Chat Forum
It is currently Mon Nov 19, 2018 2:25 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 88060 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 1792, 1793, 1794, 1795, 1796, 1797, 1798 ... 2202  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 2:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 45041
A die-hard Trump supporter got stuck into Stormy Daniels on Twitter.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 2:15 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16267
100MileDad wrote:
penguin wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
penguin wrote:
100MileDad wrote:

You've every right to be pessimistic, a year from now Mr Trump could be awarded a Nobel Peace Prize.

How'd you like those apples?


You seem determined to believe that anyone who is anti-Trump would be blind to anything good
. If he genuinely gets North Korea to disarm, and create a peaceful status quo then he'll be praised for that.

Do good things, get praise. Do bad things, get criticism...it's not that hard.


Sorry, I'm only basing that on 1700+ pages of hate.


Well, we haven't been able to test the 'done something good' part of the equation yet.


That's because you've been hysterical.

I would suggest that Trump's first year as POTUS has been the most successful first year ever.

We can discuss the facts if you like?

Absolute rubbish.

If you can't see that Trump has been a monumental f*ck up from the beginning, you are even stupider than your posting history suggests.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 2:57 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 7682
Location: A gaf in Bracknell
DAC it's no wonder you're such a bitter plum, you really should try altruism occasionally.

Science has proved it makes it you feel better.

You know science, that thing your monkey doesn't believe in...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 3:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:51 pm
Posts: 13782
Turbogoat wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
So Trump is meeting Kim, by May. How are our bored sufferers of Trump Disorder reacting to the news?


It'll be interesting to see how those guys react, for sure. Those that haven't been banned for racism, that is.

Could be a very good thing, if NK agree to give up their nukes, although they'll definitely be holding out for a fair bit in return. Luckily, the rest of the world has the Master of the art of the idea of the essence of the deal ready to do the negotiating.

There are several hurdles. Currently, there is only a 50/50 chance that Trump will negotiate with the correct Korea.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 ... korea.html

The two leaders may also get a bit distracted if they start swapping hair styling tips or military parade planning ideas.

Could be a great victory, could come at a great cost, may even be a Pyrrhic victory, or could be an utter clusterfuck. Will certainly be interesting to see how it plays out.

NK aren't giving up their nukes. There's a NK movie about how the pursuit of Nukes brings the US to the table. That's the narrative. They're just playing him IMO.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 4:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5504
Kiwias wrote:
A die-hard Trump supporter got stuck into Stormy Daniels on Twitter.

Image


It's probably true that he only shagged Stormy because Ivanka wouldn't let him climb aboard. It's might be the same reason he hooked up with Melania, too.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 4:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:51 pm
Posts: 13782
1994: N Korea signs agreement to freeze its plutonium weapons program

2002: US finds out Pyongyang is secretly pursuing uranium enrichment; deal collapses

2005: N Korea commits to denuclearization

2006: N Korea tests its first nuclear device

2018: TBD

From Ian Bremmer on twitter.

If something good comes from this great but I'm sceptical.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 4:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 4:01 pm
Posts: 4071
paddyor wrote:
1994: N Korea signs agreement to freeze its plutonium weapons program

2002: US finds out Pyongyang is secretly pursuing uranium enrichment; deal collapses

2005: N Korea commits to denuclearization

2006: N Korea tests its first nuclear device

2018: TBD

From Ian Bremmer on twitter.

If something good comes from this great but I'm sceptical.


Same. Donny will lose a lot of face if he can't get something from a face to face meeting


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 4:39 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:30 am
Posts: 1121
DragonKhan wrote:
paddyor wrote:
1994: N Korea signs agreement to freeze its plutonium weapons program

2002: US finds out Pyongyang is secretly pursuing uranium enrichment; deal collapses

2005: N Korea commits to denuclearization

2006: N Korea tests its first nuclear device

2018: TBD

From Ian Bremmer on twitter.

If something good comes from this great but I'm sceptical.


Same. Donny will lose a lot of face if he can't get something from a face to face meeting


Scary thought - Trump being the petty, vindictive, thin-skinned, narcissist that he is...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 4:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 34236
Image

:thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 5:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 34236
Meanwhile, the Globalists are starting to sabre-rattle:

Image

Quote:
Humility and passivity do not well serve those who truly believe the liberal capitalist order hammered out after the Second World War is of the greatest benefit to the greatest number. Concessions to illiberal populists or chauvinistic nationalists should not be the product of charity or self-doubt. They should be hard-won, and only after a bitterly contested ordeal. These kinds of martial metaphors will yield bouts of feigned indignation from populist nationalists who freely and recklessly resort to such language themselves, but this, too, amounts to mere theatrics. If capitalist democrats believe their model is the means by which the greatest number will benefit, and contend that their opponents are dangerously wrong, they need to start acting like it.

It has been more than a generation since the West confronted a peer competitor that championed an alternative model to the kind of liberalized global economic integration that emerged after the collapse of the Berlin Wall. As such, our skill at championing a model of social organization unapologetically, without fear or favor, has atrophied. That’s an aptitude that we will have to re-learn, and soon. If populist nationalism is to be contained, it cannot be subsumed into greater liberalism and its malcontents mollified by social-welfare programs. The very idea of populist nationalism will have to be overwhelmed. As soon as advocates of unfettered freedom and commerce come to that conclusion, that necessary work can begin.


https://www.commentarymagazine.com/poli ... m-problem/

Some vigorous stuff in there.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 5:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 34236
Another question: When does Sessions start arresting some of these recalcitrant Californian politicians? The optics are going to be great for Trump's poll numbers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 5:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24502
Location: Middle East
Kiwias wrote:
A die-hard Trump supporter got stuck into Stormy Daniels on Twitter.

Image


...when he has Ivanka...

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

... oh wait, you're serious. x(


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 5:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5861
Location: LOL! WISDOM!
Turbogoat wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
So Trump is meeting Kim, by May. How are our bored sufferers of Trump Disorder reacting to the news?


It'll be interesting to see how those guys react, for sure. Those that haven't been banned for racism, that is.

Could be a very good thing, if NK agree to give up their nukes, although they'll definitely be holding out for a fair bit in return. Luckily, the rest of the world has the Master of the art of the idea of the essence of the deal ready to do the negotiating.

There are several hurdles. Currently, there is only a 50/50 chance that Trump will negotiate with the correct Korea.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 ... korea.html

The two leaders may also get a bit distracted if they start swapping hair styling tips or military parade planning ideas.

Could be a great victory, could come at a great cost, may even be a Pyrrhic victory, or could be an utter clusterfuck. Will certainly be interesting to see how it plays out.


Image


There's going to be shitloads of pointing at things too.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 6:00 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 7688
Bullettyme wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
So Trump is meeting Kim, by May. How are our bored sufferers of Trump Disorder reacting to the news?


It's interesting. I don't see what it's going to achieve though, I'm not sure the North Koreans are acting in good faith. Unless Kim rolls out the red carpet and Trump ends up completely infatuated with him, as Xi Jinping successfully achieved. It's already a success for the North Koreans because they've faced Trump down from "talks are useless" to "I'm happy to meet him", and undoubtedly there'll be some form of sanction relief to go along with this. There won't be denuclearization though.


it's far more than the last 5 leaders of the USA accomplished though, yeah? They are actually going to talk. Probably.


I'd say possibly at this stage. A lot can happen in two months, I mean nobody expected this on Monday, did they?

The last 5 leaders of the USA actually did talk to NK, just through diplomats rather than face to face. They also came up with lots of agreements which the North Koreans systematically undermined and broke. So forgive me my pessimism.


And that is exactly the point, it's the diplomats that make things happen, they have never stopped talking. Kim has played Trump beautifully and lured him into a meeting that the USA has absolutely no hope of being ready for. These types of summits take months, even years, to get to the stage where 2 leaders can sit down and make something meaningful happen - Trumps disfunctional administration, without even a decent diplomat currently in Korea, hopes to do this in a few weeks?

NK are going to make the US look like complete fools and there is no way, no way at all, they will be sitting down for a chat in May.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 6:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 7111
slick wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
So Trump is meeting Kim, by May. How are our bored sufferers of Trump Disorder reacting to the news?


It's interesting. I don't see what it's going to achieve though, I'm not sure the North Koreans are acting in good faith. Unless Kim rolls out the red carpet and Trump ends up completely infatuated with him, as Xi Jinping successfully achieved. It's already a success for the North Koreans because they've faced Trump down from "talks are useless" to "I'm happy to meet him", and undoubtedly there'll be some form of sanction relief to go along with this. There won't be denuclearization though.


it's far more than the last 5 leaders of the USA accomplished though, yeah? They are actually going to talk. Probably.


I'd say possibly at this stage. A lot can happen in two months, I mean nobody expected this on Monday, did they?

The last 5 leaders of the USA actually did talk to NK, just through diplomats rather than face to face. They also came up with lots of agreements which the North Koreans systematically undermined and broke. So forgive me my pessimism.


And that is exactly the point, it's the diplomats that make things happen, they have never stopped talking. Kim has played Trump beautifully and lured him into a meeting that the USA has absolutely no hope of being ready for. These types of summits take months, even years, to get to the stage where 2 leaders can sit down and make something meaningful happen - Trumps disfunctional administration, without even a decent diplomat currently in Korea, hopes to do this in a few weeks?

NK are going to make the US look like complete fools and there is no way, no way at all, they will be sitting down for a chat in May.


Good summary. where do you think Kissinger went wrong, the stupid dolt.

https://thediplomat.com/2018/01/the-tro ... ea-advice/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 6:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 31867
Just maybe The Don will subject the young Korean leader to a true, knock them down and drag them out Noo York property type deal. Just MAYBE both parties will come out winners ....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 6:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20227
slick wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
So Trump is meeting Kim, by May. How are our bored sufferers of Trump Disorder reacting to the news?


It's interesting. I don't see what it's going to achieve though, I'm not sure the North Koreans are acting in good faith. Unless Kim rolls out the red carpet and Trump ends up completely infatuated with him, as Xi Jinping successfully achieved. It's already a success for the North Koreans because they've faced Trump down from "talks are useless" to "I'm happy to meet him", and undoubtedly there'll be some form of sanction relief to go along with this. There won't be denuclearization though.


it's far more than the last 5 leaders of the USA accomplished though, yeah? They are actually going to talk. Probably.


I'd say possibly at this stage. A lot can happen in two months, I mean nobody expected this on Monday, did they?

The last 5 leaders of the USA actually did talk to NK, just through diplomats rather than face to face. They also came up with lots of agreements which the North Koreans systematically undermined and broke. So forgive me my pessimism.


And that is exactly the point, it's the diplomats that make things happen, they have never stopped talking. Kim has played Trump beautifully and lured him into a meeting that the USA has absolutely no hope of being ready for. These types of summits take months, even years, to get to the stage where 2 leaders can sit down and make something meaningful happen - Trumps disfunctional administration, without even a decent diplomat currently in Korea, hopes to do this in a few weeks?

NK are going to make the US look like complete fools and there is no way, no way at all, they will be sitting down for a chat in May.


Agreed here. The US also has no diplomatic links to speak with now with NK, there's nothing there. So if a meeting were to take place there's nobody to actually do the negotiating when the leader photocalls are done with. And considering most of the state department posts remain unfilled it seems wishful thinking that they'd fill those posts and sort any sort of agenda or strategy in a couple of weeks.

I kind of see something happening just before any meeting, expect a NK nuclear or missle test or a US military drill or flyover as both swing dicks beforehand, and watch how it caves everything in. And probably the North Koreans will have gotten their conditional sanction relief before then, or foreign aid.

As far as I see it denuclearization is an existential thing for NK, they're not going to give it up.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 7:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19062
Bullettyme wrote:
As far as I see it denuclearization is an existential thing for NK, they're not going to give it up.

This.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 7:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 34236
Bullettyme wrote:

Agreed here. The US also has no diplomatic links to speak with now with NK, there's nothing there. So if a meeting were to take place there's nobody to actually do the negotiating when the leader photocalls are done with. And considering most of the state department posts remain unfilled it seems wishful thinking that they'd fill those posts and sort any sort of agenda or strategy in a couple of weeks.

I kind of see something happening just before any meeting, expect a NK nuclear or missle test or a US military drill or flyover as both swing dicks beforehand, and watch how it caves everything in. And probably the North Koreans will have gotten their conditional sanction relief before then, or foreign aid.

As far as I see it denuclearization is an existential thing for NK, they're not going to give it up.


It's staggering to think that you do this stuff for a living.

You're like a sommelier with no tongue.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 7:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20227
Yes yes Seneca, maybe you can add something of substance instead of being one of those other shitbags that hurls from the ditch.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 7:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 7111
Yer Man wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
As far as I see it denuclearization is an existential thing for NK, they're not going to give it up.

This.


Sounds dangerous. Who do you think would be first to attack them if they get rid of their nukes?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 7:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24502
Location: Middle East
Santa wrote:
Yer Man wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
As far as I see it denuclearization is an existential thing for NK, they're not going to give it up.

This.


Sounds dangerous. Who do you think would be first to attack them if they get rid of their nukes?


The question should be who do the North Koreans think would be the first to attack them if they got rid of their nukes.

They'd still want to have some form of security against any of their imagined aggressors, who may stem back to 1953 and they're still considering a ROK/USA force massing on their border as a likely threat. Maybe.

Only Dennis Rodman can say for sure.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 7:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20227
f**king hell he actually asked that question :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 7:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 7111
Turbogoat wrote:
Santa wrote:
Yer Man wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
As far as I see it denuclearization is an existential thing for NK, they're not going to give it up.

This.


Sounds dangerous. Who do you think would be first to attack them if they get rid of their nukes?


The question should be who do the North Koreans think would be the first to attack them if they got rid of their nukes.

They'd still want to have some form of security against any of their imagined aggressors, who may stem back to 1953 and they're still considering a ROK/USA force massing on their border as a likely threat. Maybe.

Only Dennis Rodman can say for sure.


Do you reckon they think the US will pile in as soon as they don't have nukes?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 8:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 7111
Juat working this through.

List of potential attackers

1. South Korea
2. United States
3. China
4. Russia
5. Japan

Anyone else?

So which of those does North Korea think so attack them if they de-nuke and why do they think it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 8:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 7304
It's interesting. In many ways I think Tump's decision is a good one superficially, even if the meeting lacks substance. But there's other sides to it and risks. It's no secret that N. Korea's wanted this meeting since forever... for whatever reason.

There is a bit going on behind the scenes which also raise questions:
Quote:
Joseph Yun, the U.S. envoy in charge of negotiating with North Korea, quit last week, and Trump has yet to nominate an ambassador to South Korea.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 8:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 7111
Santa wrote:
Juat working this through.

List of potential attackers

1. South Korea
2. United States
3. China
4. Russia
5. Japan

Anyone else?

So which of those does North Korea think so attack them if they de-nuke and why do they think it?


I suggest not the US or SK because if NK's continuing conventional threat. Not China or Russia because why would they and they are sort of allies. And not Japan because they are currently a bunch of pusswads.

Those all seem like long term positions.

So who poses the threat? Even a long term one?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 8:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24502
Location: Middle East
Santa wrote:
Turbogoat wrote:
Santa wrote:
Yer Man wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
As far as I see it denuclearization is an existential thing for NK, they're not going to give it up.

This.


Sounds dangerous. Who do you think would be first to attack them if they get rid of their nukes?


The question should be who do the North Koreans think would be the first to attack them if they got rid of their nukes.

They'd still want to have some form of security against any of their imagined aggressors, who may stem back to 1953 and they're still considering a ROK/USA force massing on their border as a likely threat. Maybe.

Only Dennis Rodman can say for sure.


Do you reckon they think the US will pile in as soon as they don't have nukes?


It wouldn't be in their interests, you'd hope, but it might boil down to how ruffled Trump felt his ego became. He got manipulated into a fairly large drone strike on Syria about a year ago, maybe he's due for another one.

DPRK still have a shit ton of other weapons including chemical and bio that would pose a massive threat to South Korea so they'd be doing their damnedest to prevent any attacks on a suddenly no-nuclear DPRK.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 8:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20227
Flockwitt wrote:
It's interesting. In many ways I think Tump's decision is a good one superficially, even if the meeting lacks substance. But there's other sides to it and risks. It's no secret that N. Korea's wanted this meeting since forever... for whatever reason.

There is a bit going on behind the scenes which also raise questions:
Quote:
Joseph Yun, the U.S. envoy in charge of negotiating with North Korea, quit last week, and Trump has yet to nominate an ambassador to South Korea.


International prestige and vanity. NK wants to be seen as a strong world power.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 8:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Posts: 34520
Location: Planet Rock
Santa wrote:
Do you reckon they think the US will pile in as soon as they don't have nukes?

The regime have spent many years persuading their population that is what would happen.So what they really think doesn't really matter.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 8:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 7111
Anonymous. wrote:
Santa wrote:
Do you reckon they think the US will pile in as soon as they don't have nukes?

The regime have spent many years persuading their population that is what would happen.So what they really think doesn't really matter.


Wut?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 8:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 7111
Turbogoat wrote:

It wouldn't be in their interests, you'd hope, but it might boil down to how ruffled Trump felt his ego became. He got manip[/code]ulated into a fairly large drone strike on Syria about a year ago, maybe he's due for another one.

DPRK still have a shit ton of other weapons including chemical and bio that would pose a massive threat to South Korea so they'd be doing their damnedest to prevent any attacks on a suddenly no-nuclear DPRK.


Oookaaaay.....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 8:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Posts: 34520
Location: Planet Rock
Santa wrote:
Anonymous. wrote:
Santa wrote:
Do you reckon they think the US will pile in as soon as they don't have nukes?

The regime have spent many years persuading their population that is what would happen.So what they really think doesn't really matter.


Wut?

They are not stupid and probably don't believe America will attack them if they don't have nukes. Point is they have done their best to make sure that is what their population believes and that is why denuclearization is not and will never be (without regime change) on the table.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 9:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 7111
Anonymous. wrote:
Santa wrote:
Anonymous. wrote:
Santa wrote:
Do you reckon they think the US will pile in as soon as they don't have nukes?

The regime have spent many years persuading their population that is what would happen.So what they really think doesn't really matter.


Wut?

They are not stupid and probably don't believe America will attack them if they don't have nukes. Point is they have done their best to make sure that is what their population believes and that is why denuclearization is not and will never be (without regime change) on the table.


So the dictator is slave to the beliefs of his people you reckon?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 9:28 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16267
Santa wrote:
Turbogoat wrote:
Santa wrote:
Yer Man wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
As far as I see it denuclearization is an existential thing for NK, they're not going to give it up.

This.


Sounds dangerous. Who do you think would be first to attack them if they get rid of their nukes?


The question should be who do the North Koreans think would be the first to attack them if they got rid of their nukes.

They'd still want to have some form of security against any of their imagined aggressors, who may stem back to 1953 and they're still considering a ROK/USA force massing on their border as a likely threat. Maybe.

Only Dennis Rodman can say for sure.


Do you reckon they think the US will pile in as soon as they don't have nukes?

Do you actually believe that the DPRK think that they won't?

Whether the US would pile in is immaterial. I wouldn't think that they would, Donald Trump notwithstanding.

However, I don't believe that Kim Jong-un would trust them not to, hence I do not think that they would even consider giving up their nukes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19030
Location: Adelaide via Sydney and Patea
Rinkals wrote:
penguin wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
So Trump is meeting Kim, by May. How are our bored sufferers of Trump Disorder reacting to the news?


I don't think I've found too many positives about Trump's presidency, and I still don't think his attempts to out-crazy Kim are healthy, but the recent sanctions seem to have been productive, and talks are always preferable to the alternative...so all in all, good news.


Personally, I worry about the prospect having the two batshit-crazy retards in the same room together.


Don't worry, DAC doesn't have any friends IRL...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 12:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5504
Santa wrote:
Anonymous. wrote:
Santa wrote:
Anonymous. wrote:
Santa wrote:
Do you reckon they think the US will pile in as soon as they don't have nukes?

The regime have spent many years persuading their population that is what would happen.So what they really think doesn't really matter.

Wut?

They are not stupid and probably don't believe America will attack them if they don't have nukes. Point is they have done their best to make sure that is what their population believes and that is why denuclearization is not and will never be (without regime change) on the table.


So the dictator is slave to the beliefs of his people you reckon?

How many nuclear powers have been invaded?

How many no nuclear powers have been invaded in the nuclear era?

And there lies your answer


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 12:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21886
He’s being contrarian for the sake of it.

You have to have something to say while waving your unfiltered Gauloise around


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 2:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16908
The only way I could see NK giving up their nukes (or even a significant reduction) would be if they got the US to agree to withdraw troops from SK. Which Trump, as an isolationist, probably wouldn't mind.

Win win. Except for SK, of course.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 4:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 45041
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
The only way I could see NK giving up their nukes (or even a significant reduction) would be if they got the US to agree to withdraw troops from SK. Which Trump, as an isolationist, probably wouldn't mind.

Win win. Except for SK, of course.


The Fat Boy will also probably want to see US forces in Japan gone


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 88060 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 1792, 1793, 1794, 1795, 1796, 1797, 1798 ... 2202  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Armchair_Superstar, Bing [Bot], BokJock, Boxcar Ira, camroc1, Cartman, David990, de_Selby, DragsterDriver, duke, Edinburgh01, EverReady, fatcat, forrester, frillage, FujiKiwi, Google Adsense [Bot], Google [Bot], handyman, Hawaiian_shirts_rule, houtkabouter, Jim Lahey, Joost, La soule, Lenny, Liquid_Len, Mog The Almighty, Monk Zombie, MrDominator, Mr Fedora, nardol, normilet, Oats, OomPB, openclashXX, ovalball, P in VG, Plato'sCave, Rinkals, ruckinhell, Sandstorm, slick, themaddog, The Man Without Fear, Toulon's Not Toulouse, unseenwork, Uthikoloshe, Wendigo7, Willie Falloon, ZappaMan and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group