Not just theatre - U.S. officials defend Trump-Kim meeting

[dunroaming]

3 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

"If you were to put Kim and Trump in a room together then Kim is by far the more savvy." 

 

Based on what? Alright, Trump's a doofus, yeah. What do we actually know about Kim? It's not like he was voted in, not like the decision making processes in NK are all too clear, and not like his policies took the country places. Neither is a self-made man, neither is a scholar, neither seems the paragon of mental stability....

 

Well there is stupid and there is stupid.  In my opinion based on Trump rather than Kim you simply can't get any dumber than him.  Kim was educated in Switzerland and holds two degrees not that that alone makes him more savvy.  In fact degrees from North Korea are about as valid as degrees from Thailand.  In other words they were also probably just bought.

 

But you are right, I am not basing my statement on documented evidence.  Just on everyday events from both sides.

[Morch]

10 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

Well there is stupid and there is stupid.  In my opinion based on Trump rather than Kim you simply can't get any dumber than him.  Kim was educated in Switzerland and holds two degrees not that that alone makes him more savvy.  In fact degrees from North Korea are about as valid as degrees from Thailand.  In other words they were also probably just bought.

 

But you are right, I am not basing my statement on documented evidence.  Just on everyday events from both sides.

 

Both went to private schools as teens. Neither excelled. Kim's "degrees" are, as mentioned, probably suspect (one from Kim Il-sung University in NK, the an honorary degree from a private university in Malaysia). I'll stick with the view that neither is particularly well educated.

 

I think we just get more exposure, on a daily basis, to Trump's nonsense. That's all.

[dunroaming]

3 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Both went to private schools as teens. Neither excelled. Kim's "degrees" are, as mentioned, probably suspect (one from Kim Il-sung University in NK, the an honorary degree from a private university in Malaysia). I'll stick with the view that neither is particularly well educated.

 

I think we just get more exposure, on a daily basis, to Trump's nonsense. That's all.

Valid point.

[Mac98]

They won't go to each other's capital. US will suggest Guam, where MacArthur met with Truman in 1950 when the general had the N. Korean army on the run. Surprisingly, Kim will happily agree. Upon Trump's arrival Kim will nuke the island, saying, "Little Rocket Man" indeed!

[dunroaming]

2 minutes ago, Mac98 said:

They won't go to each other's capital. US will suggest Guam, where MacArthur met with Truman in 1950 when the general had the N. Korean army on the run. Surprisingly, Kim will happily agree. Upon Trump's arrival Kim will nuke the island, saying, "Little Rocket Man" indeed!

I think the venue for the meeting will be interesting.  Both of these paranoid nutcases will be cautious as to where to meet.  Can you imagine the security arrangements from both sides 

[stevenl]

4 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Yes, if the want peace as they claim. 

Ah, and USA doesn't want peace since threatening behaviour continues.

[Thaidream]

The meeting site will most likely be China or SKorea.  Kim seeks the eventual reunification of Korea but what he initially seeks is a formal end to the Korean War with his regime guaranteed.  SKorea also wants the same  as they know full well current reunification would mean Kim in charge.

China does not want a reunification  as it would put a very powerful military on its doorstep. China wants a peaceful resolution with the Kim regime in place and peaceful visits between the South and North. 

America does not want reunification unless under a Democracy but it will accept the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and possibly a guarantee by China taking possession of the North's nuclear arsenal and a promise that within a certain period US Troops will be reduced to a small level and mostly relocated to either Japan or possibly Vietnam (Thailand a choice also)

 

The more NKorea is exposed to Capitalism the more chance that at some point it will go the way of China in that it will opt for a better life for its citizens  as long as the Kim dynasty can remain in power.

 

This is going to be a complicated negotiation and it will take real professionals to pull it off and not the minions within the Trump inner circle.

[mikebike]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

In no sense whatsoever, unless you're into hyperbole. The US forces deployed in SK and conducting exercises with SK cannot do what you claim. Not with ease, and not without NK almost immediate retaliation against SK.

 

This is not just about the possible threat to the US, but the actual threat to SK (and maybe Japan as well).

Why do you think the US is restricted to traditional warfare. Their nuclear arsenal is more than capable of what I suggested. Also never suggested that there wouldn't be collateral damage if the US annihilated NK. There is an actual threat to NK from their point of view, just as there is an actual threat to the US and her regional allies from their perspective.

[mikebike]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

A huge difference is that no one--the US, South Korea, or China--want to invade North Korea.  Nobody wants the responsibility of repairing that backwards, impoverished country.   However North Korea would love to unite the Korean peninsula under the Kim dynasty.  That is why every act of military aggression between the Korea's since, and including, the war, was initiated by North Korea.

 

In short, South Korea's and the United States' militaries are there to defend South Korea, North Korea's military is geared toward offense and invasion.

The NK military has one mandate. Protect the supreme leader from threats within and without. If you do not think Kim feels threatened (with or without reason) by the USA you have a problem putting yourself into someone else's shoes.

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, mikebike said:

Why do you think the US is restricted to traditional warfare. Their nuclear arsenal is more than capable of what I suggested. Also never suggested that there wouldn't be collateral damage if the US annihilated NK. There is an actual threat to NK from their point of view, just as there is an actual threat to the US and her regional allies from their perspective.

 

Your original comments in this exchange had to do with the SK/US joint military exercises - which I don't think have a lot to do with the US's nuclear arsenal. As far as I'm aware these are no longer deployed in SK (since the early 90's). If you wish to move the goalposts, that's alright - just be clear about it.

 

The US forces deployed in SK are not capable of what you suggested. The threat to NK (or rather, Kim) is not from these joint military exercises. If what you're on about is suggesting that the US fully disarm itself from nuclear weapons first - ain't gonna happen, and no one expects it to.

 

 

[Morch]

12 minutes ago, mikebike said:

The NK military has one mandate. Protect the supreme leader from threats within and without. If you do not think Kim feels threatened (with or without reason) by the USA you have a problem putting yourself into someone else's shoes.

 

By holding Seoul hostage?

[boomerangutang]

3 hours ago, Morch said:

"If you were to put Kim and Trump in a room together then Kim is by far the more savvy." 

Based on what? Alright, Trump's a doofus, yeah. What do we actually know about Kim? It's not like he was voted in, not like the decision making processes in NK are all too clear, and not like his policies took the country places. Neither is a self-made man, neither is a scholar, neither seems the paragon of mental stability....

Does Kim have a string of daily lies behind him?  Even if Kim is rather dumb, he's smarter than Trump.  Neither is Trump more reliable or good on his word.  I could list hundreds of instances where Trump lied and/or went back on or reversed what he said earlier. 

 

The meeting is about 'FACE.'   Both men are trying to gain some face.  It doesn't matter (to Trump fans or to NK folks) whether anything is accomplished.  It's the theater that counts.

 

Here's what I think will happen.  Note: the US is already making pre-conditions - which Kim won't agree to.  A meeting with any useful agreement is as dead as Mexico agreeing to pay for T's stupid wall.

 

Trump is hoping this meeting BS will hog some of the headlines, for primarily the following three reasons:

#1.  It diverts, somewhat, from the Mueller investigation.

#2.  It makes Trump appear presidential.  Covfefe.

#3.  Trump hopes this will drag out through early November, and hopefully garner some votes for his right-winger candidates.  After that, Trump will probably lose interest, like he has with gun safety issues.

[dunroaming]

3 hours ago, Thaidream said:

The meeting site will most likely be China or SKorea.  Kim seeks the eventual reunification of Korea but what he initially seeks is a formal end to the Korean War with his regime guaranteed.  SKorea also wants the same  as they know full well current reunification would mean Kim in charge.

China does not want a reunification  as it would put a very powerful military on its doorstep. China wants a peaceful resolution with the Kim regime in place and peaceful visits between the South and North. 

America does not want reunification unless under a Democracy but it will accept the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and possibly a guarantee by China taking possession of the North's nuclear arsenal and a promise that within a certain period US Troops will be reduced to a small level and mostly relocated to either Japan or possibly Vietnam (Thailand a choice also)

 

The more NKorea is exposed to Capitalism the more chance that at some point it will go the way of China in that it will opt for a better life for its citizens  as long as the Kim dynasty can remain in power.

 

This is going to be a complicated negotiation and it will take real professionals to pull it off and not the minions within the Trump inner circle.

I would think China as the most obvious venue.  I see the logic in your post but expecting realistic solutions are a bit of a stretch for these guys.

[Morch]

46 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

Does Kim have a string of daily lies behind him?  Even if Kim is rather dumb, he's smarter than Trump.  Neither is Trump more reliable or good on his word.  I could list hundreds of instances where Trump lied and/or went back on or reversed what he said earlier. 

 

The meeting is about 'FACE.'   Both men are trying to gain some face.  It doesn't matter (to Trump fans or to NK folks) whether anything is accomplished.  It's the theater that counts.

 

Here's what I think will happen.  Note: the US is already making pre-conditions - which Kim won't agree to.  A meeting with any useful agreement is as dead as Mexico agreeing to pay for T's stupid wall.

 

Trump is hoping this meeting BS will hog some of the headlines, for primarily the following three reasons:

#1.  It diverts, somewhat, from the Mueller investigation.

#2.  It makes Trump appear presidential.  Covfefe.

#3.  Trump hopes this will drag out through early November, and hopefully garner some votes for his right-winger candidates.  After that, Trump will probably lose interest, like he has with gun safety issues.

 

I would say that Kim actually lies more than Trump, constantly, and to his people's greater misfortune. The whole foundation of Kim's rule relies on incessant propaganda and brainwashing. The current Kim is the third installation in the series. Trump's got a ways to go getting anywhere near that.

 

You have absolutely no idea how smart Kim is. All you know is Trump. Jumping to extreme conclusions based on this is rather lame. You can list whatever you like - the point stands, that Trump decision making (or what passes for such) is relatively open for scrutiny and criticism, whereas the same cannot be said of Kim.

 

Going on and on about what "will happen" is all very well - but none of your comments actually says anything meaningful or well-founded with regard to Kim's point of view. It's all about Trump as far as you're concerned.  Sort of makes the point that people focus on what they are exposed to.

 

[boomerangutang]

10 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

I would say that Kim actually lies more than Trump, constantly, and to his people's greater misfortune. The whole foundation of Kim's rule relies on incessant propaganda and brainwashing. The current Kim is the third installation in the series. Trump's got a ways to go getting anywhere near that.

 

You have absolutely no idea how smart Kim is. All you know is Trump. Jumping to extreme conclusions based on this is rather lame. You can list whatever you like - the point stands, that Trump decision making (or what passes for such) is relatively open for scrutiny and criticism, whereas the same cannot be said of Kim.

 

Going on and on about what "will happen" is all very well - but none of your comments actually says anything meaningful or well-founded with regard to Kim's point of view. It's all about Trump as far as you're concerned.  Sort of makes the point that people focus on what they are exposed to.

I'm not saying Kim is smart, but I'm insinuating Trump is dumber.  A clay ball is smarter than Trump.

 

Does Kim do 180 degree changes on policy, weekly, as Trump?

Does Kim deny all sorts of things (Stormy affair, affairs with 14 other women, the Russia thing is a hoax)?

 

One thing Kim doesn't do, which Trump does daily, is openly diss the US press corps and some of the finest politicians in DC and elsewhere in the US. 

 

The icing on the cake was over the weekend, where Trump went on and on ad nauseum putting down good Americans,  ....but then when T mentioned Kim, and some boos rang out,  TRUMP QUICKLY HUSHED UP THE BOOS. 

 

Can it be any clearer?   Trump is actively working for the best interests of Russia, NK and China, while shitting on Americans.   

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

I'm not saying Kim is smart, but I'm insinuating Trump is dumber.  A clay ball is smarter than Trump.

 

Does Kim do 180 degree changes on policy, weekly, as Trump?

Does Kim deny all sorts of things (Stormy affair, affairs with 14 other women, the Russia thing is a hoax)?

 

One thing Kim doesn't do, which Trump does daily, is openly diss the US press corps and some of the finest politicians in DC and elsewhere in the US. 

 

The icing on the cake was over the weekend, where Trump went on and on ad nauseum putting down good Americans,  ....but then when T mentioned Kim, and some boos rang out,  TRUMP QUICKLY HUSHED UP THE BOOS. 

 

Can it be any clearer?   Trump is actively working for the best interests of Russia, NK and China, while shitting on Americans.   

 

Whatever you're insinuating is meaningless without knowing anything concrete about Kim. That you announce this or that is equally pointless. I get it some feel the urge to rant about Trump to the point they sound like him, but seriously.

 

You (and me, and everyone else) know very little about Kim's decision making prowess, habits and whatnot. Looking at how his country and people are doing, I'll take a wild guess that better choices could have been made. Or at least, more benevolent ones. Kim is not subjected to anything resembling the level of detailed coverage Trump does, if he was, there might have been some point to your posts.

 

Last time I checked Trump didn't execute his relatives (some in bizarre ways). I don't know how that tallies against having an affair with a porn star (I think Kim had some affairs himself, but details are murky). And yes, Kin will have little issue applying whatever spin he likes on anything - the level of control exercised on the media is nothing like the US. But you already knew that...

 

As for openly "dissing" the North Korean press - what press? Politicians? Like them party cronies who clap or laugh like madmen whenever he says anything? Trump is nowhere near that.

 

Any attempt to portray Trump, or the US under Trump as being on par or worse with NK under Kim is pathetic and bizarre. The very fact that you can go on posting such rants is quite a tell...

 

[boomerangutang]

I'll say it again:  Kim is flawed and dangerous.   Trump is worse.

[boomerangutang]

Look at Trump's recent Mussolinni-like speech in PA.

 

Morch, this may bother you, but I'm going to say it anyway:

 

Kim appears to give a crap for all N.Koreans, except those breaking laws.

Trump cares only for the 1/3 of his voters.   Trump talks more shit about the other 2/3 of Americans than Kim, Putin and Xi combined.   In sum, Kim seems to be more decent towards the 2/3 of Americans Trump hates, than Trump himself.   At least Kim knows how to be a gentleman in mixed company.  Trump has no idea.  Kim doesn't talk shit about his own politburo.  Trump talks shit about half the politicians in DC.   Connect the dots.

 

Trump thinks he's winning over Americans by his anti-US rhetoric, but he's only getting his 1/3 to cheer.  The majority of Americans are turning off to him like a brown spot on underwear.  He's losing supporters daily.

 

 

[Morch]

11 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

I'll say it again:  Kim is flawed and dangerous.   Trump is worse.

 

You can say whatever you like. Doesn't make it true or even correct.

 

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

Look at Trump's recent Mussolinni-like speech in PA.

 

Morch, this may bother you, but I'm going to say it anyway:

 

Kim appears to give a crap for all N.Koreans, except those breaking laws.

Trump cares only for the 1/3 of his voters.   Trump talks more shit about the other 2/3 of Americans than Kim, Putin and Xi combined.   In sum, Kim seems to be more decent towards the 2/3 of Americans Trump hates, than Trump himself.   At least Kim knows how to be a gentleman in mixed company.  Trump has no idea.  Kim doesn't talk shit about his own politburo.  Trump talks shit about half the politicians in DC.   Connect the dots.

 

Trump thinks he's winning over Americans by his anti-US rhetoric, but he's only getting his 1/3 to cheer.  The majority of Americans are turning off to him like a brown spot on underwear.  He's losing supporters daily.

 

 

 

Your nonsense doesn't bother me as such, just finding the hijacking of topics for your anti-Trump rants, using whatever as a pretext to be very Trumpian.

 

People in the US can vote. There's a special prosecutor investigation going on. Media isn't too shy about having a go at Trump. People in  the US are free to leave the country. Go about the  country. Do not have to join the military. And on and on.

 

All the BS offered doesn't amount to life in NK, or to anything coming close to Kim's regime and rule. And no, the "calculations" offered do not make the premise above less inane. You're saying it yourself. Trump is losing supporters. Doesn't matter if it's accurate. The point is that it is a valid concept. Now try applying the same in NK, then go on about how much Kim cares.

[lannarebirth]

5 hours ago, stevenl said:

Ah, and USA doesn't want peace since threatening behaviour continues.

Well, there's the peace that's easily achieved in the short term, that comes from giving the belligerent party what they want, Then there's the harder won peace that indicates to the belligerent party that continuation of the path they are on will come at too great a cost and of course you have to make periodic demonstrations of that claim.

 

I think our interests are very closely aligned with those of Japan, South Korea to a lesser extent, and China hardly at all. I am less concerned about the US getting taken in by NK than I am by the US getting taken in by China in furtherance of it's goal of regional dominance.

[stevenl]

7 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

Well, there's the peace that's easily achieved in the short term, that comes from giving the belligerent party what they want, Then there's the harder won peace that indicates to the belligerent party that continuation of the path they are on will come at too great a cost and of course you have to make periodic demonstrations of that claim.

 

I think our interests are very closely aligned with those of Japan, South Korea to a lesser extent, and China hardly at all. I am less concerned about the US getting taken in by NK than I am by the US getting taken in by China in furtherance of it's goal of regional dominance.

Thanks for underlining my point.

[heybruce]

21 hours ago, mikebike said:

The NK military has one mandate. Protect the supreme leader from threats within and without. If you do not think Kim feels threatened (with or without reason) by the USA you have a problem putting yourself into someone else's shoes.

If you don't think South Korea feels threatened by the thousands of artillery pieces and rockets North Korea is pointing at Seoul, you have the same problem.

 

As I already pointed out, every act of military aggression on the Korean peninsula since the end of World War II was initiated by North Korea.  That includes the Korean War.

[boomerangutang]

18 hours ago, Morch said:

You can say whatever you like. Doesn't make it true or even correct.

I think the chances are about 1 in 25 that the two will meet.  For Trump, it's a diversion, and a way to appear presidential for his 1/3 of voters.

 

If the meet, I wouldn't be surprised if Trump brings props to show how much more powerful the US is than NK.  He could bring a red-painted pencil (to show NK's capability) and a red painted Thermos to indicate the US's prowess.  As much as anything else, it's the theater of the meeting that's important for Trump.  

[mikebike]

2 hours ago, heybruce said:

If you don't think South Korea feels threatened by the thousands of artillery pieces and rockets North Korea is pointing at Seoul, you have the same problem.

 

As I already pointed out, every act of military aggression on the Korean peninsula since the end of World War II was initiated by North Korea.  That includes the Korean War.

Ok. So we are in agreement in the first paragraph. NK feels threatened. By the USA and her allies as I said.

 

So. Who cares who caused historical aggression? Possibly the Kim family adheres to the "a good offence is the best defence" school of thought.

 

My original point was, as of today, both sides feel threatened but ONLY one side has the ability to annihilate the other. Is this really controversial?

[Morch]

4 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

I think the chances are about 1 in 25 that the two will meet.  For Trump, it's a diversion, and a way to appear presidential for his 1/3 of voters.

 

If the meet, I wouldn't be surprised if Trump brings props to show how much more powerful the US is than NK.  He could bring a red-painted pencil (to show NK's capability) and a red painted Thermos to indicate the US's prowess.  As much as anything else, it's the theater of the meeting that's important for Trump.  

 

More partisan drivel. About as coherent or realistic as one of Trump's tweets. Covfefe, if you like.

[Morch]

2 hours ago, mikebike said:

Ok. So we are in agreement in the first paragraph. NK feels threatened. By the USA and her allies as I said.

 

So. Who cares who caused historical aggression? Possibly the Kim family adheres to the "a good offence is the best defence" school of thought.

 

My original point was, as of today, both sides feel threatened but ONLY one side has the ability to annihilate the other. Is this really controversial?

 

The point made, I think, was that both sides (as in NK and SK) can feel threatened. This is not limited to NK only. The US being threatened, is a relatively new development, and another issue.

 

This isn't about "historical aggression", trying to paint things as if they ancient history or something won't cut it. NK is not a good neighbor, spin away. Musings about the Kim family adhering to this or that are irrelevant - the fact stands that the initiated most such instances.

 

You original point was bogus and still is. SK does not have the ability to annihilate NK. The US forces stationed in SK do not have the ability to annihilate NK. NK, on the other  hand can devastate, if not annihilate Seoul. That's using conventional weapons. Adding their nuclear capability to the mix, maybe changes the equation. 

[heybruce]

4 hours ago, mikebike said:

Ok. So we are in agreement in the first paragraph. NK feels threatened. By the USA and her allies as I said.

 

So. Who cares who caused historical aggression? Possibly the Kim family adheres to the "a good offence is the best defence" school of thought.

 

My original point was, as of today, both sides feel threatened but ONLY one side has the ability to annihilate the other. Is this really controversial?

That historical aggression was not that long ago.  Launching missiles over the territory of our allies is pretty aggressive.  And while North Korea may not have the power to completely wipe out South Korea, it can kill a large portion of South Korea's population and cause massive destruction to its economy and infrastructure.

 

My point is that only one side has expressed a willingness to use its military to dominate the Korean peninsula, and the US and South Korea need a strong military alliance to prevent this from happening.

[mrdome]

Good background info here, also nice to be reminded again how just months ago 'pocket Caligula' kept tweeting that "Talking is not the answer!".

 

He'll change his mind again soon, no doubt.

 

Oh, and goodbye Rex Tillerson, we all knew this moment would come.

 

 

[boomerangutang]

I challenge anyone on this thread to name one American who would be worse than Trump - for negotiation with Kim. Similarly, can they name one prominent American (not counting Alex Jones, or Fox people) who is more anti-American.  What other American denigrates half the politicians in DC while showering praise on Xi, Kim and Putin? 

 

 

Edited March 14, 2018 by boomerangutang