Chat Forum
It is currently Wed May 27, 2020 6:59 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 112544 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 1787, 1788, 1789, 1790, 1791, 1792, 1793 ... 2814  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 10:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21779
Location: Middle East
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
Turbogoat wrote:
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
Turbogoat wrote:
The starting position for Trump about North Korea included statements like "Fire and fury, like the world has never seen".

He's now going to have a meeting to negotiate instead. (this is a good thing, all credit to Trump for this).

However, the North Koreans are going to see this as a significant shift in position before they've even sat down at the negotiating table, and the only thing they have done is not attack anyone... yet.



So standard diplomacy did not work in the past few decades. Trump is coming with a new approach. After selling himself as being as dangerous as a sidewinder, he suddenly wants to talk about having talks ... .
NK does not know what his next move will be. Total capitulation, a trade deal proffered or The Don nukes them. The Don himself does not know either - which is what makes him even more dangerous (for Northern Korea)

Guess we will have to wait and see.


Absolutely, acting like a complete madman has forced the other side to act a little more rationally, just like in an impending bar fight. Nobody wants to fight a madman.
Trump isn't acting, though.


He is paid to get results (which pay he does not collect, but give to charity)
The Don is the best thing to hit world leadership, these last few decades - a man who just MIGHT be mad enough to really back his own words.


Yes, yes, we know you're a fanboi.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 10:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17501
Leaving aside the partisanship..

Does anyone thnk that China’s sometimes-embargo of NK coal has been the decisive factor in seemingly getting Kim to the table?

Because the previous time, where millions of his people died of starvation, didn’t seem to do it

Maybe coal is the answer


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 10:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10137
Location: location, location
Santa wrote:
alliswell wrote:
Santa wrote:
alliswell wrote:
You have to say that young Kim has played Trump like a fiddle here. He's increased his nuclear arsenal, has waved his knob in the face of his neighbours and he's used increasingly threatening language when referring to the US. Now he's got the US president coming running over when he asks for a chat.
It's a real template for any lunatic dictator who has recently found himself as the supreme leader of a shithole country. Get yourself a nice big stick and you can do any sort of mad shit you want.


insightful. Can you give us a thumbnail sketch of what Trump should have done in the past year to counter the NK nuclear programme that's was started more than a decade ago.

Why would you assume there's anything he could do? The little fat kid is running this like a boss.


So if he couldn't do anything how has he been played like a fiddle? Interested to learn about IR from you.

No you're not, you little scamp :lol:

Anyway, every utterance from Kim has been met with a similar response from Trump. The tone of the dialogue has changed in the media so that it increasingly seems like a conversation between equals. Kim's backed this up by demonstrating his increased capabilities (Hwasong-15). Then he makes steps at reconciliation towards the South, followed up by a request for negotiations with the US which the president leaps at. Do you feel that any of his actions this year have resulted in anything other than the reaction he desired?

It appears to me (ignorant though I am compared with your towering intellect) that he is doing stuff and it is going how he likes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 11:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5576
Location: A gaf in Bracknell
Is putting Trump in a room with him a good idea? We all know his latest position depends on who’s been in the room with him.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 11:18 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17008
houtkabouter wrote:
Is putting Trump in a room with him a good idea? We all know his latest position depends on who’s been in the room with him.

That's my worry.

I suspect that KJU will play him like a violin.

Either that or some small slight, imagined or otherwise, will set Trump off the deep end.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 1:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4398
Santa wrote:
4071 wrote:
How many nuclear powers have been invaded?

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

And there lies your answer


Israel and the UK have been invaded since they have been nuclear powers. India and Pakistan?


When was the UK invaded? Are you thinking of the Falklands? Which are not part of the UK. Is that the invasion of the UK you are thinking of?

And Israel? Rocket attacks and no incursions into Israeli territory does not make for an invasion.

EDIT: correction. After a quick bit of research it seems that Israel was indeed invaded once after becoming a nuclear power.


Last edited by 4071 on Sat Mar 10, 2018 1:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 1:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 40479
shanky wrote:
Leaving aside the partisanship..

Does anyone thnk that China’s sometimes-embargo of NK coal has been the decisive factor in seemingly getting Kim to the table?

Because the previous time, where millions of his people died of starvation, didn’t seem to do it

Maybe coal is the answer


Talk here is that the sanctions are biting so hard that KJU does not have sufficient goods or money to distribute in order to keep officials "loyal" to him. A Chinese-embargo on coal could be a major contributing factor to that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 1:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9286
4071 wrote:
Santa wrote:
4071 wrote:
How many nuclear powers have been invaded?

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

And there lies your answer


Israel and the UK have been invaded since they have been nuclear powers. India and Pakistan?


When was the UK invaded? Are you thinking of the Falklands? Which are not part of the UK. Is that the invasion of the UK you are thinking of?

And Israel? Rocket attacks and no incursions into Israeli territory does not make for an invasion.

EDIT: correction. After a quick bit of research it seems that Israel was indeed invaded once after becoming a nuclear power.


Yes I'm sure the Argies said "but it is an overseas territory and therefore not part of the UK and therefore you may may not attack us".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 2:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2014 12:47 pm
Posts: 4687
Location: Chukity - puck!!!
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 2:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21779
Location: Middle East
4071 wrote:
Santa wrote:
4071 wrote:
How many nuclear powers have been invaded?

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

And there lies your answer


Israel and the UK have been invaded since they have been nuclear powers. India and Pakistan?


When was the UK invaded? Are you thinking of the Falklands? Which are not part of the UK. Is that the invasion of the UK you are thinking of?

And Israel? Rocket attacks and no incursions into Israeli territory does not make for an invasion.

EDIT: correction. After a quick bit of research it seems that Israel was indeed invaded once after becoming a nuclear power.


If you really want to give that specious reasoning (and how it may apply to North Korea) the attention it doesn't deserve, you'd just have to point out that the Falklands are a British Overseas territory and are NOT part of the UK (except Gibraltar), and it'd fall apart.
North Korea aren't concerned about their tiny overseas territory on the South Atlantic being invaded, it's just a petty attempt to quibble over an absolute statement, rather than the actual spirit of it. Do nukes make a country believe they are a LOT safer from perceived outer threats? Hells yeah.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 6:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24397
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/03/ ... attack.htm

Interesting article by ex-soldier on Trump, Korea and military action.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 11, 2018 2:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3467
Turbogoat wrote:
The starting position for Trump about North Korea included statements like "Fire and fury, like the world has never seen".

He's now going to have a meeting to negotiate instead. (this is a good thing, all credit to Trump for this).

However, the North Koreans are going to see this as a significant shift in position before they've even sat down at the negotiating table, and the only thing they have done is not attack anyone... yet.




I think maybe there's an element of "fudge, this plum might actually just pile in on us just for shits and giggles" and they've decided to tone it down a bit.

The nuke issue is really the only one that might force an invasion, they aren't enough of a threat without them. More a pain in the arse, but such a significant force it's just not worth it. Nukes change that to "ok now we have to deal with this once and for all".

Perhaps Kim has realised that?

If so it they might actually be serious about giving them up, in exchange for legitimacy, reduced sanctions and maybe US withdrawal from the Korean peninsular. Japan no, but they might settle for Korea. An official treaty would need to be in there as well as part of the whole deal.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 11, 2018 4:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4599
Location: Straya c**ts.
Brumbieman wrote:
I think maybe there's an element of "fudge, this plum might actually just pile in on us just for shits and giggles" and they've decided to tone it down a bit.

The nuke issue is really the only one that might force an invasion, they aren't enough of a threat without them. More a pain in the arse, but such a significant force it's just not worth it. Nukes change that to "ok now we have to deal with this once and for all".

Perhaps Kim has realised that?

If so it they might actually be serious about giving them up, in exchange for legitimacy, reduced sanctions and maybe US withdrawal from the Korean peninsular. Japan no, but they might settle for Korea. An official treaty would need to be in there as well as part of the whole deal.

He'd settle for nothing less than the complete withdrawal of the US from the peninsular before he gave up his only safeguard against an invasion via South Korea.

More likely he thinks that, unlike any President before him, Trump would seriously entertain this idea, because he's an idiot who doesn't know what he's doing and whose views change according to the last person he spoke to.

Probably figures it's worth a shot, having nothing to lose, but short of Trump handing North Korea (and China) such an extraordinary victory, Jong Un's giving up nothing at all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 11, 2018 5:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 40479
Waratah wrote:
Brumbieman wrote:
I think maybe there's an element of "fudge, this plum might actually just pile in on us just for shits and giggles" and they've decided to tone it down a bit.

The nuke issue is really the only one that might force an invasion, they aren't enough of a threat without them. More a pain in the arse, but such a significant force it's just not worth it. Nukes change that to "ok now we have to deal with this once and for all".

Perhaps Kim has realised that?

If so it they might actually be serious about giving them up, in exchange for legitimacy, reduced sanctions and maybe US withdrawal from the Korean peninsular. Japan no, but they might settle for Korea. An official treaty would need to be in there as well as part of the whole deal.

He'd settle for nothing less than the complete withdrawal of the US from the peninsular before he gave up his only safeguard against an invasion via South Korea.

More likely he thinks that, unlike any President before him, Trump would seriously entertain this idea, because he's an idiot who doesn't know what he's doing and whose views change according to the last person he spoke to.

Probably figures it's worth a shot, having nothing to lose, but short of Trump handing North Korea (and China) such an extraordinary victory, Jong Un's giving up nothing at all.


I suspect that Kim will also require as a condition the US withdrawal from its bases in not only SK but also Japan.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 11, 2018 12:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24397
I suspect The Don will feed young Kim a succession of KFC, MacDonalds and steak-with-ketchup until Kim undertake to denuke.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 11, 2018 5:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5224
Well the greatest news on earth will require the greatest news conference on earth.

I believe the announcement will go something like this. Kims a great guy, the greatest on earth.
He said he won't bomb USA, and has agreed that we can open up US food chains in his palace.

I then saw the opportunity that he will need to defend his country, so we have sold him our nuclear arsenal which we no longer need. The greatest deal on earth.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 11, 2018 7:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24397
The Don can, of course, put Kim on a back burner, send a minor official/diplomat to deal with him.. I can imagine the shit storms on here if he does ...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 11, 2018 7:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15377
Location: South Oxfordshire
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
The Don can, of course, put Kim on a back burner, send a minor official/diplomat to deal with him.. I can imagine the shit storms on here if he does ...


On. Orlando at the moment and happened to turn Fox ob out of interest. They reckon he's making de-nuke a precondition of talks, which would seem to be the ultimate way to get out of this for him.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 11, 2018 7:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24397
I am quite interested in seeing Trump's own brand of diplomacy develop. If at all.

This can be quite important, definitely is very different from Russia/China/ Europe/UK/Mexico etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 2:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3467
Waratah wrote:
Brumbieman wrote:
I think maybe there's an element of "fudge, this plum might actually just pile in on us just for shits and giggles" and they've decided to tone it down a bit.

The nuke issue is really the only one that might force an invasion, they aren't enough of a threat without them. More a pain in the arse, but such a significant force it's just not worth it. Nukes change that to "ok now we have to deal with this once and for all".

Perhaps Kim has realised that?

If so it they might actually be serious about giving them up, in exchange for legitimacy, reduced sanctions and maybe US withdrawal from the Korean peninsular. Japan no, but they might settle for Korea. An official treaty would need to be in there as well as part of the whole deal.

He'd settle for nothing less than the complete withdrawal of the US from the peninsular before he gave up his only safeguard against an invasion via South Korea.

More likely he thinks that, unlike any President before him, Trump would seriously entertain this idea, because he's an idiot who doesn't know what he's doing and whose views change according to the last person he spoke to.

Probably figures it's worth a shot, having nothing to lose, but short of Trump handing North Korea (and China) such an extraordinary victory, Jong Un's giving up nothing at all.




Probably didn't explain that well. I mean that unless they're a legitimate threat to the US or Japan, as in impending potential nuclear strike, no one has the will, or balls, to take NK on unless they were defending an invasion of the south.

They aren't Iraq or Panama or some other tiny country the US can obliterate for fun/practise and sell as entertainment back home, they actually have an enormous, powerful military with fanatical loyalty among their soldiers, nothing to lose and a shitload of horrible weapons. No one is going anywhere near that, they're the country equivalent of a hornets nest.

Developing nuclear capability upgrades them from "fudge that, too hard and too painful" to "ok, now they actually CAN nuke us, we HAVE to deal with this".

Perhaps Kim has realised that nuclear capability isn't much of a deterrence if you only have a couple of them and no real delivery method, instead they paint a giant throbbing red target on you until you have 50 or so mounted on ICBM's. Especially when you're dealing with Trump, as opposed to a more rational leader who would take that into account. By all appearances, Trump might just wake up and say fudge it, turn them into glass and solve this problem once and for all.

Their conventional army is easily enough of a deterrent alone and no one will touch them unless they HAVE to.

Lions will run from a Honey Badger, unless the badger is after their cubs.


Withdrawal from the Korean peninsular - absolute must for sure.

Japan: probably not, if other terms were favourable, eg an official treaty to officially end the war, a reduction in sanctions etc, official recognition etc

Of course, Kim could just be winding the Don up, but I reckon he's worked out that nukes are not actually a deterrent and is feeling a bit exposed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 2:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5576
Location: A gaf in Bracknell
I suspect the Don will back away from any meaningful promises on this just like he has on guns.

He’ll drop a few bombs on Twitter and those tiny attention spans will hop to the next piece of glitter and forget about all of it.

Maybe you should wait for him to actually deliver something before you worship his diplomacy skills.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 7:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24397
Brumbieman wrote:
Waratah wrote:
Brumbieman wrote:
I think maybe there's an element of "fudge, this plum might actually just pile in on us just for shits and giggles" and they've decided to tone it down a bit.

The nuke issue is really the only one that might force an invasion, they aren't enough of a threat without them. More a pain in the arse, but such a significant force it's just not worth it. Nukes change that to "ok now we have to deal with this once and for all".

Perhaps Kim has realised that?

If so it they might actually be serious about giving them up, in exchange for legitimacy, reduced sanctions and maybe US withdrawal from the Korean peninsular. Japan no, but they might settle for Korea. An official treaty would need to be in there as well as part of the whole deal.

He'd settle for nothing less than the complete withdrawal of the US from the peninsular before he gave up his only safeguard against an invasion via South Korea.

More likely he thinks that, unlike any President before him, Trump would seriously entertain this idea, because he's an idiot who doesn't know what he's doing and whose views change according to the last person he spoke to.

Probably figures it's worth a shot, having nothing to lose, but short of Trump handing North Korea (and China) such an extraordinary victory, Jong Un's giving up nothing at all.




Probably didn't explain that well. I mean that unless they're a legitimate threat to the US or Japan, as in impending potential nuclear strike, no one has the will, or balls, to take NK on unless they were defending an invasion of the south.

They aren't Iraq or Panama or some other tiny country the US can obliterate for fun/practise and sell as entertainment back home, they actually have an enormous, powerful military with fanatical loyalty among their soldiers, nothing to lose and a shitload of horrible weapons. No one is going anywhere near that, they're the country equivalent of a hornets nest.

Developing nuclear capability upgrades them from "fudge that, too hard and too painful" to "ok, now they actually CAN nuke us, we HAVE to deal with this".

Perhaps Kim has realised that nuclear capability isn't much of a deterrence if you only have a couple of them and no real delivery method, instead they paint a giant throbbing red target on you until you have 50 or so mounted on ICBM's. Especially when you're dealing with Trump, as opposed to a more rational leader who would take that into account. By all appearances, Trump might just wake up and say fudge it, turn them into glass and solve this problem once and for all.

Their conventional army is easily enough of a deterrent alone and no one will touch them unless they HAVE to.

Lions will run from a Honey Badger, unless the badger is after their cubs.


Withdrawal from the Korean peninsular - absolute must for sure.

Japan: probably not, if other terms were favourable, eg an official treaty to officially end the war, a reduction in sanctions etc, official recognition etc

Of course, Kim could just be winding the Don up, but I reckon he's worked out that nukes are not actually a deterrent and is feeling a bit exposed.



Maybe Kim has sorted out his wish list already, waiting for the USA to bribe him into a sembalnce of co-operation. Bribes, trade deals, aid and "other" assistance.
USA should go for this, they have the most pervasive and eroding culture since Babylon. Way to beat Kim.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 7:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9286
Waratah wrote:
Brumbieman wrote:
I think maybe there's an element of "fudge, this plum might actually just pile in on us just for shits and giggles" and they've decided to tone it down a bit.

The nuke issue is really the only one that might force an invasion, they aren't enough of a threat without them. More a pain in the arse, but such a significant force it's just not worth it. Nukes change that to "ok now we have to deal with this once and for all".

Perhaps Kim has realised that?

If so it they might actually be serious about giving them up, in exchange for legitimacy, reduced sanctions and maybe US withdrawal from the Korean peninsular. Japan no, but they might settle for Korea. An official treaty would need to be in there as well as part of the whole deal.

He'd settle for nothing less than the complete withdrawal of the US from the peninsular before he gave up his only safeguard against an invasion via South Korea.

More likely he thinks that, unlike any President before him, Trump would seriously entertain this idea, because he's an idiot who doesn't know what he's doing and whose views change according to the last person he spoke to.

Probably figures it's worth a shot, having nothing to lose, but short of Trump handing North Korea (and China) such an extraordinary victory, Jong Un's giving up nothing at all.


Only safeguard against invasion from the South? :?

Quote:
“There’s no military solution [to North Korea’s nuclear threats], forget it,” Bannon told the American Prospect. “Until somebody solves the part of the equation that shows me that 10 million people in Seoul don’t die in the first 30 minutes from conventional weapons, I don’t know what you’re talking about, there’s no military solution here, they got us.”


Quote:
In Washington, a “Kinsley gaffe” is when someone tells an obvious truth that isn’t supposed to be said. Such was the case when White House chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon told a reporter, in an interview published Wednesday, that there is no viable military option for stopping North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs.

Bannon’s view is that any preemptive attack on North Korea would result in horrendous casualties in South Korea and elsewhere and therefore cannot be seriously considered. That view is shared by many officials, former officials and North Korea experts. Whether President Trump believes it is unknown.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/jos ... abf7e316aa


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 8:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24397
Santa wrote:
Waratah wrote:
Brumbieman wrote:
I think maybe there's an element of "fudge, this plum might actually just pile in on us just for shits and giggles" and they've decided to tone it down a bit.

The nuke issue is really the only one that might force an invasion, they aren't enough of a threat without them. More a pain in the arse, but such a significant force it's just not worth it. Nukes change that to "ok now we have to deal with this once and for all".

Perhaps Kim has realised that?

If so it they might actually be serious about giving them up, in exchange for legitimacy, reduced sanctions and maybe US withdrawal from the Korean peninsular. Japan no, but they might settle for Korea. An official treaty would need to be in there as well as part of the whole deal.

He'd settle for nothing less than the complete withdrawal of the US from the peninsular before he gave up his only safeguard against an invasion via South Korea.

More likely he thinks that, unlike any President before him, Trump would seriously entertain this idea, because he's an idiot who doesn't know what he's doing and whose views change according to the last person he spoke to.

Probably figures it's worth a shot, having nothing to lose, but short of Trump handing North Korea (and China) such an extraordinary victory, Jong Un's giving up nothing at all.


Only safeguard against invasion from the South? :?

Quote:
“There’s no military solution [to North Korea’s nuclear threats], forget it,” Bannon told the American Prospect. “Until somebody solves the part of the equation that shows me that 10 million people in Seoul don’t die in the first 30 minutes from conventional weapons, I don’t know what you’re talking about, there’s no military solution here, they got us.”


Quote:
In Washington, a “Kinsley gaffe” is when someone tells an obvious truth that isn’t supposed to be said. Such was the case when White House chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon told a reporter, in an interview published Wednesday, that there is no viable military option for stopping North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs.

Bannon’s view is that any preemptive attack on North Korea would result in horrendous casualties in South Korea and elsewhere and therefore cannot be seriously considered. That view is shared by many officials, former officials and North Korea experts. Whether President Trump believes it is unknown.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/jos ... abf7e316aa



Any military action by either Kim or The Don will mean political suicide for the instigator. And a burnt out Korean peninsula. With untold casualties. Possible interference by Russia, China, and NATO, too. Which can escalate. A big no-no.
Unsure how much North Korea will be able to target and effectively hit the USA mainland. But they will fight, that is for sure, and try to annihilate every USA troop on the ground in Korea. ...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 9:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 28146
Location: Chickenrunning...
You’re all wrong. Trump is a great business man and deal maker: he’s going to sell some nukes to NK. :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 9:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24397
Sandstorm wrote:
You’re all wrong. Trump is a great business man and deal maker: he’s going to sell some nukes to NK. :thumbup:



Why not ?
Nobody is going to use them, outside of tests.


Then maybe he could also negotiate putting up a Trump Tower, somewhere in NK ... USA can pay.

EDIT: He even might put up a deal to negate China's influence- coal for a nuke. Help the Morth Koreans eat ...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 10:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:30 am
Posts: 4801
Anybody catch the latest campaign rally in Pennsylvania - it was a thing of beauty.

He played all his greatest hits - fake news, evil CNN and MSNBC (called one of their anchors a son of a bitch), Hillary, Obama, Pocahontas, Bernie, Arnold Schwatzenegger, build the wall, 2016 election....

Plus he played stuff from his new album - Oprah Winfrey and death penalties for drug dealers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ke4FykCxwcc

He also amazingly takes credit for a successful Winter Olympics.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 11:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 37132
BokJock wrote:
Anybody catch the latest campaign rally in Pennsylvania - it was a thing of beauty.

He played all his greatest hits - fake news, evil CNN and MSNBC (called one of their anchors a son of a bitch), Hillary, Obama, Pocahontas, Bernie, Arnold Schwatzenegger, build the wall, 2016 election....

Plus he played stuff from his new album - Oprah Winfrey and death penalties for drug dealers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ke4FykCxwcc

He also amazingly takes credit for a successful Winter Olympics.


Terrific stuff. :thumbup: thanks for the link.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 12:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24397
:lol:

:thumbup:

The Don. Make him President for Life.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 1:20 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17413
Location: balbriggan
Seneca of the Night wrote:
BokJock wrote:
Anybody catch the latest campaign rally in Pennsylvania - it was a thing of beauty.

He played all his greatest hits - fake news, evil CNN and MSNBC (called one of their anchors a son of a bitch), Hillary, Obama, Pocahontas, Bernie, Arnold Schwatzenegger, build the wall, 2016 election....

Plus he played stuff from his new album - Oprah Winfrey and death penalties for drug dealers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ke4FykCxwcc

He also amazingly takes credit for a successful Winter Olympics.


Terrific stuff. :thumbup: thanks for the link.

Two three new neo fascist show up so you find the courage to show your ugly mug once again.

:lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 1:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:47 pm
Posts: 3236
BokJock wrote:
Anybody catch the latest campaign rally in Pennsylvania - it was a thing of beauty.

He played all his greatest hits - fake news, evil CNN and MSNBC (called one of their anchors a son of a bitch), Hillary, Obama, Pocahontas, Bernie, Arnold Schwatzenegger, build the wall, 2016 election....

Plus he played stuff from his new album - Oprah Winfrey and death penalties for drug dealers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ke4FykCxwcc

He also amazingly takes credit for a successful Winter Olympics.


I've had this on in the background for the last 45 minutes, some of it's genuinely funny
Still don't get American audiences, especially for politicians. They've just burst into their 'Build that wall' chant :uhoh:
Still doesn't feel real that he's president of the US, weird times we live in


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 3:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20282
ID2 wrote:
Still doesn't feel real that he's president of the US, weird times we live in

The Truman Show feels more like a documentary with each passing year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 5:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:30 am
Posts: 4801
Trump just telling it like it is...

Quote:
Donald J. Trump
✔ @realDonaldTrump

Rasmussen and others have my approval ratings at around 50%, which is higher than Obama, and yet the political pundits love saying my approval ratings are “somewhat low.” They know they are lying when they say it. Turn off the show - FAKE NEWS!

3:16 PM - Mar 11, 2018



Quote:
Fact-checking Trump's approval ratings tweet

President Trump tweeted that media reports that his approval ratings are lower than those of President Obama are "fake news." Here are the facts:

•RealClearPolitics' polling average places Trump's approval at 40.9%, significantly lower than Obama's approval (48.5%) at the same time during his presidency.
•Rasmussen Reports' latest numbers, from Friday, put Trump's approval rating at 44% — not "around 50%." Rasmussen, whose "likely voter" model tends to favor Republicans, also had Obama at 44% on the same day in 2010.
•The bottom line: Trump's numbers have ticked upward, and his current approval rating is higher than the low point of Obama's presidency (39.8% per RCP). But Trump's rating remains below the 48% that Obama averaged over 8 years, and far below the 57.2% rating he had when he left office.


It is such a stupid thing to lie about...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 5:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19301
Location: End of the road, turn right and first house on the left
One advantage of having Trump there (assuming of course they would tell him anything)

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 8:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5224
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
The Don can, of course, put Kim on a back burner, send a minor official/diplomat to deal with him.. I can imagine the shit storms on here if he does ...


No, the shit storm starts when the envoy is sent home in a coma.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 8:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2706
Enzedder wrote:
One advantage of having Trump there (assuming of course they would tell him anything)

Image

I made that joke even before Trump was elected. 8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 11:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 7:02 am
Posts: 4073
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
The Don can, of course, put Kim on a back burner, send a minor official/diplomat to deal with him.. I can imagine the shit storms on here if he does ...



He has only got ONE asian expert on the White House staff, and NO Korean expertise. There is not even a bloody ambassador in Seoul!!!!


Fark me this idiot is actually the most dangerous person on the planet. He does not have the slightest idea about international deals of the compexity that will be required to solve this situation.


Draining the swamp does not mean throwing away, or ignoring, the standard modus operandi for negotiations like this.


The ignorant man despises that which he does not understand. Ignorance is potentially deadly. For all of us.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 11:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 37132
Quote:
“We found no evidence of collusion,” Conaway told reporters Monday, suggesting that those who believe there was are reading too many spy novels. “We found perhaps some bad judgment, inappropriate meetings, inappropriate judgment in taking meetings. But only Tom Clancy or Vince Flynn or someone else like that could take this series of inadvertent contacts with each other, or meetings or whatever, and weave that into sort of a fiction page turner, spy thriller.”


https://apnews.com/dc7c4ec1be104801aefd ... and-Russia


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 12:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 37132
Meanwhile, in India . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... bp3yne4h_4


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 1:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 40479
Seneca of the Night wrote:


Just like Trump :lol: :lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 112544 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 1787, 1788, 1789, 1790, 1791, 1792, 1793 ... 2814  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Caley_Red, Dan54., Demilich, Google Adsense [Bot], HighKingLeinster, Laurent, Leffe, not_english, Rinkals and 101 guests


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