BREAKING NEWS Trump meets with Kim, crosses border into North Korea

[wayned]

On 7/2/2019 at 6:38 AM, bristolboy said:

Sure. That's why he claimed North Korea agreed to complete denuclearization. Because it wasn't true.

He was being the true psychopath that he actually is.  Whatever he does or says it will have to be something that he thinks makes him look good at the moment that he says it.  It had nothing to do with negotiation it was Trump being Trump and there was no way he could tell the truth, "we haven't reached a deal", because it wouldn't have made him look good!

[sanemax]

51 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Sure. That's why he claimed North Korea agreed to complete denuclearization. Because it wasn't true.

It was true . North Korea signed the agreement stating so 

[bristolboy]

3 minutes ago, sanemax said:

It was true . North Korea signed the agreement stating so 

You never give up on subscribing to Trump's falsehood on this one, do you? North Korea agreed to work towards denuclearization. The did not agree to denuclearization. And since North Korea has never defined denuclearization, what does working towards something that has no agreed upon definition even mean? And of course, that wasn't the first time North Korea agreed to denuclearization. So touting that episode as something significant was, at best, foolishness.

[sanemax]

21 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

You never give up on subscribing to Trump's falsehood on this one, do you? North Korea agreed to work towards denuclearization. The did not agree to denuclearization. And since North Korea has never defined denuclearization, what does working towards something that has no agreed upon definition even mean? And of course, that wasn't the first time North Korea agreed to denuclearization. So touting that episode as something significant was, at best, foolishness.

Working towards denunclearistaion is an agreement to work towards denuclearisation .

NK did agree to work towards denuclearizeation which is the same as what Trump said  

[bristolboy]

42 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Working towards denunclearistaion is an agreement to work towards denuclearisation .

 

Do you realize that your formulation above is basically x=x?.

But working towards denuclearization is not the same as denuclearization. In other words, x /= y. Look up "asymptotic curve" for a more precise analogy.

[Opl]

7 hours ago, heybruce said:

I just saw that Trump tweeted this before his Kim photo-op nonsense:

 

“President Obama wanted to meet, and Chairman Kim would not meet him. The Obama administration was begging for a meeting. They were begging for meetings constantly, and Chairman Kim would not meet with him.”

 

Another blatant, bold-faced Trump lie.  Of course the Trump fans won't object and may keep themselves sufficiently ignorant to believe it.

Trump only speaks to his followers and they stick to him.

Why does Trump need to lie or make up stories or distort facts anytime he has the opportunity?

Because that's what enjoys his fans.  

[heybruce]

8 hours ago, usviphotography said:

End to the Korean War and N. Korea following Vietnam's path of opening up to the rest of the world is hardly the "status quo". It would be a monumental victory, and worthy of a dozen Nobel Peace Prizes as it would easily be the biggest accomplishment in terms of World Peace in decades. Complete denuclearization was always nothing more than a negotiating position. Nobody views that as a realistic goal after the Gaddafi Precedent. But Trump is a master negotiator and knows that you always make a big ask at the opening and go proceed from there. 

Ok, after Trump gets North Korea to open up and follow Vietnam's path to prosperity I'll concede he has accomplished something.
 

 

One question, where does that leave the sanctions in place against North Korea for developing nuclear weapons and delivery systems?  Do you advocate accepting North Korea as a nuclear power and dropping all sanctions?

[sanemax]

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

Do you realize that your formulation above is basically x=x?.

But working towards denuclearization is not the same as denuclearization. In other words, x /= y. Look up "asymptotic curve" for a more precise analogy.

Agreeing to do something and actually doing something may be different things  , but saying that someone is going to so something AFTER they've signed an agreement to do so, cannot be considered to be a lie .

   Had Kim not signed the agreement and stated that he will not be getting rid of his nukes, then, you could claim that Trump was lieing 

[bristolboy]

7 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Agreeing to do something and actually doing something may be different things  , but saying that someone is going to so something AFTER they've signed an agreement to do so, cannot be considered to be a lie .

   Had Kim not signed the agreement and stated that he will not be getting rid of his nukes, then, you could claim that Trump was lieing 

You seem remarkably resistent to the fact that Kim did not agree to denuclearization. He agreed to work towards it. Not to arrive. In other words, the North Koreans used a typical diplomatic formulation not to commit themselves. Why is it so difficult for you to understand that?

[sanemax]

1 minute ago, bristolboy said:

You seem remarkably resistent to the fact that Kim did not agree to denuclearization. He agreed to work towards it. Not to arrive. In other words, the North Koreans used a typical diplomatic formulation not to commit themselves. Why is it so difficult for you to understand that?

Because if you work towards something , you are aiming to achieve something  , it was an agreement of intent .

Kim did indeed agree to denuclearize the whole region , negotiations must take place first though , lifting of sanctions , security guarantees for NK and various other things .

Had Trump stated that NK had already denuked , that would have been incorrect , BUT, he did not say that  

[wayned]

On 7/2/2019 at 7:29 AM, sanemax said:

It was true . North Korea signed the agreement stating so 

Wrong, the statement that they signed said that they had agreed to continuing discussions regarding denuclearization, DT spun it to and said that they had agreed to denuclearize which they clearly didn't.  Made him look good at the moment that he said it and then could blame Kim for not honoring his agreement!

[wayned]

DT is now considering changing his requirement that NK agree freeze any further development and testing and let them keep some, if not all, of there arsenal and recognize NK as a nuclear power like India and Pakistan.  Of course he would claim that it's an initial step to complete denuclearization but it'll stop there.  He has to have a win on this for 2020!

[Cryingdick]

4 minutes ago, wayned said:

DT is now considering changing his requirement that NK agree freeze any further development and testing and let them keep some, if not all, of there arsenal and recognize NK as a nuclear power like India and Pakistan.  Of course he would claim that it's an initial step to complete denuclearization but it'll stop there.  He has to have a win on this for 2020!

Why not? The year is 2019 we can't deny every country in the world Einstein's technology for the next 100 years.

[sanemax]

6 minutes ago, wayned said:

DT is now considering changing his requirement that NK agree freeze any further development and testing and let them keep some, if not all, of there arsenal and recognize NK as a nuclear power like India and Pakistan.  Of course he would claim that it's an initial step to complete denuclearization but it'll stop there.  He has to have a win on this for 2020!

Do provide a link to your claims 

[spidermike007]

Nothing wrong with a meeting. But, it has to result in some progress. So far, three meetings and no progress. The US wants NK to completely give up their nuclear program. They have likely spent tens of billions on it. Will they do that? I do not think so. Will Trump compromise? He usually does. 

 

His M.O. is to bring the world to the brink, then back down. And he attempts to frame that as a victory. We were going to impose massive tariffs on China. Xi outsmarted me, and I am not a particularly good negotiator, so I gave in, and decided not to impose the tariffs. Does that sound like a victory? Same will happen in NK. Trump will likely compromised. OK. You can keep your weapons. Just stop your launch tests, and do not build any more. At least do not build any more that we can see, or detect.

 

I will tell my people I won the negotiations, and they will believe it! That works best. And we can remain best friends. But please, continue to flatter me, and I will do the same for you. Really, I admire you. I wish I could be a dictator. Democracy sucks. The media is terrible. They ask questions. I hate that.  

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, sanemax said:

Because if you work towards something , you are aiming to achieve something  , it was an agreement of intent .

Kim did indeed agree to denuclearize the whole region , negotiations must take place first though , lifting of sanctions , security guarantees for NK and various other things .

Had Trump stated that NK had already denuked , that would have been incorrect , BUT, he did not say that  

We know that what Trump was saying was nonsense because he also said that North Korea was no longer a threat, A stupid thing to say because it removes the justification for making North Korea lose its nukes. In other words he accepted North Korea's words at face value.

[heybruce]

47 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

Why not? The year is 2019 we can't deny every country in the world Einstein's technology for the next 100 years.

I take it you are ok with nuclear proliferation. 

 

Sure, why not?  What could possibly go wrong with every country having a nuclear arsenal and the means to deliver the weapons?  It's not like countries are ever unstable, or are ruled by crackpots, or ally themselves with terrorists, or have incompetent militaries that couldn't secure the weapons, or are profoundly corrupt and would sell the weapons to the highest bidders...

[bristolboy]

56 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

Why not? The year is 2019 we can't deny every country in the world Einstein's technology for the next 100 years.

So it looks like once again you're getting ready to support Trump when he reverses course. 

[johnnybangkok]

55 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

Why not? The year is 2019 we can't deny every country in the world Einstein's technology for the next 100 years.

First of all it isn't 'Einsteins technology'. He only gave the formula for the energy released by a nuclear weapon (E=MC2). Oppenheimer is credited as the 'father of the atomic bomb'.

Secondly, because Trump can't make a deal with NK you now believe it's ok that they (and everyone else by all accounts) should be allowed nukes? That's some grade A logical fallacy right there.

[sanemax]

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

We know that what Trump was saying was nonsense because he also said that North Korea was no longer a threat, A stupid thing to say because it removes the justification for making North Korea lose its nukes. In other words he accepted North Korea's words at face value.

No, I do disagree .

NK havent been threatening  the USA or firing missiles since the meeting .

NK may not currently be a threat  , but the World would be more comfortable if they didnt have nukes

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, sanemax said:

No, I do disagree .

NK havent been threatening  the USA or firing missiles since the meeting .

NK may not currently be a threat  , but the World would be more comfortable if they didnt have nukes

North Korea has been playing that game for over 20 years--kick up a ruckus to get international attention, then settle down after getting some kind of concessions. 

 

However they never got concessions like Trump has given them; multiple face-to-face meetings with the US President and cancellation of the US-South Korea military drills that North Korea has been screaming about for decades.  All that for no longer conducting tests that were no longer necessary (the new bomb designs had been proven), changing from long range to intermediate range missile tests, and making some vague promises with no schedule for compliance.

 

On top of that, North Korea no longer has to create a ruckus to get international attention, Donald Trump is doing that for them.  Trump is the gift that keeps on giving for North Korea.

[sanemax]

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

North Korea has been playing that game for over 20 years--kick up a ruckus to get international attention, then settle down after getting some kind of concessions. 

 

However they never got concessions like Trump has given them; multiple face-to-face meetings with the US President and cancellation of the US-South Korea military drills that North Korea has been screaming about for decades.  All that for no longer conducting tests that were no longer necessary (the new bomb designs had been proven), changing from long range to intermediate range missile tests, and making some vague promises with no schedule for compliance.

 

On top of that, North Korea no longer has to create a ruckus to get international attention, Donald Trump is doing that for them.  Trump is the gift that keeps on giving for North Korea.

Its a vert different situation compared to 20 years ago 

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, sanemax said:

No, I do disagree .

NK havent been threatening  the USA or firing missiles since the meeting .

NK may not currently be a threat  , but the World would be more comfortable if they didnt have nukes

Because they are not making threats therefore they aren't a threat? Really?

[sanemax]

1 minute ago, bristolboy said:

Because they are not making threats therefore they aren't a threat? Really?

NK seem to now be on friendly terms with the USA , no more threats from either side and the likelihood of war breaking out is quite remote .

Compared to pre meeting when war looked likely to be the outcome

[johnnybangkok]

1 hour ago, sanemax said:

No, I do disagree .

NK havent been threatening  the USA or firing missiles since the meeting .

NK may not currently be a threat  , but the World would be more comfortable if they didnt have nukes

When you say 'NK havent been threatening  the USA or firing missiles since the meeting' do you mean apart from the test-firing of multiple rocket launchers, including a new model of a tactical guided weapon and the firing of a new short-range ballistic missile in May 2019?

 

https://www.voanews.com/east-asia/missile-test-north-korea-sends-message-seoul

[heybruce]

7 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Its a vert different situation compared to 20 years ago 

Yes, 20 years ago North Korea didn't have nuclear weapons, and the Clinton administration had an agreement in place that kept them from developing them.  North Korea kept cheating and had to be constantly watched, but it wasn't developing nukes.

 

Bush ended this arrangement and replaced it with...nothing.  North Korea tested its first atomic bomb in 2006.

 

Obama tried to limit the development and test of more weapons using carrots and sticks.  Trump tried another approach, lots of bluster then lots of carrots.  North Korea accepted the carrots, suspended tests that were not longer necessary, and has been adding to its nuclear arsenal since.  

 

" U.S. intelligence last summer estimated North Korea may have anywhere from 20 to 60 nuclear weapons. In 2018, North Korea probably produced enough plutonium and uranium for an additional five to seven nuclear weapons, researchers at Stanford have estimated, steadily adding to its stockpile. "    https://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-north-korea-trump-kim-jong-un-nuclear-arsenal-20190301-story.html

[bristolboy]

14 minutes ago, sanemax said:

NK seem to now be on friendly terms with the USA , no more threats from either side and the likelihood of war breaking out is quite remote .

Compared to pre meeting when war looked likely to be the outcome

Because this time it's different? And no, war didn't look any more or less likely than it was in the past when North Korea made similar threats. They've learned that threats work. Trump has massively confirmed that.

[sanemax]

Just now, heybruce said:

Yes, 20 years ago North Korea didn't have nuclear weapons, and the Clinton administration had an agreement in place that kept them from developing them.  North Korea kept cheating and had to be constantly watched, but it wasn't developing nukes.

 

Bush ended this arrangement and replaced it with...nothing.  North Korea tested its first atomic bomb in 2006.

 

Obama tried to limit the development and test of more weapons using carrots and sticks.  Trump tried another approach, lots of bluster then lots of carrots.  North Korea accepted the carrots, suspended tests that were not longer necessary, and has been adding to its nuclear arsenal since.  

 

" U.S. intelligence last summer estimated North Korea may have anywhere from 20 to 60 nuclear weapons. In 2018, North Korea probably produced enough plutonium and uranium for an additional five to seven nuclear weapons, researchers at Stanford have estimated, steadily adding to its stockpile. "    https://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-north-korea-trump-kim-jong-un-nuclear-arsenal-20190301-story.html

The Worlds changed a bit more than that in the last 20 years .

Regime change in NK , Chinas relation with NK and the rest of the world and many other changes 

[bristolboy]

3 minutes ago, sanemax said:

The Worlds changed a bit more than that in the last 20 years .

Regime change in NK , Chinas relation with NK and the rest of the world and many other changes 

Another psychopath in charge of North Korea who is busily expanding its nuclear arsenal. What a difference 20 years make!

[sanemax]

4 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Because this time it's different? And no, war didn't look any more or less likely than it was in the past when North Korea made similar threats. They've learned that threats work. Trump has massively confirmed that.

You cannot be serious .

Prior to the first meeting , Kim was threatening to nuke the USA and the USA sent an aIRCRAFT CARRIER TO confront NK on the Korean peninsula , war was a likely/possible  outcome then  , are you seriously suggesting that its a similar situation today ?