
Yeah. That's a thing.

We've known about this vulnerability for how many years now, and we've done what to overcome it?

For the same reason Houston's underwater and our bridges are falling apart:

Because there's no money to be made in infrastructure improvements.

Andrew NDB
09-06-2017, 01:02 PM
We've known about this vulnerability for how many years now, and we've done what to overcome it?

I'd like to believe quite a bit, but they just don't publicize it for worry of enemies developing newer tech to counter the counters.

But I really have no idea.

CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy
09-06-2017, 01:09 PM
I'd like to believe quite a bit, but they just don't publicize it for worry of enemies developing newer tech to counter the counters.

But I really have no idea.

See, that's what I'd like to think, too...

For the same reason Houston's underwater and our bridges are falling apart:

Because there's no money to be made in infrastructure improvements.

... but because of THIS, nobody ever wanting to approve tax dollars for infrastructure repair/improvement, I don't feel very confident in it.

Katie
09-06-2017, 04:04 PM
...and if we did start manufacturing again the cost of produced goods would skyrocket and price a whole bunch of working class and lower folks out of those nifty things China makes.



Edit: damnit! I was 4 hours too late on my reply. Damn work and damn my not paying attention that there was a page 2

MsMarvelDuckie
09-06-2017, 04:25 PM
Quote: Plastron Cafe:

"We uh, dont exactly make a lot of stuff in the US anymore."


But, but.... Wasn't Trump going to fix that? Oh wait. Never mind.....

Prowler
09-06-2017, 09:16 PM
I hope no nuclear weapons are dropped. Plus, it'd affect South Korea. I have a South Korean friend and I don't want him to die... and so would millions of other innocent people, obviously.

Anyway, North Korea pulls this **** often in order to blackmail other nations. This time they're really pushing the limits, though.

Andrew NDB
09-14-2017, 05:29 PM
So North Korea launched another missile over Japan AGAIN, just a few minutes ago, and this is the coverage it gets:

http://www.highlander-community.com/Untitled-2.jpg

Prowler
09-14-2017, 05:34 PM
Tbh every time North Korea pulls something like this nothing happens in the end. It's just their way of saying "look at me". It's like the boy who cries wolf over 9000 times.

Andrew NDB
09-14-2017, 05:36 PM
Sure, but the only thing that worries me about all of this is... what exactly is the incentive for us NOT to be shooting down these missiles every time they're launched, if we can? Why even let them get to Japan? We don't know how far they'll go or what's in them, and displaying our ability to shoot them down would do a lot to dissuade Kim. I worry they've sold us on a false sense of security that we can and would shoot them down.

ToTheNines
09-14-2017, 05:49 PM
Sure, but the only thing that worries me about all of this is... what exactly is the incentive for us NOT to be shooting down these missiles every time they're launched, if we can? Why even let them get to Japan? We don't know how far they'll go or what's in them, and displaying our ability to shoot them down would do a lot to dissuade Kim. I worry they've sold us on a false sense of security that we can and would shoot them down.

Warhead defense missiles are EXTREMELY expensive and currently finite. But I've personally installed missile triangulating radars all over D.C. with my company. The technology exists, I guess we just haven't felt the need to flex that muscle yet.

Katie
09-14-2017, 08:50 PM
Sure, but the only thing that worries me about all of this is... what exactly is the incentive for us NOT to be shooting down these missiles every time they're launched, if we can? Why even let them get to Japan? We don't know how far they'll go or what's in them, and displaying our ability to shoot them down would do a lot to dissuade Kim. I worry they've sold us on a false sense of security that we can and would shoot them down.

We really don't need to display that we can shoot missles down. They know we can already. So does China, which is why they are so agitated about our missle defense systems in the area.

Again, Kim's motivation is 100% to stay in power and prove is mettle to the DPRK people and party. I think there's some internal power struggling going on there. But the bottom line is that he doesn't have enough missles/nukes to destroy us, he wants to stay in power, he knows if he fires at us we will destroy him.

His only tiny hope is that he somehow gets us to make the first attack which compels China to act. We do not want that. I hope to God Trump has rational people explaining this to him. The worst thing we could EVER do is make the first attack.

Shoot missles into the water. Who cares. Let him bluster.

snake
09-14-2017, 09:00 PM
Damn, Kim really hates the ocean.

Andrew NDB
09-19-2017, 09:36 PM
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-north-korea-un-speech-destroy-kim-jong-un-us-threat-nuclear-a7955631.html

"Trump vows to totally destroy North Korea if it threatens US."

I don't believe for one moment that Trump would dare nuke North Korea but it will be very interesting to see Kim's response. Every response so far has been threats... is this Kim's last chance?

CyberCubed
09-19-2017, 09:43 PM
I think Trump actually believes he can just drop an Atom bomb or two right in the middle of North Korea like we did to Japan in World War II. Except this time nobody is going to tolerate millions of innocents wiped out in the blast, not to mention the millions who would die of radiation poisioning in the following weeks.

On top of that any bombing there would fallout to South Korea since it's right next to it. They would essentially be harming one of our allies as well.

Prowler
09-19-2017, 10:48 PM
I think Trump actually believes he can just drop an Atom bomb or two right in the middle of North Korea like we did to Japan in World War II. Except this time nobody is going to tolerate millions of innocents wiped out in the blast, not to mention the millions who would die of radiation poisioning in the following weeks.

On top of that any bombing there would fallout to South Korea since it's right next to it. They would essentially be harming one of our allies as well.
Yeah even if Trump was crazy and stupid enough to think that would be a good idea, I'm sure people who have his ear are not and will tell him to stay put.

TurtleWA
09-20-2017, 01:14 AM
Totally destroying NK doesn't necessarily mean with nukes. I'm sure the generals in charge update the president with the most current and up to date warfare techniques. We could go in with a cyber assault or EMP like in first link. Side note: video in second link shows testing of ICBM intercept test. The US has got this covered without nukes.

http://mil-embedded.com/news/raytheon-emp-missile-tested-by-boeing-usaf-research-lab/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.space.com/37048-missile-intercept-system-test-boeing-success.html

Prowler
09-20-2017, 01:54 AM
Is invading North Korea even a wise idea? I mean, do they know the terrain or what kind of arsenal that country really possesses?

Also, I don't think anyone would gain much from invading NK and putting an end to that dictatorship. I don't think South Koreans, the Chinese and the Japanese are interested in taking in millions of refugees.

Katie
09-20-2017, 05:45 AM
Knowing the terrain is not a problem. There was a war there previously and we have sattelites.

The main problem with an invasion is China. Which was exactly the problem in the Korean war. We can't fight China. It would be horrible.

Sumac
09-20-2017, 07:57 AM
Is invading North Korea even a wise idea?
No.
Because, after Kim Fatty Fat goes down the drain, you need to deal with several millions of hungry brainwashed people and outdated infrastructure. Not to mention most likely destruction of Seul.

This the sole reason why NK is still existing - no-one wants to sort this mess.

CyberCubed
09-20-2017, 03:52 PM
Most likely South Korea would take over the North if their government and leaders were able taken care of. Then Korea would be unified as one country again.

Andrew NDB
09-20-2017, 04:15 PM
Is invading North Korea even a wise idea? I mean, do they know the terrain or what kind of arsenal that country really possesses?

Also, I don't think anyone would gain much from invading NK and putting an end to that dictatorship. I don't think South Koreans, the Chinese and the Japanese are interested in taking in millions of refugees.

We wouldn't need to send even one boot on the ground until after we tactical missile strike every military outpost, staging area, fort, etc..

TurtleWA
09-20-2017, 04:56 PM
We wouldn't need to send even one boot on the ground until after we tactical missile strike every military outpost, staging area, fort, etc..

And maybe one of these mothers on rocket mans front door.
https://www.nytimes.com/video/world/middleeast/100000005043219/moab-mother-of-all-bombs-afghanistan.html

Redeemer
09-20-2017, 05:19 PM
My 2 cents which is worth about that.

Kim Jong Un has one motivation: to stay in power. I feel like he's pretty insecure about (or paranoid about) how the senior party members and military in DPRK see him. (As evidenced by the high level executions he's done)

He knows that no matter who the US president is, he'd get stomped pretty quick if he fired a missle, much less a nuke, at the US. He has been taken aback by Trump's angry rhetoric.

The thing is, he never wants to use those missle and be put out of power. He just wants to wave them around for his own people's sake and to prove he's tough to them. He'd be a fool to actually use them.

The WORST thing that could happen is if Trump actually starts something preemptively. That compells China to act because of treaties with DPRK and we definitely don't want to fight China.

The best thing is to leave the baby alone and let him bluster all he wants. I agree with a lot of what you said Katie. He has been exciting senior staff members and members of his own family who might oppose his rule. I also agree that he doesn't want to launch a full scale war either, bc he would lose power. But then again look at what Sadam Husain did.

Let's face it, whether we go to war with Korea depends on largely whether China will allow it.

Don't they have the largest standing army on earth right now?


http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/29-largest-armies-in-the-world.html

Wow I didn't think our army was that large! Should have known better :lol: Numbers is not everything though, but still I would rather not go to war with a Nuclear power.

Not doing business with China would hurt us more than it would hurt them.
We uh...don't exactly make a whole lot of stuff in the US anymore.
I don't agree. We are the #2 Exporting Nation in the world behind China of course.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/264623/leading-export-countries-worldwide/
China economy has already been trending down while the U.S. is Trending up, also I believe we are China #1 importer. So if we closed off trade with them I think China's economy would collapse. Also the U.S. dollar is the Global Currency still. I think we could crush China Economically with sanctions. I think our economy would suffer some, but not like China.

Hopefully North Korea can be dealt with a peaceful resolution.

Andrew NDB
03-08-2018, 05:56 PM
So it seems like Trump has... brought Kim to the table? Like, literally? In the weeks to come, anyway.

Maybe all that "fire and fury" talk was just what was needed.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/08/politics/trump-latest/index.html

FredWolfLeonardo
03-08-2018, 07:17 PM
So it seems like Trump has... brought Kim to the table? Like, literally? In the weeks to come, anyway.

Maybe all that "fire and fury" talk was just what was needed.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/08/politics/trump-latest/index.html

CNN? I'm calling FAKE news

Katie
03-09-2018, 06:08 AM
This.....makes me a little wary. I wouldnít be surprised if one side or the other or both think they can take the other side out during this meeting.

Iím very interested in where this meeting will happen. China? Iím sure they are super happy with Trump right now with those Tariffs. Russia? Optics arenít good on that for Trump and would boost Russia and Putin unnecessarily. Europe? Probably no good for Kim to be surrounded by US allies. I bet it will be in South Korea.

Sumac
03-09-2018, 07:16 AM
This.....makes me a little wary. I wouldn’t be surprised if one side or the other or both think they can take the other side out during this meeting.
It's not James Bond movie.
Doing something like this will be irresponsible and stupid for either side.
Yes, even for the likes of Trump and Kim Fatty Fat.

Redeemer
03-09-2018, 07:40 AM
It's not James Bond movie.
Doing something like this will be irresponsible and stupid for either side.
Yes, even for the likes of Trump and Kim Fatty Fat.

A Russian Spy and a few others just got attacked with nerve gas. Also Kim Jung has been executing members of his own family and senior staff so I don't doubt anything at this point.

Sumac
03-09-2018, 08:19 AM
A Russian Spy and a few others just got attacked with nerve gas. Also Kim Jung has been executing members of his own family and senior staff so I don't doubt anything at this point.
Russian spy and meaningless relative of the Glorious Leader are not on the same scale as Kim Fatty Fat and American president.

Kim's elimination will lead to the war with South Korea.
Trump's elimination, if done by NK, will lead to war with South Korea and immediate annihilation of NK.

Galactus
03-09-2018, 04:49 PM
So it seems like Trump has... brought Kim to the table? Like, literally? In the weeks to come, anyway.

Maybe all that "fire and fury" talk was just what was needed.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/08/politics/trump-latest/index.html

Trump did not bring Kim Jong Un to the table though. North Korea has several times in the past sought an audience with the US president and it's never happened largely because it would be seem as giving the regime the kind of global credibility it craves.

A lot has happened with China and especially South Korea for the offer to come again and it's a bad thing to ignore that work but more than that it's dangerous to credit Trump's tough line approach instead because Trump is dumb enough to believe it - even if his advisers are telling him the real reasons behind it. If Trump goes into a meeting with Kim Jong Un believing that he can strong arm his way to peace and that he's got one over him as opposed to actually giving him something he really wants then it could be very bad.

On the other hand if the meeting does go ahead and goes well and they get some concessions out of North Korea then we probably should credit Trump and his people. I understand the reticence from some quarters to credit Trump with anything, ironically the danger is the same with NK conundrum as it can seem to validate a clearly wrong-headed government but I'd like to think we're all mature enough to be able to acknowledge Trump did one good thing while pretty much everything else was a **** show and a failure.

Of course this may all be a moot point as the meeting may not actually happen and even if it does the likelihood of getting anything meaningful out of Kim Jong Un is practically zero but whatever happens the narrative should not be that "fire and fury" worked.

Utrommaniac
03-22-2018, 11:29 PM
Well, now that John Bolton is the National Security Advisor...and with timing that couldn't be any worse...it seems a little more real.

I can't help but feel we're more doomed than ever before.

Papenbrook
04-20-2018, 11:55 PM
It looks like North Korea is ready to stop their nuclear tests. (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-43846488)

FredWolfLeonardo
04-21-2018, 12:16 AM
It looks like North Korea is ready to stop their nuclear tests. (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-43846488)

Trump and Kim Jong Un are set to meet in person in June? That will sure be something to see.

Andrew NDB
06-01-2018, 01:57 PM
Summit is back on:
https://www.king5.com/article/news/nation-world/trump-says-north-korea-summit-is-back-on-for-june-12/507-560640710

Andrew NDB
06-12-2018, 11:56 AM
So it happened... and now all the articles out there are about how Kim is conning Trump, or Trump is doing it for hotels, or how Kim doesn't like Trump because he "didn't smile from ear to ear, it was just a basic smile."

FredWolfLeonardo
06-12-2018, 12:12 PM
Leftist garbage FAKE news.

That meeting between Trump and Kim Jong Un was legendary and has made history.

MsMarvelDuckie
06-12-2018, 01:03 PM
No, it's not for the hotels. Trump is doing this because he knows he needs to do SOMETHING "big and important" if he wants to ride this gravy train another four years. It's getting close to ctunch time if he wants to stay in the good graces of voters, and he NEEDS a "win" to keep his base.

Galactus
06-12-2018, 04:38 PM
If I could be bothered I'd break out the Duey I expect nothing and I'm still let down meme. Sure, this wasn't the worst case scenario but this is not a victory for anyone but the two people at the very top. It doesn't really forward peace in any way.

Kim Jong Un gets a what he's always wanted in a meeting with the a US president. He gains an even tighter propaganda grip on North Korea and validity on the world stage. Pretty much all the globe with all of it's extreme ideological differences seemed to agree not to deal with North Korea unless they had to. Now that Trump has cracked open the door it's possible other world leaders will want to have a chat with the great dictator. That may not like such a bad thing unless say North Korea and Iran start meeting then I'm sure eyebrows will be raised.

Still that possibility may have been worth it to ensure some kind of peace, de-nuclearisation still seems unlikely but he could have got something out of Kim (stuff that he wasn't already doing anyway) but he didn't.

Worse than that Trump offered stuff like halting joint military exercises on the Korean peninsula without running it by South Korea - y'know the real people that are leading the way in this. I'm not sure blindsiding the real brains behind this with something they may not be cool with is a good idea. Trump got nothing out of Kim and Kim got everything he wanted out of Trump and then some. It's not that Kim outsmarted Trump but rather in his zeal for a big PR win Trump played himself.

Still it's a big PR win for Trump but I recall during his election his supporters gloated about how much free publicity the media (true) I wonder if they are really that cool with the millions in tax payer money this photo op cost.

Autbot_Benz
06-12-2018, 04:46 PM
Once Again the Orange Idiot only did it because Obama never did. It was cool seeing two dictators hanging out :lol:.

TurtleWA
06-12-2018, 05:00 PM
aYsaC2CADs0

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aYsaC2CADs0

turtle1237
06-12-2018, 06:42 PM
Once Again the Orange Idiot only did it because Obama never did. It was cool seeing two dictators hanging out :lol:.

A dictator stays in for life, you cant remove or vote him out, unless you have a army backing you up. Trump will be gone at the end of this term or if voted in again, at the end of other 4 years. So 4 or 8 years and America will have other President.

The Deadman
06-13-2018, 05:13 AM
Once Again the Orange Idiot only did it because Obama never did. It was cool seeing two dictators hanging out :lol:.

Sounds like you're upset because Trump is actually doing sh*t in his term, unlike Obama.

Galactus
06-13-2018, 07:35 AM
Sounds like you're upset because Trump is actually doing sh*t in his term, unlike Obama.

But Trump didn't do anything...that's the point.

He had a nice day trip Singapore and signed a document of vague promises that don't have to be kept. If anything he made things slightly worse by making some verbal commitments his allies may not be cool with.

It was a gloried photo op for Trump and Kim. At best you could say it was a nice symbolic gesture but it seems more than childish that the people hyping meeting this up as some great thing while complaining for years about Obama's Iran deal. It may not have been perfect but it had tangible benefits, now that was getting **** done.

MsMarvelDuckie
06-13-2018, 07:36 AM
If by "doing sh**" you mean golfing every weekend and taking credit for what the former administration started just because it ended in his term, then yes, he certainly has. This is literally the ONLY "good" thing he has done. And it's still questionable how good it will prove to be.

BartAllen
06-13-2018, 09:55 AM
If by "doing sh**" you mean golfing every weekend and taking credit for what the former administration started just because it ended in his term, then yes, he certainly has. This is literally the ONLY "good" thing he has done. And it's still questionable how good it will prove to be.

Two years in? I'm by no means a fan of Trump, but the current economy falls directly on his shoulders. Now, you could make the argument that he did indeed inherit a good economy from Obama, but Trump has maintained that health. Don't forget that within a year Bush took our economy from a surplus to a pretty substantial recession. Should we blame Clinton for Bush's economy the first two years as President? Of course not.

And I love that I get a couple hundred extra dollars on my paychecks. Hillary was talking about raising taxes.

http://www.newsweek.com/democrats-trump-obama-economy-responsible-885845

Sumac
06-13-2018, 02:17 PM
Two years in? I'm by no means a fan of Trump, but the current economy falls directly on his shoulders. Now, you could make the argument that he did indeed inherit a good economy from Obama, but Trump has maintained that health. Don't forget that within a year Bush took our economy from a surplus to a pretty substantial recession. Should we blame Clinton for Bush's economy the first two years as President? Of course not.

And I love that I get a couple hundred extra dollars on my paychecks. Hillary was talking about raising taxes.

http://www.newsweek.com/democrats-trump-obama-economy-responsible-885845
Careful, you might accused for being nazi-bigot by some people, if you aknowledge reality and use logic. :lol:

plastroncafe
06-13-2018, 02:21 PM
A dictator stays in for life, you cant remove or vote him out, unless you have a army backing you up. Trump will be gone at the end of this term or if voted in again, at the end of other 4 years. So 4 or 8 years and America will have other President.

Someone should let Fox News in on the difference.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trump-dictator-fox-friends-host-abby-huntsman-apology-a8393081.html

Autbot_Benz
06-13-2018, 03:05 PM
Sounds like you're upset because Trump is actually doing sh*t in his term, unlike Obama.

https://i.imgur.com/Q1Meysg.gif

you mean like golfing everyday being a big baby at the g7 summit being late to every single meeting at the g7. Making an ass of himself everytime he opens his mouth. separating parents from children who come to seek asylum from Mexico Legally. :roll:

Ya he is doing so much more than Obama. Not like Obama got healthcare got us out of Bush' recession and actually got us jobs :roll:

Galactus
06-13-2018, 04:28 PM
Two years in? I'm by no means a fan of Trump, but the current economy falls directly on his shoulders. Now, you could make the argument that he did indeed inherit a good economy from Obama, but Trump has maintained that health. Don't forget that within a year Bush took our economy from a surplus to a pretty substantial recession. Should we blame Clinton for Bush's economy the first two years as President? Of course not.

And I love that I get a couple hundred extra dollars on my paychecks. Hillary was talking about raising taxes.

http://www.newsweek.com/democrats-trump-obama-economy-responsible-885845

I'm no expert on the economy in my own country let alone North America but I do know Trumps economic policies have a habit of crumbling down years later.

A recession was forecasted for sometime in the 2020s but some have revised this to happening before then, that doesn't sound like sound handling of economy from Trump, does it? I don't think anyone should be celebrating the prospect of an economic downturn but I can see why some US liberals are happy that if it happens there's no way Trump can't own it.

People that have some degree of interest in the economy acknowledge that presidents inherit problems and successes of the previous administration but for most people I don't think they dwell on it too much. They just think things like under President A: Gas Prices were lower and under President B: Gas prices were higher. I guess A was better than B with the economy. That's why some would prefer any kind of recession happen when we know Trump can't escape it as opposed to after 2020 when there's at least a possibility a Democrat might be in office and get blamed.

Not that I think the economy makes much difference. To some of those rust belt voters that flipped from Democrat to Republican maybe but a not insignificant number of Trump voters don't really care if their boy accomplishes anything. He mostly hasn't so far; no prospect of a wall, no Muslim ban, no repeal or replacing Obamacare. They don't really care if he follows through on any of that as long as he carries on with all the culture wars stuff.

That's why even though the Trump/Kim summit was totally a huge let down in terms of actually accomplishing anything it delivered what a lot of his supporters want which is a picture of a dictator and would-be dictator where they can nyah, nyah my president is better than your president.

MsMarvelDuckie
06-13-2018, 07:49 PM
Two years in? I'm by no means a fan of Trump, but the current economy falls directly on his shoulders. Now, you could make the argument that he did indeed inherit a good economy from Obama, but Trump has maintained that health. Don't forget that within a year Bush took our economy from a surplus to a pretty substantial recession. Should we blame Clinton for Bush's economy the first two years as President? Of course not.

And I love that I get a couple hundred extra dollars on my paychecks. Hillary was talking about raising taxes.

http://www.newsweek.com/democrats-trump-obama-economy-responsible-885845


Maintained it for whom? The top 1% that largely consists of his cronies? Because the rest of us haven't seen these "tax breaks" he promised, and most of the economic decisions that he has claimed credit for were made BEFORE he was even elected- they just didn't actually go into effect until after he was in office. So of course "HE" is responsible for bringing jobs back, etc.... Yeah, sure.

sdp
06-13-2018, 07:51 PM
Well I studied economics and the current economic policies he's using are known to fail in the long term, they do provide a boost in the short term though. Sure he inherited a good economy from Obama but he boosted it with his rhetoric and cutting down taxes for companies. This has lead to the market feeling bullish and unemployment, but this won't last. What should worry people is it might still be doing good come 2020 and people who don't know better like some posters here might actually think it's a good thing and think of him actually doing what he has said. If that happens it doesn't matter when it fails because he'll be in power in 8 years.

What he's doing around the world though should be concerning to people, yes the US is one of the strongest economies and it can bully other nations like it's doing. There's a reason why the US has done it subtly over the past century. No one likes a bully and right now the US is viewed worse than it was in the Bush years. Some of you may think "Who cares as long as WE are doing well. Well the point is we live in a globalized economy, and the one country that has benefited the most because of it is the US, that means for you to live comfy in your warm house someone in a poor country has to pay the consequences for it. If the US ticks off all its allies, these things could very well turn.

When they're also helping you out, you are less likely to confront the current status quo but when the Bully in power starts abusing its power more you're going to look at alternatives, and there are alternatives. There would be massive inflation in the US if the dollar wasn't the world currency, piss off enough countries for them to drop the dollar s the currency and let's see how the US does, not to mention it'd have no bargaining power anymore. The reason people put up with it is because it would damage their economies even more, but if the US is already going to be doing that, then what's the point? Look at the countries who don't. Look at the countries who don't trade in US dollars and see which countries the US has "problems" with to get a better idea of how important it is for the US to keep things in the status quo.

As far as the Kim meeting, what I find funny is had Hillary won things would've played out very similar. This meeting didn't happen because of Trump, it happened because NK finally had the tech to launch and hit the US, they finally had bargaining power. The news networks would've reported the same thing but on the opposite extremes, CNN would be praising the event while Fox News would be saying Clinton was weak and she didn't actually sign anything. Of course Trump is going to get credit for it like say Obama got for Osama's Death.

Trump is indeed doing stuff, but it's not good things in the long run and I wish more people could see that. Things will be bad for the US and the rest of the world because of the current policies. But I guess that will fall on deaf ears.