gbear Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 Did Trump make this all fail in an effort to take news coverage off of Cohen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 3 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said: The risk that trump got outwitted by Kim in a one sided deal thst benefited Kim was real, but thus far trump hasn’t made a unfair deal... His first meeting gave Kim something that NK has been wanting since before he was born. In exchange for . . . ? Might want to back off from "thus far trump hasn’t made a unfair deal." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CousinsCowgirl84 Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 (edited) 28 minutes ago, Larry said: His first meeting gave Kim something that NK has been wanting since before he was born. In exchange for . . . ? Might want to back off from "thus far trump hasn’t made a unfair deal." Youve missed the point of the article. Talking is not a concession... the US president isn’t king of the world. Borrowing your card analogy, you’re acting like it’s aces when it’s more 89 suited... the value of the hand depends totally on the board (the world). for NK talking to Putin and Xi has way way way more value... Maybe you just didn’t read it. It’s ok. There also havnt been any missile launches/nuclear tests since trump and Kim started talking... but, ultimately “what’s fair” is an opinion so in my opinion (and for example, Fareed’s) talking to Kim is not an concession or unfair deal... Edited February 28, 2019 by CousinsCowgirl84 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 As a point of comparison, NK performed 16 missile tests in Trumps first 9 months. They attempted 15 in the 16 years under the Bush/Obama administrations. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatBuzz Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 @Llevron Quote obviously things have accelerated greatly while he has been in office. I'd say this is debatable at best. He had nukes well before Trump. He had the technology to put them on a warhead before Trump. He has only done 1 missle test since Trump came to power (right? I know it has been very few). What exactly has accelerated greatly while Trump has been in office? Quote neither of you seem to want to acknowledge that being on the same "world stage" as the American President was something he always wanted....and we gave it up for nothing, along with the war games....also for nothing. And that was why I said I didn't necessarily agree with all of Trump's methods. Quote You are talking about doing something different like letting one of the worst dictators alive have the most powerful weapons know to mankind ever. You keep saying "let" like we have a choice. We either "let" him have them or go to war. Which would you prefer? We are not "letting" him have them any more than Bush2 or Obama "let" them have them. Quote Thats the plan? I understand there isnt another one. I def dont have one. Again, I don't exactly love the way Trump is going about all this. But I fully support trying something different than what we have been doing. And it's real easy to **** about a plan when you don't have a better idea. I personally have said I think we should lean on China a lot harder to make them lean on NK. Conceded something to them that we haven't really done **** about anyways like the islands they are building and then claiming as sovergn territory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hersh Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 This is what happens when you have a totally inconsistent foreign policy. As already pointed out they leave the Iran deal, but it's a lot more than that. Gutting the state department, letting the Saudi prince get away with murdering a WP reporter, suddenly withdrawing from Syria, but not really withdrawing apparently, increasing tensions with allies, and not preparing properly for the summits. I have zero problems with engagement, but as also pointed out here already, the US gave up stuff in return for nothing. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llevron Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 13 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said: @Llevron I'd say this is debatable at best. He had nukes well before Trump. He had the technology to put them on a warhead before Trump. He has only done 1 missle test since Trump came to power (right? I know it has been very few). What exactly has accelerated greatly while Trump has been in office? I got a timeline of missile launches. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_North_Korean_missile_tests In fairness, this is not specifically "nuke" tests. But one can gather that is what the tests are for. They are specifically testing to have the capability to threaten any place on the planet. That not going to lead to peace. 13 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said: You keep saying "let" like we have a choice. We either "let" him have them or go to war. Which would you prefer? We are not "letting" him have them any more than Bush2 or Obama "let" them have them. I like your idea below much more. Lean on China. We already have a better relationship with them and we dont need to give them anything but money. I would prefer to give China money than a madman with a huge ego the ability to hit us with a nuke from his house. 13 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said: Again, I don't exactly love the way Trump is going about all this. But I fully support trying something different than what we have been doing. And it's real easy to **** about a plan when you don't have a better idea. True, but you cant tell me you have never in alllll your years heard an idea and thought it was bad without having a better solution. Obviously im not a diplomat. I can make up some **** off of the top of my head and pretend I know what the hell im talking about. But I dont. We both know that. But on its face, I have to think giving a known murderer more ways to kill people is bad. Right? How do you possibly see this ending in anything other than more death or threats? What would make you believe otherwise? I dont have a better idea, but that doesnt mean I cant call out a bad one. You gave a better one in this post! Thats why you have conversations like this there are people smarter than you with better ideas. In this case you have a better idea than...yourself lol (kidding kidding) 13 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said: I personally have said I think we should lean on China a lot harder to make them lean on NK. Conceded something to them that we haven't really done **** about anyways like the islands they are building and then claiming as sovergn territory. I think thats a great idea man. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sacks 'n' Stuff Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 Kissy kissy Kim Jong Un. Smoochie Smoochie MBS. Suckie Suckie Putin. Mueller... bad guy. Obama... bad guy. FBI... bad guys. Manafort... good person KKK... good people John McCain... not a hero. DUUUUUUUuuuuuuuuurrrrr.... D'Im a REpublican... Duuuuuuuurrrrrr. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatBuzz Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 41 minutes ago, Llevron said: I got a timeline of missile launches. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_North_Korean_missile_tests In fairness, this is not specifically "nuke" tests. But one can gather that is what the tests are for. They are specifically testing to have the capability to threaten any place on the planet. That not going to lead to peace. I'd say it's debatable if testing more missles is a speed up or not compared to testing nukes. But I don't think it matters enough either to have the debate. Agree to disagree? As for the rest, I don't love everything Trump has done but I do like some of it. And until we get to see some long term effects of his tactics, I'm not ready to condemn it all. But again, sanctions and such led to him getting a nuclear missle that can reach the better part of the globe. I'm not sure how much worse it can get short of the nukes actually flying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llevron Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 16 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said: I'd say it's debatable if testing more missles is a speed up or not compared to testing nukes. But I don't think it matters enough either to have the debate. Agree to disagree? As for the rest, I don't love everything Trump has done but I do like some of it. And until we get to see some long term effects of his tactics, I'm not ready to condemn it all. But again, sanctions and such led to him getting a nuclear missle that can reach the better part of the globe. I'm not sure how much worse it can get short of the nukes actually flying. Agree to disagree is always cool with me homie. I dont really have a strong position on it one way or the other. Just debating cause I enjoy it and happen to feel differently in this case. Honestly if long term Trumps tactics work out I will be happy about it. I just dont want to be blown up. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 3 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said: The risk that trump got outwitted by Kim in a one sided deal thst benefited Kim was real, but thus far trump hasn’t made a unfair deal... He hasn't made ANY deal that we know of, and NK hasn't had to do a damned thing! Trunip said last time that KLU was going to stop nuclear labs rtc none of which happened. Trump has been ineffective at grtting KJU to do ANYTHING. Whereas KJU has now gotten prime billing with POTUS for a SECOND time had conceded NOTHING! So please quote to me where in "The Art of the Deal" getting played by a despot TWICE fits! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 3 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said: Youve missed the point of the article. Talking is not a concession... It is when you're a third rate despot who has done NOTHING to demonstrate that you're worth a discussion with the President of the United States. There are African Presidents who don't get that sit down, and if they wanted it they'd have to concede certain things BEFORE that sit ever took place, KJU has given nothing....NOTHING. And now Trump has been made to look the fool twice. The first time he lied about the "deal" that NK obviously didn't think existed, at leadt this time Trump isn't lying about nothing happening. He still looks like a welp, but at leadt he has Hannity spinning for him so ya'll know what to think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 3 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said: Youve missed the point of the article. Talking is not a concession... the US president isn’t king of the world. Borrowing your card analogy, you’re acting like it’s aces when it’s more 89 suited... the value of the hand depends totally on the board (the world). for NK talking to Putin and Xi has way way way more value... Maybe you just didn’t read it. It’s ok. There also havnt been any missile launches/nuclear tests since trump and Kim started talking... but, ultimately “what’s fair” is an opinion so in my opinion (and for example, Fareed’s) talking to Kim is not an concession or unfair deal... Of course talking isn't a concession. That's why you have diplomats, intermediaries, and other channels of communication. What Trump has been doing with these summits isn't "talking" so much as pure grandstanding without any hint of an actual plan or even a concrete foreign policy in general. There's a big difference between talking to NK and giving them the legitimacy on the world stage that they've been craving for over 50 years in return for absolutely nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 (edited) Un is happy with the recognition and equal footing with Trump, and now they are making Trump (and the US) look like the weaker of of the pair and perhaps getting some more concessions for another opportunity to keep getting what they want. Edited February 28, 2019 by visionary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CousinsCowgirl84 Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 (edited) Giving them legitimacy gives them something to lose.... Abd again, if you are looking for “something in return” look at the lack of missile tests and inane threats... Edited February 28, 2019 by CousinsCowgirl84 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD0506 Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 3 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said: Abd again, if you are looking for “something in return” look at the lack of missile tests and inane threats... So...when they got the attention they were seeking they stopped doing the things they were doing to get the attention? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chachie Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 (edited) 11 hours ago, Corcaigh said: Having the meeting in the first place is a total failure in diplomacy. Does anyone know how long the dates were set for this meeting? I'm trying to figure out if The House had the Cohen thing scheduled first or if the summit was scheduled first. Here's my point (without honestly knowing why these two events occurred at the same time): The whole NK trip just felt like there was no "deal" on the table in the first place. It felt irrelevant. It felt, quite frankly, "staged." Maybe Trump needed a grand gesture as a distraction, maybe Pompeo and Bolton just wanted to "whisk" him away while Cohen was on the Hill. I'm sure 45 wanted to make something happen while he was there, but I (perhaps ignorant of relevant info) kinda feel like NK was just a big "hey look over there!" He planned to walk away from Kim the whole time because he wasn't there for a deal. He was there because Cohen was in D.C. Edited March 1, 2019 by Chachie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 I think it was planned before the Cohen hearing was...but I could be wrong. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatBuzz Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 4 minutes ago, Chachie said: Does anyone know how long the dates were set for this meeting? I'm trying to figure out if The House had the Cohen thing scheduled first or if the summit was scheduled first. Here's my point (without honestly knowing why these two events occurred at the same time): The whole NK trip just felt like there was no "deal" on the table in the first place. It felt irrelevant. It felt, quite frankly, "staged." Maybe Trump needed a grand gesture as a distraction, maybe Pompeo and Bolton just wanted to "whisk" him away while Cohen was on the Hill. I'm sure 45 wanted to make something happen while he was there, but I (perhaps ignorant of relevant info) kinda feel like NK was just a big "hey look over there!" He planned to walk away from Kim the whole time because he wasn't there for a deal. He was there because Cohen was in D.C. My bet is they purposely planned Trump to visit a non-extradition country during the Cohen testimony just in case he gave some REALLY bad info. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 (edited) https://oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/committee-announces-rescheduling-of-michael-cohen-s-public-testimony Quote Feb 20, 2019 Quote Today, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, the Chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Reform, announced that the Committee has rescheduled its public hearing with President Donald Trump’s longtime personal attorney, Michael Cohen, for 10 a.m. on Wednesday, February 27, 2019, in room 2154 of the Rayburn House Office Building: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_North_Korea–United_States_Hanoi_Summit Quote The White House gave confirmation of the planned summit between North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un and U.S. President Donald Trump on September 11, 2018. U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo stated that the DPRK and U.S. were ‘working diligently’ to make sure the conditions were right for the summit.[3][4] Trump announced the host country, Vietnam, and the dates, February 27–28, during his second State of the Union Address on February 5, 2019.[5] Edited March 1, 2019 by visionary 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chachie Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 5 minutes ago, visionary said: I think it was planned before the Cohen hearing was...but I could be wrong. 1 minute ago, TheGreatBuzz said: My bet is they purposely planned Trump to visit a non-extradition country during the Cohen testimony just in case he gave some REALLY bad info. It just felt pointless on purpose. I'm sure the trip was planned first and I know that the Cohen hearing got moved due to witness tampering by the POTUS but I'd swear that trip was totally just an attempt to upstage Cohen or to avoid him altogether. Nobody thought they'd strike a deal with Kim. 2 minutes ago, visionary said: https://oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/committee-announces-rescheduling-of-michael-cohen-s-public-testimony https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_North_Korea–United_States_Hanoi_Summit Copy that, thx. 😎 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatBuzz Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 13 minutes ago, visionary said: https://oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/committee-announces-rescheduling-of-michael-cohen-s-public-testimony https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_North_Korea–United_States_Hanoi_Summit My explanation is funnier........ 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now