Bravo President Trump!
Well done Sir!
Well done Sir!
North Korea suspends nuclear and missile testing
- Thread starter UCFKnight85
- Start date
It’s a good gesture but not nearly as absolute as you would think. There’s a lot of wiggle room for more testing even if the statement is honored. We’ll see what happens at the summit.
Well, obviously.
It’s still a huge first step. One that seemed impossible just 3 months ago.
Lol Iran is more belligerent and destructive in the region than they’ve ever been. Their missile programs got a huge boost from Obama unlocking billions of dollars for them.
The Revolutionary Guard should have sent him a thank you note.
How many Americans has N Korea killed in the past 45 years? A handful?
Iranian militia have killed thousands of US service members in the past 15 years.
But hey- they gave up their nuke program for a few years . Yay. Oh and we can’t inspect their military sites. Yay. What a deal
At least you're on the record that any deal with NK short of us being able to conduct inspections is bad.
Do you enjoy just making up stuff to fit the fantasy land you live in?
All sources say at most 500:
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/13/iran-responsible-for-deaths-of-500-us-service-memb/
https://www.jsonline.com/story/mili...f-500-us-troops-in-iraq-afghanistan/30131097/
Also the entire premise of this thread is laughably ignorant. NK has claimed (which they have done in the past) to give up Nuclear weapon testing. Which is mighty convenient now that they already have an ICBM capable of delivering a nuclear warhead to mainland US.
source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.1e709bb08a2a
Also this comes on the heals of a massive collapse at their underground test site, which experts are saying crippled their program and killed off the majority of their top scientists. So their program is probably dead in the water anyway.
source: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/31/collapse-north-korea-nuclear-test-site-leaves-200-dead/
It made no mention of giving up their nuclear weapons. Now if they do that, then yes, I'll be the first to create a thread giving appropriate props to the part that Trump contributed. But the OP was just a pathetic ignorant display of political pandering displaying an appallingly naive Americentric view of international politics.
Last edited:
Well of course. Military sites included. Everything.
The deal should also require stopping their ballistic missile programs. Something the Iran deal completely avoided .
No, it's true. The Obama administration agreement wasn't to stop Iran, but to get them to 'slow down' for awhile. Even the administration admitted this, when the US media isn't editing it out. Seriously. It's one of the biggest, intentional omissions by the US media.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...but-pledges-are-short-on-detail-idUSKBN1HX2I6
if someone told me this was going to happen even a few months ago, i wouldve thought they were insane.
if someone told me this was going to happen even a few months ago, i wouldve thought they were insane.
I'm still skeptical. I think N Korea is on the brink of economic collapse, with China finally executing sanctions, and now they're just totally desperate. Looking for a life line. I don't buy they'll denuclearize 100% as would be the mandate.
I think Trump actually helped legitimize Kim and his nuclear threat. That's the irony of all this. Kim wanted someone to react.
Kim is hurting because of sanctions. So what does he do?
He gets the US and South Korea to commit to full disarmament, including drastically reducing the number of US troops. How? Officially end the war, give up nuclear weapons, and getting South Korea to help his economy more than ever before.
He gets to save face too. He can say it's because they developed thermonuclear weapons and delivery systems. It's not far from the truth either. I did allow the US -- albeit we had to wait for Trump-Tillerson -- to push real sanctions for once.
The biggest challenge in all this is getting the South Koreans to give them what they want. They want a lot. The US will refuse to give them anything like the past. The Carter appeasement approach has been tried, and failed. It's on the South Koreans.
But the South Koreans can save face here too. They can look like the 'calmer, wiser' nation. It's going to cost them though, serious support funds.
Kim is hurting because of sanctions. So what does he do?
He gets the US and South Korea to commit to full disarmament, including drastically reducing the number of US troops. How? Officially end the war, give up nuclear weapons, and getting South Korea to help his economy more than ever before.
He gets to save face too. He can say it's because they developed thermonuclear weapons and delivery systems. It's not far from the truth either. I did allow the US -- albeit we had to wait for Trump-Tillerson -- to push real sanctions for once.
The biggest challenge in all this is getting the South Koreans to give them what they want. They want a lot. The US will refuse to give them anything like the past. The Carter appeasement approach has been tried, and failed. It's on the South Koreans.
But the South Koreans can save face here too. They can look like the 'calmer, wiser' nation. It's going to cost them though, serious support funds.
Last edited:
Well .... looks like the Iran deal was as crappy as everyone expected it was. Israel blowing the roof off of Iran's secrets.
Does Obama have to give back his Nobel Peace Prize because his foreign policy was all smoke and mirrors .... with a smidge of BS added in?
whats funny is they probably wont give trump a peace prize even though if this deal does go through, he would have done far more than obama even dreamed.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/dennis-rodman-says-kim-jong-193803931.html
statesmen dennis rodman says he gave kim a copy of trumps art of the deal and that might have lead to a change of heart.
i wish all our ambassadors were as classy as dennis.*
statesmen dennis rodman says he gave kim a copy of trumps art of the deal and that might have lead to a change of heart.
i wish all our ambassadors were as classy as dennis.*
Nope. President Obama should have never accepted it in the first place.
Frankly, I would have been insulted, and I think President Obama actually was. I mean, there's no bigger insult than to be given something before completing anything. It was an anti-W. award. He said he accepted it as a motivation to make his presidency one of peace.
Honestly, if I was President Obama in 2009, having accomplished virtually nothing by then, I would have deferred the prize to someone else ... like maybe Ronald Reagan for helping bring about the end of the Cold War. And if not Reagan, and possibly better yet, a virtual nobody in political circles who actually has done a lot for world peace.
It was a complete farce that Obama was chosen for the Nobel, and really cheapened the award. I know he considered declining it since he knew he didn’t deserve it, but it was decided it would look even worse to turn it down.
Which is why the easiest way to avoid declining is to defer the award to someone who feel is more worthy. President Obama could have done that.
I've been doing this since high school. Unless it was an actual exam or competition where there was an outright winner in direct versus, where it was undisputed, whenever I felt someone else deserved it, I deferred it to them.
In my career I take blame personally (away from a team), and I only accept credit (as a team). I've had several managers and co-workers say that directly affected my promotion too. I could care less.
Because the world is what we make it.
I've never heard of anyone defering a nobel peace prize, it would probably look about the same as turning it down. But I think it would have been a better idea than accepting it, he absolutely did not deserve it.
Yeah but I 100 percent support him accepting it . He was backed in a corner . I didn’t agree with most of his politics but Obama was put in a tough spot by Both friends and foes throughout his presidency
Maybe because their nuclear test site collapsed?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...test-site-collapse-may-be-out-of-action-china
Yep, between this and the fact that they have pretty much achieved their stated goal of being able to have an ICBM that can carry a nuclear warhead to CONUS, they don't have much of a reason to continue their research. They have joined the MAD club, or at least close enough.
Anyone who is cheering president Trump for getting the Norks to suspend nuclear research is a certified moron. Trump had absolutely nothing to do with that, they did that to themselves. Now if we can get them to actually give up their nukes that would be worth creating a thread for, and I would be the first to congratulate Trump for what part he would have played for that to occur.
This has been out there for quite a while. I read a few articles about the mountain collapsing after their last test.
that could definitely be part of the reason. many others have pointed to trump finally getting china to come around and actually tell north korea stop. probably alot of various reasons added up to the negotiations.
but hey, cant give any credit to trump...
You haven't heard about it because they were deferred before they were publicly announced. What did you not understand about my comment about deferring praise? You do it without people knowing.
The Nobel Prize committee very much does contact award winners before they are publicly announced, especially in the case of political issues whereby accepting the award could cause great issues for the awarded.
At the same time ...
Which brings me back to deferring ...
You can do it before it's announced, or after. In the case of President Obama, he should have picked someone else, and said, "This person is more worthy than I at this time. Re-evaluate me in 7 years, and then I will more than accept if you feel I am worthy."
BTW, this is the most infamous (and relatively unknown -- especially to most people) "deferral" in the history of the prize:
- https://www.theguardian.com/science/across-the-universe/2012/oct/08/einstein-nobel-prize-relativity
Einstein's Theories of Relativity, even in the '30s and '40s, but especially back in the early '20s, was denied by most scientists. It wasn't until the experiments of the late '40s and '50s, ironically by the US government, that most scientists came around. Relativity was considered "too simple" of an explanation for most scientists.
BTW, I agree with at least half of this list as well.
- https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/10/151005-ten-science-discovery-without-nobel/
And then there's this reality.
- http://theconversation.com/how-fair...e-to-receive-the-nobel-prize-in-physics-85161
So the "political non-sense" extends into the sciences too.
On the "Peace" prize front, I agreed with Jimmy Carter getting the prize. He deserved it for the Camp David Accords.
But Al Gore award made it a joke, and then it was extended with the Obama award. Obama was too knew to say anything about, but Gore was a "do as I say, not do as I do," hypocrite -- and a well known one for the infamous, and indirect, "buzzword bingo" games that used to be played by people wherever he spoke (this was well before the '90s -- Gore finally figured it out in the '90s).
- https://www.theguardian.com/science/across-the-universe/2012/oct/08/einstein-nobel-prize-relativity
Einstein's Theories of Relativity, even in the '30s and '40s, but especially back in the early '20s, was denied by most scientists. It wasn't until the experiments of the late '40s and '50s, ironically by the US government, that most scientists came around. Relativity was considered "too simple" of an explanation for most scientists.
BTW, I agree with at least half of this list as well.
- https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/10/151005-ten-science-discovery-without-nobel/
And then there's this reality.
- http://theconversation.com/how-fair...e-to-receive-the-nobel-prize-in-physics-85161
So the "political non-sense" extends into the sciences too.
On the "Peace" prize front, I agreed with Jimmy Carter getting the prize. He deserved it for the Camp David Accords.
But Al Gore award made it a joke, and then it was extended with the Obama award. Obama was too knew to say anything about, but Gore was a "do as I say, not do as I do," hypocrite -- and a well known one for the infamous, and indirect, "buzzword bingo" games that used to be played by people wherever he spoke (this was well before the '90s -- Gore finally figured it out in the '90s).
You haven't heard about it because they were deferred before they were publicly announced. What did you not understand about my comment about deferring praise? You do it without people knowing.
The Nobel Prize committee very much does contact award winners before they are publicly announced, especially in the case of political issues whereby accepting the award could cause great issues for the awarded.
That link about Einstein was fascinating, but had absolutely nothing to do with your example of the committee choosing someone and then that person declining or deferring the prize. It says no one was chosen for the 1921 prize initially.
The situation reached crisis point in 1921 when, paralysed by indecision, the Nobel Committee decided it was better not to award a prize at all than to give it to relativity.
Again ... you're missing the point.
It's that the Nobel Prize committee directly works with awardees and others before the selection. If President Obama wanted to defer the award, they could easily have worked with him to do so.
That's really what this is all about.
President Obama decided to accept the award as a 'challenge him during his administration' -- and this was decided upon before it was awarded -- and that is why it will be debated forever, often with Obama coming out on the very negative side. It never works to accept an award before the challenge is complete.
My addition about Einstein was just the biggest example where it was "political untenable," and to this day, a supermajority of people assume Einstein won it for Relativity. The Obama award was one of those situations as well, and in the future, people will assume he won it for ending the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Both are examples of "too early" as well, with a lot of "backlash" when it was announced.
Last edited:
I was just wondering if you had any proof about the committee "directly working with the awardees before the selection" since the Nobel web page doesn't mention that at all. Just asking for proof, you have been known to make wildly inaccurate claims in the past so I always like to get sources.
Nobel Laureates are chosen. At the beginning of October, the Nobel Committee chooses the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates through a majority vote. The decision is final and without appeal. The names of the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates are then announced.
https://www.nobelprize.org/nomination/peace/
Nobel Laureates are chosen. At the beginning of October, the Nobel Committee chooses the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates through a majority vote. The decision is final and without appeal. The names of the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates are then announced.
https://www.nobelprize.org/nomination/peace/
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...located-in-north-korea-official-idUSKBN1I3329
looks like north korea might release 3 us detainees today. i still dont completely trust him but they are certainly making good on their word so far.
looks like north korea might release 3 us detainees today. i still dont completely trust him but they are certainly making good on their word so far.
The highly anticipated meeting between Kim Jong Un and myself will take place in Singapore on June 12th. We will both try to make it a very special moment for World Peace!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 10, 2018
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 10, 2018
