Peace In Korea
I would like to see someone say Trump is incompetent now.... He has only been able to do what the last 4 presidents could not do.
Comments
-
Is the US moving away from the military industrial complex into a sort of business industrial complex?
-
@reformed said:
I would like to see someone say Trump is incompetent now.... He has only been able to do what the last 4 presidents could not do.I could write a quite lengthy post about the president's rambling, incoherent, and dangerous presentation at today's news conference [e.g. listen for a wonderfully abbreviated distillation of Trump the man when he talks about the possibility that North Korea won't denuclearize the way they've now promised to: The president says "I may be wrong, I mean I may stand before you in six months and say, 'Hey I was wrong.' I don't know that I'll ever admit that, but I'll find some kind of an excuse."]
There is MUCH in the agreement to be concerned about - for example, did the South Koreans know the US was going to discontinue its military exercises with it? And why did the US Defense Department not know what the president had in mind by the decision? (DoD reps told reporters that the US military will implement the president's decision as soon as they figure what he was talking about!) - but I don't have time, so from the Arms Control Association I offer a summary of a statement North Korea agreed to in September 2005, during the Bush 43 presidency. See whether any of what you're about to read sounds familiar to what we heard today:
"September 19, 2005: The participants in the six-party talks conclude a joint statement of principles to guide future negotiations.
According to the statement, North Korea commits “to abandoning all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs and returning, at an early date, to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and to IAEA safeguards.” It also calls for the 1992 Joint Declaration of the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, which forbids the two Koreas from possessing uranium-enrichment and plutonium-separation facilities, to be “observed and implemented.” Washington affirms in the statement that it has no intention to attack or invade North Korea.
The statement commits the participants to achieving “the verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula in a peaceful manner” and says that the parties agree “to take coordinated steps to implement” the agreed-upon obligations and rewards “in a phased manner in line with the principle of ‘commitment for commitment, action for action.’”
The statement says that North Korea “stated that it has the right to peaceful uses of nuclear energy” and that the other parties “expressed their respect and agreed to discuss, at an appropriate time, the subject of the provision” of a light-water nuclear power reactor to Pyongyang. This issue had been controversial during the negotiations and the final agreement was the result of a compromise between Washington and Pyongyang. North Korea insisted that the statement recognize its right to a peaceful nuclear energy program and commit the other participants to provide it with light-water reactors while the United States argued that North Korea should not receive any nuclear reactors.
Oh, there is at least one significant difference between now and 2005: In 2005, we didn't agree to suspend military exercises with South Korea.
But then again, Kim Jong Un is SUCH a trustworthy partner, so, what could possibly go wrong?! Why, Kim was so good that the president didn't even have to press him on his less than ideal record on human rights. I mean, what world leader in today's stressful world DOESN'T assassinate his or her own siblings?!
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
I would like to see someone say Trump is incompetent now.... He has only been able to do what the last 4 presidents could not do.I could write a quite lengthy post about the president's rambling, incoherent, and dangerous presentation at today's news conference [e.g. listen for a wonderfully abbreviated distillation of Trump the man when he talks about the possibility that North Korea won't denuclearize the way they've now promised to: The president says "I may be wrong, I mean I may stand before you in six months and say, 'Hey I was wrong.' I don't know that I'll ever admit that, but I'll find some kind of an excuse."]
There is MUCH in the agreement to be concerned about - for example, did the South Koreans know the US was going to discontinue its military exercises with it? And why did the US Defense Department not know what the president had in mind by the decision? (DoD reps told reporters that the US military will implement the president's decision as soon as they figure what he was talking about!) - but I don't have time, so from the Arms Control Association I offer a summary of a statement North Korea agreed to in September 2005, during the Bush 43 presidency. See whether any of what you're about to read sounds familiar to what we heard today:
"September 19, 2005: The participants in the six-party talks conclude a joint statement of principles to guide future negotiations.
According to the statement, North Korea commits “to abandoning all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs and returning, at an early date, to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and to IAEA safeguards.” It also calls for the 1992 Joint Declaration of the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, which forbids the two Koreas from possessing uranium-enrichment and plutonium-separation facilities, to be “observed and implemented.” Washington affirms in the statement that it has no intention to attack or invade North Korea.
The statement commits the participants to achieving “the verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula in a peaceful manner” and says that the parties agree “to take coordinated steps to implement” the agreed-upon obligations and rewards “in a phased manner in line with the principle of ‘commitment for commitment, action for action.’”
The statement says that North Korea “stated that it has the right to peaceful uses of nuclear energy” and that the other parties “expressed their respect and agreed to discuss, at an appropriate time, the subject of the provision” of a light-water nuclear power reactor to Pyongyang. This issue had been controversial during the negotiations and the final agreement was the result of a compromise between Washington and Pyongyang. North Korea insisted that the statement recognize its right to a peaceful nuclear energy program and commit the other participants to provide it with light-water reactors while the United States argued that North Korea should not receive any nuclear reactors.
Oh, there is at least one significant difference between now and 2005: In 2005, we didn't agree to suspend military exercises with South Korea.
But then again, Kim Jong Un is SUCH a trustworthy partner, so, what could possibly go wrong?! Why, Kim was so good that the president didn't even have to press him on his less than ideal record on human rights. I mean, what world leader in today's stressful world DOESN'T assassinate his or her own siblings?!
Well let's see. Let's see how it works out. It can't work out worse than the Iran deal so we will see.
-
@reformed said:
Well let's see. Let's see how it works out. It can't work out worse than the Iran deal so we will see.An interesting point!
According to every observing/participating international agency AND every Trump administration official in a position to know, Iran was in full compliance with the deal it signed. Yet Trump called that "a horrible one-sided deal that should never, ever have been made."
The only thing we know so far about the verification system North Korea will face is that "the 'V' matters" (Secretary of State Mike Pompeo) and that it will take "a lot of people there" (President Trump).
They've obviously put a lot of thought and preparation into this.
BTW, did the language of the 2005 statement on denuclearization that I quoted in my previous post sound at all similar to what we heard from Trump and Kim today?
-
Nice PR theater show in Singapore .... staged for domestic political propaganda on both sides. The paper signed doesn't change a lousy thing from the status quo ...
The USA should pack up their military and let North and South Korea figure out their peace treaty with each other.
Someone sort of sarcastically mentioned "trustworthy partner" in reference to Kim Jong-Un ... the truth is that it is the other pary (USA) who has shown itself to be NOT trustworthy at all as they've never kept any contract they made .... always insisted on the other party disarming, and then broke the contract and hit the place (Iraq, Libya, etc.) ...the most recent example in plain view of the trustworthiness of the USA is how they have "kept" the agreements made with Iran (where it didn't matter to them at all that there were other parties involved in the agreement also) ... as part of the agreement, sanctions were to be lifted by the USA, but were they? Oh, no ...
The responsible agency for supervising the nuclear power plants etc in Iran in accordance with the agreement acknowledged and certified several times that Iran was keeping its part of the agreement, but did the USA keep their part? of course not -
Here's a link to a five minute interview the president conducted with Voice of America after the summit. He tells Greta VanSusteran that Kim Jong Un is a "smart" guy who "loves his people" and "has a great feeling for them." Further, the president says he's "not surprised" by the fact the Kim loves his people so much.
When asked how someone who has brutalized his people as much as Kim has could be said to love them, the president says "he's a rough guy," one who is "doing what he's seen done," but the president has no words of judgment or condemnation for Kim's conduct.
- The prime minister of Canada holds a post-G7 press conference in which he diplomatically says Canada will stand up to new US tariffs, and our president calls him "very dishonest and weak."
- The dictator of North Korea starves, imprisons, and assassinates his own people, and our president calls him "a rough guy" who "loves his people."
Since when is it right to express more disdain for an ally who disagrees with our trade policy than for a repressive dictator who brutalizes his people?
-
UPDATE: In a previous post, I mentioned that DoD reps had told reporters they will "implement the president's decision as soon as they can figure out what he was talking about." We now have a statement from the US forces command in South Korea that in diplomatic language makes the same basic point:
"USFK (US Forces in South Korea) has received no updated guidance on execution or cessation of training exercises - to include this fall’s schedule Ulchi Freedom Guardian. In coordination with our (South Korean) partners, we will continue with our current military posture until we receive updated guidance from the Department of Defense (DoD) and/or Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM)"
-
Like I already mentioned above .... the whole thing is a staged hot air propaganda event to dupe many and especially so the people of the two home countries in order to boost the "chief" and his domestic politics
One may as well forget it ... nothing will change for now or the near future. Who is opposed to the two Korean governments to figure out their peace deal with each other? -
On the other hand, have a look at the current military situation surrounding North Korea ... who do you think is being threatened by whom?
But of course, North Korea is the terrible threat prohibiting peace ...
-
@Wolfgang said:
On the other hand, have a look at the current military situation surrounding North Korea ... who do you think is being threatened by whom?But of course, North Korea is the terrible threat prohibiting peace ...
Your American hatred is showing again....
-
@reformed said:
I would like to see someone say Trump is incompetent now.... He has only been able to do what the last 4 presidents could not do."EVEN A BROKEN CLOCK IS RIGHT TWICE A DAY" CM
-
Trump is doing an amazing job. Surpassing all expectations. Doing good around the clock. Who would have thought?
Democrats have so much potential, but need reinvented. They have anger and hatred to offer but that is not proving to be popular. They need to unite on....something people want. It seems like whatever liberals want, Trump is doing. Well, so be it. -
Ha, Ha, Ha, Your Mr. Trump negotiated a "Nothing Burger." He met and gave away military exercises "without preconditions." He choked up before "rocket man." CM
-
@C_M_ said:
Ha, Ha, Ha, Your Mr. Trump negotiated a "Nothing Burger." He met and gave away military exercises "without preconditions." He choked up before "rocket man." CMGiven the national and international embarrassment that was the president's performance at the G7 summit, it was almost guaranteed that he would declare ANYTHING that happened in Singapore to be a victory. As it turned out, there was almost nothing there to be the "anything" he could claim as a win.
As I heard news anchors reveal the four basic points of the agreement, my mouth opened wider and wider in amazement at how little Trump got and how much he had given away. The third point, for example, I think was that the two leaders affirmed an agreement South and North Korea had signed in the spring! Some achievement!!
Had the president only got nothing for his time and effort, I think the negative impact of the summit would have been short-lived. But Trump's incessant praise for Kim Jong Un, one of the most brutal dictators in the world, just days after verbally slapping the prime minister of one of our closest, most valuable allies, Canada, was an offensive and inexcusable display of unfitness for the office. The combination of praise for our enemies and ridicule for our friends was embarrassing, of course, but it was also disgusting and potentially quite risky should our allies decide not to cooperate with the US while we are led by an unprepared, unpredictable, and temperamental emotional invalid.
Our president is a disgrace to the nation and to the office he holds.
-
@Bill_Coley said:
Had the president only got nothing for his time and effort, I think the negative impact of the summit would have been short-lived. But Trump's incessant praise for Kim Jong Un, one of the most brutal dictators in the world, just days after verbally slapping the prime minister of one of our closest, most valuable allies, Canada, was an offensive and inexcusable display of unfitness for the office. The combination of praise for our enemies and ridicule for our friends was embarrassing, of course, but it was also disgusting and potentially quite risky should our allies decide not to cooperate with the US while we are led by an unprepared, unpredictable, and temperamental emotional invalid.Well, the "prepared" presidents of the last few decades have caused perhaps a much greater disaster among people in the world with their bombing campaigns and war mongering efforts ... although, Trump has already joined them a little (been forced to join), even though he declared in his inaugural speech that he would not do so .... seems like certain forces behind the scenes have waged and are waging a war against their president to bring him in line with their globalist "new world" agendas and to continue the course set during the times of the Clinton, Bush, Obama regimes which has caused the USA to become like Rome towards its closing stages
I read a few times about North Korea and it being a terrible regime, most brutal dictator, etc .... where does such information come from? Perhaps a little USA and other Western propaganda? Do those reports mention under which conditions imposed by the "want to be world hegemon" USA and its allies with brutal sanctions? Do those reports mention how in the early 1950ies North Korea was basically bombed back to the middle ages and millions of its population wiped out by those "good bombs" carpeted on North Korea civilian areas?? Who was so "kindly brutal" to do such things?
@Reformed ... is mentioning facts hatred? or is it an attempt to cause you to be less lured and susceptible to propaganda?
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@C_M_ said:
Ha, Ha, Ha, Your Mr. Trump negotiated a "Nothing Burger." He met and gave away military exercises "without preconditions." He choked up before "rocket man." CMGiven the national and international embarrassment that was the president's performance at the G7 summit, it was almost guaranteed that he would declare ANYTHING that happened in Singapore to be a victory. As it turned out, there was almost nothing there to be the "anything" he could claim as a win.
As I heard news anchors reveal the four basic points of the agreement, my mouth opened wider and wider in amazement at how little Trump got and how much he had given away. The third point, for example, I think was that the two leaders affirmed an agreement South and North Korea had signed in the spring! Some achievement!!
Had the president only got nothing for his time and effort, I think the negative impact of the summit would have been short-lived. But Trump's incessant praise for Kim Jong Un, one of the most brutal dictators in the world, just days after verbally slapping the prime minister of one of our closest, most valuable allies, Canada, was an offensive and inexcusable display of unfitness for the office. The combination of praise for our enemies and ridicule for our friends was embarrassing, of course, but it was also disgusting and potentially quite risky should our allies decide not to cooperate with the US while we are led by an unprepared, unpredictable, and temperamental emotional invalid.
Our president is a disgrace to the nation and to the office he holds.
Bill,
This is the inevitable consequences of an ill-qualified man in such powerful and important position. IMOP, he (Trump) is an illegitimate President to start (follow the Mueller Investigation). "I don't have to eat a whole cow..." Of these two points, America has herself to blame. Wake-up, America People! CM
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
I would like to see someone say Trump is incompetent now.... He has only been able to do what the last 4 presidents could not do.I could write a quite lengthy post about the president's rambling, incoherent, and dangerous presentation at today's news conference [e.g. listen for a wonderfully abbreviated distillation of Trump the man when he talks about the possibility that North Korea won't denuclearize the way they've now promised to: The president says "I may be wrong, I mean I may stand before you in six months and say, 'Hey I was wrong.' I don't know that I'll ever admit that, but I'll find some kind of an excuse."]
There is MUCH in the agreement to be concerned about - for example, did the South Koreans know the US was going to discontinue its military exercises with it? And why did the US Defense Department not know what the president had in mind by the decision? (DoD reps told reporters that the US military will implement the president's decision as soon as they figure what he was talking about!) - but I don't have time, so from the Arms Control Association I offer a summary of a statement North Korea agreed to in September 2005, during the Bush 43 presidency. See whether any of what you're about to read sounds familiar to what we heard today:
Wow Bill, turns out the DoD not knowing about the plans was FAKE NEWS. Imagine that.
-
Trump is becoming quite the hero. An amazing man, a doer, an achiever. I understand his approval is equal to or higher than Reagan or Obama at this time.
I am presently visiting America, seeing Trumo stickers and signs, hearing so many people excited about what he is doing. I am seeing success, prosperity and growth, increasing sensibility and hope. Young people are excited and there is a positivity in the air I haven’t seen in many years.
All that and 2020 is coming!
My dear friends have faith. The answer is not politics or downcast eyes that can’t see a sunrise. The answer is not hate and anger. The answer is Jesus Christ and faith! -
@C_M_ said:
@Bill_Coley said:
@C_M_ said:
Ha, Ha, Ha, Your Mr. Trump negotiated a "Nothing Burger." He met and gave away military exercises "without preconditions." He choked up before "rocket man." CMGiven the national and international embarrassment that was the president's performance at the G7 summit, it was almost guaranteed that he would declare ANYTHING that happened in Singapore to be a victory. As it turned out, there was almost nothing there to be the "anything" he could claim as a win.
As I heard news anchors reveal the four basic points of the agreement, my mouth opened wider and wider in amazement at how little Trump got and how much he had given away. The third point, for example, I think was that the two leaders affirmed an agreement South and North Korea had signed in the spring! Some achievement!!
Had the president only got nothing for his time and effort, I think the negative impact of the summit would have been short-lived. But Trump's incessant praise for Kim Jong Un, one of the most brutal dictators in the world, just days after verbally slapping the prime minister of one of our closest, most valuable allies, Canada, was an offensive and inexcusable display of unfitness for the office. The combination of praise for our enemies and ridicule for our friends was embarrassing, of course, but it was also disgusting and potentially quite risky should our allies decide not to cooperate with the US while we are led by an unprepared, unpredictable, and temperamental emotional invalid.
Our president is a disgrace to the nation and to the office he holds.
Bill,
This is the inevitable consequences of an ill-qualified man in such powerful and important position. IMOP, he (Trump) is an illegitimate President to start (follow the Mueller Investigation). "I don't have to eat a whole cow..." Of these two points, America has herself to blame. Wake-up, America People! CMApparently, you need to take a civics course and figure out what constitutes a legitimate President. What about Trump makes him an illegitimate President?
-
@reformed said:
Wow Bill, turns out the DoD not knowing about the plans was FAKE NEWS. Imagine that.It's good to know SOMEONE in DoD was consulted. But those two consultations (I hope we find out how extensive or superficial they were) don't negate what I contended in my earlier post. In a parenthetical explanatory remark immediately after asserting the DoD's lack of knowledge, I wrote "(DoD reps told reporters that the US military will implement the president's decision as soon as they figure what he was talking about!)" The "NON-FAKE NEWSINESS" of that explanation is clear in the statement from USFK I quoted in an earlier post in this thread, and in an emailed statement issued by Lt. Col. Christopher Logan:
"The Department of Defense continues to work with the White House, the interagency, and our allies and partners on the way forward. We will provide additional information as it becomes available.”
Do you read the USFK statement as an indication that they knew what was coming?
And then there's the statement issued from South Korean president Moon Jae-in, in which he wrote, "At this moment we need to figure out President Trump's accurate meaning and intention of this comment.” Do you read that as an indication MOON knew what was coming?
-
I should give the president his due.
In a tweet this morning, the president pointed out what few observers had noticed: That as a result of the agreement he and Dictator Kim signed yesterday, "there is no longer a nuclear threat from North Korea."
Most observers were apparently fooled by the dozens of nuclear weapons North Korea still has in its arsenal, the advanced stage of the country's nuclear arms testing program, and the fact that the country is led by a mad man.
Still, it's good to know the threat is over. I hear a Disney NK is already in the works (they're going to convert some of the nuclear missiles into roller coaster seats). And it goes without saying that a Trump International Hotel is on its way to Pyongyang.
-
@Bill_Coley said:
I should give the president his due.In a tweet this morning, the president pointed out what few observers had noticed: That as a result of the agreement he and Dictator Kim signed yesterday, "there is no longer a nuclear threat from North Korea."
Most observers were apparently fooled by the dozens of nuclear weapons North Korea still has in its arsenal, the advanced stage of the country's nuclear arms testing program, and the fact that the country is led by a mad man.
Still, it's good to know the threat is over. I hear a Disney NK is already in the works (they're going to convert some of the nuclear missiles into roller coaster seats). And it goes without saying that a Trump International Hotel is on its way to Pyongyang.
My how the liberals change their tune. If Obama had made this agreement (like in Iran) you would be singing Trump's praises. Hypocrites.
-
@reformed said:
My how the liberals change their tune. If Obama had made this agreement (like in Iran) you would be singing Trump's praises. Hypocrites.1) It's hard to fathom that President Obama (or any other president in the last 40 years) would ever have agreed even to meet with Dictator Kim under current circumstances, let alone to sign the vacuous "agreement" President Trump signed with him.
2) As you probably know, reformed, negotiations on the Iran nuclear deal began in 2006, under the aegis of the P5+1. In November 2013, the parties reached agreement on a basic roadmap/structure of their efforts to reach a long-term agreement. Said long-term agreement, which we know as the JCPOA, was signed July 14, 2015, after at least 13 separate negotiation meetings over a 20 month period. There is no evidence that I'm aware of that the agreement our president and Dictator Kim signed was the product of similarly lengthy, detailed, and multi-state negotiations.
[And as for your your standing objection to the Iran nuclear deal, please remember that international inspectors, the Obama administration, AND the Trump administration ALL verified that Iran was in compliance with the JCPOA AT ALL TIMES.
There is good news in this week's developments, I must confess: The Trump-Kim agreement will save all parties money since it contains no inspection/verification/compliance mechanisms for anyone to enforce... which is not at all surprising given the vacuousness of the document signed by the president and the dictator.]
-
For some fast-paced and insightful analysis of Fox News host - and all-star Trumpster -Sean Hannity's take on the idea of American presidents meeting with dictators, check out the video at THIS LINK. Why, it's almost as if the right hand didn't know what the alt-right hand was doing!
-
@GaoLu said:
Trump is becoming quite the hero. An amazing man, a doer, an achiever. I understand his approval is equal to or higher than Reagan or Obama at this time.
I am presently visiting America, seeing Trumo stickers and signs, hearing so many people excited about what he is doing. I am seeing success, prosperity and growth, increasing sensibility and hope. Young people are excited and there is a positivity in the air I haven’t seen in many years.
All that and 2020 is coming!Accomplishment? "There is no there, there." "Fools gold!" CM
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
My how the liberals change their tune. If Obama had made this agreement (like in Iran) you would be singing Trump's praises. Hypocrites.1) It's hard to fathom that President Obama (or any other president in the last 40 years) would ever have agreed even to meet with Dictator Kim under current circumstances, let alone to sign the vacuous "agreement" President Trump signed with him.
He signed the Iran deal....
2) As you probably know, reformed, negotiations on the Iran nuclear deal began in 2006, under the aegis of the P5+1. In November 2013, the parties reached agreement on a basic roadmap/structure of their efforts to reach a long-term agreement. Said long-term agreement, which we know as the JCPOA, was signed July 14, 2015, after at least 13 separate negotiation meetings over a 20 month period. There is no evidence that I'm aware of that the agreement our president and Dictator Kim signed was the product of similarly lengthy, detailed, and multi-state negotiations.
[And as for your your standing objection to the Iran nuclear deal, please remember that international inspectors, the Obama administration, AND the Trump administration ALL verified that Iran was in compliance with the JCPOA AT ALL TIMES.
The problem was the deal itself, not the compliance or non-compliance.
There is good news in this week's developments, I must confess: The Trump-Kim agreement will save all parties money since it contains no inspection/verification/compliance mechanisms for anyone to enforce... which is not at all surprising given the vacuousness of the document signed by the president and the dictator.]
Goodness, it's basically an agreement to work on a deal, you realize this right?
-
@reformed said:
He signed the Iran deal....An Iran deal of substance, detail, compliance verification, and consequences for non-compliance, negotiated over nine years with the help of several international partners. AND Mr Obama did NOT meet with the Iranian president to sign the deal. AND he gave Congress the option of expressing its view (voting) on the agreement.
The Iran deal Mr Obama signed was NOT a vacuous collection of pre-exisiting information and agreements "negotiated" (more accurately, assembled) over a month or two without multi-national participation and signed by the US president while sitting next to and heaping praise upon one of the world's most despotic dictators.
[And as for your your standing objection to the Iran nuclear deal, please remember that international inspectors, the Obama administration, AND the Trump administration ALL verified that Iran was in compliance with the JCPOA AT ALL TIMES.
The problem was the deal itself, not the compliance or non-compliance.
We disagree as to whether the JCPOA was a good deal. Luckily, it doesn't matter whether we agree or disagree about the new "agreement" with North Korea. There's hardly anything in it to agree or disagree with.
Goodness, it's basically an agreement to work on a deal, you realize this right?
So you're saying the president of the United States traveled to Singapore to meet with and heap praise upon one of the world's most brutal dictators in order to sign an agreement... to work toward a future agreement. Might it have been better for administration underlings - say stowaways in the State Department - to be the ones to agree to pursue an agreement with, and to give glory, laud, and honor to a ruthless dictator?
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
Goodness, it's basically an agreement to work on a deal, you realize this right?So you're saying the president of the United States traveled to Singapore to meet with and heap praise upon one of the world's most brutal dictators in order to sign an agreement... to work toward a future agreement. Might it have been better for administration underlings - say stowaways in the State Department - to be the ones to agree to pursue an agreement with, and to give glory, laud, and honor to a ruthless dictator?
Yes, kind of a MOA if you will. It's progress, they are at the table. AND we have no idea what they discussed behind closed doors, remember that. And as far as the praise, it's called a tactic. Do you really think Trump thinks Kim is a great man? I don't. But you also don't go in bashing him and expect him to come to the table either.
If you have not figured it out yet, Trump is not politics as usual (THANK GOODNESS). He is a businessman and he is treating the country as a business, as he should. Is it a lot of show? Yes. Is it a lot of fuss? Yes. But it is CALCULATED. And it has been working beautifully for a year and a half now across the board.
So do I have a problem with it? No, because I look at what it actually is and not what liberals try to spin it to be.
-
@reformed said:
Yes, kind of a MOA if you will. It's progress, they are at the table. AND we have no idea what they discussed behind closed doors, remember that. And as far as the praise, it's called a tactic. Do you really think Trump thinks Kim is a great man? I don't. But you also don't go in bashing him and expect him to come to the table either."You also don't go in bashing him and expect him to come to the table..."? What were "little rocket man," "my nuclear button is bigger than his," "I would never call him 'short and fat'" and other of the president's greatest hits?
If you have not figured it out yet, Trump is not politics as usual (THANK GOODNESS). He is a businessman and he is treating the country as a business, as he should. Is it a lot of show? Yes. Is it a lot of fuss? Yes. But it is CALCULATED. And it has been working beautifully for a year and a half now across the board.
So do I have a problem with it? No, because I look at what it actually is and not what liberals try to spin it to be.
On the subject of the role of truth, morality, and values in governmental affairs, reformed, I read this as your most revealing post yet. You, like the president you support, see government as fundamentally transactional - whatever reliance on or disregard of truth, morality, and values is necessary for success in a given moment is acceptable to you.
So if the president of the United States wants to praise a despot - in effect, to lie about him and to abandon American values when it comes to despotic leaders - that's okay with you if it's done in pursuit of policy objectives with which you agree.
It's not possible for me to disagree more with you.
I'm wondering. When it comes to name-calling among Christians, you defend the practice in part because Jesus did it. Do you also claim that Jesus praised evil and immorality as tactics to achieve desirable ends? If so, can you cite a text in which he does so?
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
Yes, kind of a MOA if you will. It's progress, they are at the table. AND we have no idea what they discussed behind closed doors, remember that. And as far as the praise, it's called a tactic. Do you really think Trump thinks Kim is a great man? I don't. But you also don't go in bashing him and expect him to come to the table either."You also don't go in bashing him and expect him to come to the table..."? What were "little rocket man," "my nuclear button is bigger than his," "I would never call him 'short and fat'" and other of the president's greatest hits?
Notice that was a different time, different stage.
If you have not figured it out yet, Trump is not politics as usual (THANK GOODNESS). He is a businessman and he is treating the country as a business, as he should. Is it a lot of show? Yes. Is it a lot of fuss? Yes. But it is CALCULATED. And it has been working beautifully for a year and a half now across the board.
So do I have a problem with it? No, because I look at what it actually is and not what liberals try to spin it to be.
On the subject of the role of truth, morality, and values in governmental affairs, reformed, I read this as your most revealing post yet. You, like the president you support, see government as fundamentally transactional - whatever reliance on or disregard of truth, morality, and values is necessary for success in a given moment is acceptable to you.
What has he actually said about Kim? Take it in context with actual questions and actual answers.
So if the president of the United States wants to praise a despot - in effect, to lie about him and to abandon American values when it comes to despotic leaders - that's okay with you if it's done in pursuit of policy objectives with which you agree.
What has he lied about? I haven't seen all the comments about Kim. The only thing I saw was when asked about his treatment of his people Trump said "He is tough"
It's not possible for me to disagree more with you.
Nothing wrong with that.
I'm wondering. When it comes to name-calling among Christians, you defend the practice in part because Jesus did it. Do you also claim that Jesus praised evil and immorality as tactics to achieve desirable ends? If so, can you cite a text in which he does so?
Without context I am not sure how to answer. Jesus never praised evil certainly. But as far as name-calling, I think it depends on the circumstance and the types of names being used. So without context I can't really answer that.
![[Deleted User]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/fcddec765be35f238a0844bd23f54b59/?default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2F8ce8323767a20f0f45db140c4cd2cea1_200.png&rating=g&size=200)
