Trump’s top general calls ex-president ‘fascist to the core’

[Rocking Robert]

If NK Keeps it’s nukes and missiles. Than SK, Japan and Taiwan.  Should be able to develop there own

[Morch]

29 minutes ago, Rocking Robert said:

If NK Keeps it’s nukes and missiles. Than SK, Japan and Taiwan.  Should be able to develop there own

 

Because one country acting badly implies nuclear proliferation is a good thing? 

[lannarebirth]

6 hours ago, Morch said:

 

I expected you to say as  much.

I guesss I walked into that one. Touche'.

[Cryingdick]

2 hours ago, Rocking Robert said:

If NK Keeps it’s nukes and missiles. Than SK, Japan and Taiwan.  Should be able to develop there own

 

I am pretty sure Japan could assemble a nuclear bomb in about 15 minutes should it come to that.

[Redline]

17 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I think the US is the stronger party and that it should maintain strong sanctions until verifiable progress is made. It should then maintain other lesser sanctions until still more progress is made. I would include sanctioning third party countries such as China and Russia if they are complicit in NK's breaking of sanctions. Then, we should switch to the carrot rather than the stick and give such aid as is required to bring NK into the fold of lawful (mostly) nations. I don't claim any of that will work, but it it is in my view a better strategy than watching them become ever more powerful and belligerant, while doing nothing to prevent it, as we witnessed these past few administrations.

Do you think this has been tried before ???? and someone made a ill informed decision to change it, and stop the training with South Korea and Japan, and now China and North Korea are buddies again?  Someone made an error for their own self grandiosity.  Kim is in the spotlight, and the sanctions have been diluted 

Edited March 6, 2019 by Redline

[jerojero]

What happened to the LOVE Donnie proclaimed that was between him and Kimmie? What happened to the Master Deal-maker Trumpy? Talk about fake news!

[Tug]

Embargo the cr%& out of them make sure the Korean people know we will help them if they get rid of Kim and their nukes China will get over it

[Sealbash]

Well, that worked out well for dim Donny. We are back pretty much where we started, although thanks to Don, Kim and NK have been given far more geopolitical legitimacy and China is more or less back trading with them as if sanctions never existed. 

 

Bolton and Trump are both complete clowns. 

Which administration was successful?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[mtls2005]

13 hours ago, CGW said:

Given the USA recent history & warmongering, if I was him I would be keeping my nucs ???? 

The Libyan disarmament issue was peacefully resolved in December 2003 when Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi agreed to eliminate his country's weapons of mass destruction program, including a decades-old nuclear weapons program.

 

Didn't end well for him.

 

 

Amazing that 2nd Amendment defenders like to say "I Will Give Up My Gun When They Peel My Cold Dead Fingers From Around It.", and then wonder why Kim won't give up his biggest, baddest GUN?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 7, 2019 by mtls2005

[Sydebolle]

It's time to retire Bolton, he has been too much of a headache, nuisance and thinks he is the King of the world.

Why should Kim give up his only trump card (no pun intended)? How stupid is Bolton? Kim started walking in the right direction and he will start to seriously denuclearize once the last American troop has been ordered back from South Korea and Japan. I would not want any troops in my fore garden (see Putin and the 4'000 US troops along the Polish-Russian border). Once the solder boys are gone, the Chinese will curb down their support for North Korea and things will normalize. Why should North Korea nuke around for no reason? Guam is not interesting enough and no ICBM will reach the US in time as it would be destroyed midair - and everybody knows that - except dick"ç*%"d Bolton ist seems. 

Retire John Bolton with a handshake, he is 70 and should be playing with grand children. Give him a mustache trimmer on the way out; it always looked unkept and disgusting and not quite statesman like! 

[scorecard]

21 hours ago, CGW said:

Given the USA recent history & warmongering, if I was him I would be keeping my nucs ???? 

Especially with bolton in the mix, always looking for opportunities to be mr. tough guy, dangerous. 

[CGW]

2 minutes ago, scorecard said:

Especially with bolton in the mix, always looking for opportunities to be mr. tough guy, dangerous. 

Yeh, good old "Bomber Bolton" he earned that name, his cure all........................

[Morch]

5 hours ago, Sydebolle said:

It's time to retire Bolton, he has been too much of a headache, nuisance and thinks he is the King of the world.

Why should Kim give up his only trump card (no pun intended)? How stupid is Bolton? Kim started walking in the right direction and he will start to seriously denuclearize once the last American troop has been ordered back from South Korea and Japan. I would not want any troops in my fore garden (see Putin and the 4'000 US troops along the Polish-Russian border). Once the solder boys are gone, the Chinese will curb down their support for North Korea and things will normalize. Why should North Korea nuke around for no reason? Guam is not interesting enough and no ICBM will reach the US in time as it would be destroyed midair - and everybody knows that - except dick"ç*%"d Bolton ist seems. 

Retire John Bolton with a handshake, he is 70 and should be playing with grand children. Give him a mustache trimmer on the way out; it always looked unkept and disgusting and not quite statesman like! 

 

I doubt your crystal ball is anywhere near tuned. Never mind them fantasies about missiles surely being destroyed "midair" (or asserting "everybody knows that"). You've no idea what Kim would or wouldn't do. You've no idea what China would or wouldn't do. All you can offer are guesses, heavily painted by an anti-USA sentiment. Nothing more.

 

And yes, Bolton is a menace, and it would be better if he wasn't around. Then again, if he wasn't, would there be someone to tell Trump not to give Kim anything he wishes in exchange for rating, controlling the news cycle and treating that over-sized ego to a shot at a Nobel Prize?

[Morch]

5 hours ago, scorecard said:

Especially with bolton in the mix, always looking for opportunities to be mr. tough guy, dangerous. 

 

What's more dangerous - Bolton as a super-hawk, or Trump going along with whatever Kim wishes as long as it keeps public attention away from ongoing investigation, and props his ego?

[scorecard]

2 hours ago, Morch said:

 

What's more dangerous - Bolton as a super-hawk, or Trump going along with whatever Kim wishes as long as it keeps public attention away from ongoing investigation, and props his ego?

Good question.

[jak2002003]

How about America get rid of their Nuclear weapons?  Why should America have them and not North Korea?   

 

If America and North Korea could both denuclearise together.  

 

 

[Morch]

37 minutes ago, jak2002003 said:

How about America get rid of their Nuclear weapons?  Why should America have them and not North Korea?   

 

If America and North Korea could both denuclearise together.  

 

 

 

May want to read up on the NPT. May wish to consider that there are other nuclear capable countries out there other than the USA and NK. I'm sure China and Russia will support your suggestion, though.

 

When it comes to nuclear proliferation, the focus is more on containment of the current situation. That's not ideal, but ideal ain't going to happen anytime soon. It may also not be the most "fair" paradigm. Then again, given the stakes, second best and imperfect is, IMO, preferable to everyone having them.

 

 

[scorecard]

9 hours ago, Morch said:

 

I doubt your crystal ball is anywhere near tuned. Never mind them fantasies about missiles surely being destroyed "midair" (or asserting "everybody knows that"). You've no idea what Kim would or wouldn't do. You've no idea what China would or wouldn't do. All you can offer are guesses, heavily painted by an anti-USA sentiment. Nothing more.

 

And yes, Bolton is a menace, and it would be better if he wasn't around. Then again, if he wasn't, would there be someone to tell Trump not to give Kim anything he wishes in exchange for rating, controlling the news cycle and treating that over-sized ego to a shot at a Nobel Prize?

Funny comment, trump invented stubborn and no listening to nobody, if bolton tries to push him bolton will be the next under the bus.

 

 

[Morch]

3 hours ago, scorecard said:

Funny comment, trump invented stubborn and no listening to nobody, if bolton tries to push him bolton will be the next under the bus.

 

 

 

That's one way of looking at the Trump administration's official turnover. But such changes were (for the most part) not instantaneous. Some (not all) efforts along such lines managed to to have Trump delaying actions and decisions, or to a degree, changing course. I guess this is dependent on the issue at hand and on the manner in which it is pitched to Trump. That this ultimately doesn't end well for the advising party, or that he tends to revert to type is another matter.

 

Push is a strong word, and I think it's correct to assert that Trump's "stubbornness" would automatically kick  in. There's plenty of ways to market ideas or direct bosses to certain courses of action, which do not necessarily involve direct confrontation.

 

 

[zydeco]

On 3/6/2019 at 6:03 PM, Morch said:

 

This used to be the case, how? Which country (apart from China and the USSR), posed such a threat during the Cold War?

Cuba

[zydeco]

On 3/6/2019 at 8:47 PM, Srikcir said:

Trade embargo China and you'll hammer the US economy.

There's a reason that China exports 4 times its trade value to the US compared to China imports from the US - a substantial part of the US economy is built around those imports. Cease imports and you terminate US businesses.

Trump has already engaged China in a trade war and the US has yet to emerge with an agreement that was due March 1st.

China is an existential threat. Its defeat is a bigger issue than the profits of American businesses or getting the markets to new highs. 

[zydeco]

On 3/6/2019 at 10:17 PM, billd766 said:

Does that apply equally if the USA attacks N Korea?

You do realize, don't you, that the lack of an end to the Korean War even at this very moment stems from the fact that the Inmin gun invaded in 1950?

[billd766]

19 minutes ago, zydeco said:

You do realize, don't you, that the lack of an end to the Korean War even at this very moment stems from the fact that the Inmin gun invaded in 1950?

Yes I do as I was about 9 when the ceasefire was signed.

[Morch]

39 minutes ago, zydeco said:

Cuba

 

Unless mistaken, that was essentially the Soviets deploying missiles to the country. Not as if Cuba had the means to do anything much on its own. Still boiled down to a USA-USSR confrontation. The situation with NK is more complex than that.

[zydeco]

46 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Unless mistaken, that was essentially the Soviets deploying missiles to the country. Not as if Cuba had the means to do anything much on its own. Still boiled down to a USA-USSR confrontation. The situation with NK is more complex than that.

Cuba and North Korea were/are both surrogates. And JFK specifically said a nuclear attack from Cuba would be regarded as an attack from the USSR and the USSR would meet with a full retaliatory strike.

[Sydebolle]

22 hours ago, Sydebolle said:

It's time to retire Bolton, he has been too much of a headache, nuisance and thinks he is the King of the world.

Why should Kim give up his only trump card (no pun intended)? How stupid is Bolton? Kim started walking in the right direction and he will start to seriously denuclearize once the last American troop has been ordered back from South Korea and Japan. I would not want any troops in my fore garden (see Putin and the 4'000 US troops along the Polish-Russian border). Once the solder boys are gone, the Chinese will curb down their support for North Korea and things will normalize. Why should North Korea nuke around for no reason? Guam is not interesting enough and no ICBM will reach the US in time as it would be destroyed midair - and everybody knows that - except dick"ç*%"d Bolton ist seems. 

Retire John Bolton with a handshake, he is 70 and should be playing with grand children. Give him a mustache trimmer on the way out; it always looked unkept and disgusting and not quite statesman like! 

Came across this excellent cartoon which wraps it up much nicer than my comment ???? 

[Morch]

1 hour ago, zydeco said:

Cuba and North Korea were/are both surrogates. And JFK specifically said a nuclear attack from Cuba would be regarded as an attack from the USSR and the USSR would meet with a full retaliatory strike.

 

I don't know what NK's supposed "surrogate" status implies in this context. It's not exactly like they got off-the-shelf missiles and nuclear capability. It's not a direct deployment of foreign systems in country. And China's actual leverage with regard to NK's nuclear projects and ambitions is less than clear cut.

 

Were the missiles in Cuba under Cuban control? Operated by Cubans and all that?

 

So no, not really same same.

 

[lannarebirth]

52 minutes ago, Morch said:

 China's actual leverage with regard to NK's nuclear projects and ambitions is less than clear cut.

 

Is it? What do you suppose that China might have to do or give or threaten to call an end to NK's nuclear arms program?

Edited March 8, 2019 by lannarebirth

[bristolboy]

3 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Is it? What do you suppose that China might have to do or give or threaten to call an end to NK's nuclear arms program?

Well, I guess China could call NK's nuclear threats and see if they were bluffing.

[lannarebirth]

1 minute ago, bristolboy said:

Well, I guess China could call NK's nuclear threats and see if they were bluffing.

Or they could cut off all cross border trade. Lots of options.