Morch

16 minutes ago, sanemax said:

They both came to an agreement , which is a success .

Had they not come to any agreement, that would have been a failure 

It's a peace of paper. If there are any specific details, they weren't disclosed. All that was released are general statements. To remind, Trump walked out on a much more detailed, comprehensive agreement after denigrating it for months, if not years. I'm sure it's a success as far as Kim goes, not so sure about the US and the rest of the world.

It could be the beginning of something positive, but the celebrations are premature - as are the pronouncements that something substantial was achieved.

4 minutes ago, KhunFred said:

How about a ONE STATE SOLUTION.  The place is called ISRAEL.....the people are called ISRAELIS. The rest need to leave.

What about them Arab citizens of Israel? Are they to "leave" as well?

And do tell - where will the Palestinian "leave" to? And who'll make them?

Getting away with maintaining the occupation is one thing, most of the time the world lives with that (mainly due to the Palestinians making it easy for Israel) - forcefully kicking out millions of people, though....doubtful it will go without a response.

Talking about bits from Trump's press conference, I found this one the most telling (starts 0:35):

Quote

"I may be wrong, I mean I may stand before you in six months and say, 'Hey I was wrong,'" said Trump, before adding, "I don't know that I'll ever admit that, but I'll find some kind of an excuse."

https://twitter.com/cnnbrk/status/1006473156868091904?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

1 minute ago, Rarebear said:

He announced that Kim committed to denuclearize of the Korean Peninsula and in exchange gave up American/Korean war games. 

He announces a whole lot of things. What's your point?

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

Did anyone watch the "trump" press conference in Singapore, his first full press conference in over a year? Many bizarre moments as expected. He basically bragged that this one meeting (which objectively is only an agreement to START on a process) to have saved thirty or forty MILLION people. Talk about WILD exaggeration. Once a con man always a con man. He's basically lobbying for that Nobel Prize. He didn't save anyone today and if this start actually amounts to something real,

Half the "con" talk is aimed at conning his own ego into maintaining the illusion he's da best.

1 minute ago, sanemax said:

No, it was you who misunderstood .

The subject matter is about Trump & Kim , the USA & NK and that is what I was talking about .

   Yes, there are still other disputes in the regiona, Spratley Islands , Taiwan , Northern Japanese island among others 

   And I did nt suggest that all those issues had been sorted out .

You misunderstood what I meant , although it may be that you deliberately misunderstood what I meant .

  

I don't think so. You made a general statement. It was commented on several times, and you just so fit to correct it. But as pointed out, your assertion still doesn't hold, even in its limited version.

1 minute ago, sanemax said:

I did mean all the hostilities surrounding NK's quest for nuclear bombs .

But as Trump does, you actually made a wider claim. And even in the current version, it's not so much a fact as a comment on what may be.

5 minutes ago, sanemax said:

North Korea did threaten to attack Guam , in America .

That is a fact .

If one ignores them North Korean propaganda clips about attacks carried out on the US, including the White House....

20 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Trump sending the U.S navy to the Korean peninsular is a fact .

Trump subsequently meeting with Kim is a fact .

Trump meeting with Kim has diffused the hostile environment , that is a fact .

USA & NK today signed an agreement for future peace and prosperity and security in the region , that is a fact .

   That seems to be what everyone wanted , everyones happy .

China , USA , NK , SK ,E.U., & Japan will all be content with that

The only unhappy ( with the outcome)people seem to be the anti Trump brigade

Those are facts .

Suggesting that it all may go wrong in the future is just a non factual prediciction

The first two are facts. The third isn't. There was a meeting between two apparently volatile leaders, who aren't known for keeping their word, and acting belligerently. I prefer to pronounce such things a fact, after it's proven that they are. Not all that interested in the instant, ready-made reality tv version.

The agreement signed (or at least what was made public) doesn't specify anything much. More a deceleration of intents. Worth bearing in mind the same POTUS tossed aside a much more comprehensive and in-depth agreement just a short while back. To imagine that the papers signed amount to anything resembling the scope of that other, discarded agreement is a joke.

I don't know that all the countries named are "happy", or that they fully buy into this without knowing details. Once more, that's something you allege, rather than a fact. IMO, most will carry a supportive outer display while reserving judgement until details are known and advances made. 

Suggesting that it might go wrong is based upon both parties track record, which you insist very hard on ignoring. On the other hand assuming it will all go well is somehow a "fact" rather than "non factual prediction". About as consistent as they get.... 

@tonbridgebrit

This here isn't China, so you don't get to tell posters not to post about China. Even if they don't care much for China's policies.

The poster I replied to claimed Trump defused all aggression etc. - the fact stands that there's still a whole lot of that around. And that China is involved in quite a bit of it.

20 minutes ago, sanemax said:

I do believe that Trump sending the U.S . Navy to the Korean peninsular triggered the whole peace talks .

   Last year , Trump and Kim were squaring up to each, threatening to attack each others Countries with nuclear weapons .

   Today , they are talking, shaking hands and making plans for future talks .

That is indeed a diffusion from hostiles , and the whole area is affected.

Hostilities may flare yup again in the future , but now, the hostilities have been defused .

   I do believe that all hostilities will cease (in the future) and that NK will now join the world community 

You can believe what you will. What we're dealing with here are facts. Not what "may", but what "is".

You announcing that Trump "defused the whole aggressive , confrontational attitude from the area" is not factual. Are all countries involved fully subscribed to whatever was agreed upon? Is it even clear what was agreed upon? Is there nothing in the two leaders past, and the dynamics of the conflict which gives reason to doubt such changes are a reality? 

You can try and spin it as an anti-Trump thing. Whatever. The point made is simple - wait and see how things pan out. Apparently, that's not good enough for some. Full adulation need to be engaged or something.

@tonbridgebrit

<removed>

You have no idea if you're "watching history". Both leaders have a history of not living up to their statements and words. That you assure this time it's different carries very little weight. I prefer to judge this on how it pans out, rather than on how it may pan out. That difference.

You have no particular insight as to why Kim did or does anything. All the more so with regard to what he may or may not do in the future. Same goes for what he "knew" or "knows".

Once more, you're not speaking for "everybody", even if you pretend you are. And you "but but but Hillary" nonsense is about as pointless as it ever was.

Marketing/Publicity stunt....

What is potcoin? Marijuana cryptocurrency flies Dennis Rodman to Trump-Kim summit

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/potcoin-marijuana-cryptocurrency-dennis-rodman-tump-kim-summit-us-north-korea-a8393631.html

28 minutes ago, lionsincity said:

RIP

He's (not) dead, Jim.

Kudlow Is 'Doing Well' After Mild Heart Attack, White House Says

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-12/trump-says-economic-adviser-kudlow-suffered-heart-attack

4 minutes ago, sanemax said:

I did state that I would address that point first .

I mentioned Obama's supporters and how their would react and asked a question.

We all know the answer to that question .

Obama would be viewed in a positive light .

Which was my point .

People should be judged on their actions , each particular action .

Maybe Trump should have taken Obama along to Singapore , just so that the anti -Trump brigade can give this meeting some praise 

I don't care much for what you "stated". You simply deflected a valid point made. Then claimed your "point" wasn't answered, when in fact it was. Try to spin it as much as you like being about Obama, it isn't. You wish to ignore how Trump came by the attitude he generates, go right ahead. You wish to pretend having no idea why Obama (not that he got much to do with the topic) was perceived differently - be my guest.

2 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Just to address that point : I simply asked the question about whether the anti-Trump brigade would have a different opinion of the meeting in Singapore, had it been Obama there instead of Trump .

   Would the Obama supporting anti-Trump brigade have poured so much scorn on Obama , had he been there instead of Trump ?

Try reading my post again, instead of quoting just one line of it. Already answered your "point". Naturally, you simply deflected the issue about Trump's track record and credibility, and went for the Obama spin.

2 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Defused the whole aggressive , confrontational attitude from the area : North Korea , South Korea , Japan , USA , E.U , China were all squaring up to each other with a possible conflict between USA & China all because of the actions of NK.

    This meeting quite possibly will put an end to hostilities .

Adverting a world war and bringing peace to the region is quite an achievement 

You're simply making stuff up. This did not happen, but may happen. In time.

There was no World War averted, and tensions between some Asian countries (notably, China) didn't go anywhere.

58 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Morch : Why are you confused about this post ?

Because I don't think he (Trump) "achieved something others could not". Other than a photo-op, what was actually "achieved"? And I mean from the US point of view, not Trump's nor Kim's.

3 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Some of the Trump supporters are just as bad as the anti-Trump brigade , critical of everything Obama/Clinton said .

   I do feel that that is the wrong approach .

Actions/words should be judged on the content , rather than on who said them

I'll buy into that when I'll notice such objections directed at Trump's or Trump supporters' comments.

Also, allow me to disagree with the premise - ignoring who says what, or their relevant record is not a good idea. Not by a long shot. If a person is known to lie (just an example), should this be swept aside and each of his statements be treated as if that's irrelevant?