Trump to Kim: 'My button's bigger!'

[Almost there]

We have a provocative President who thinks nuclear weapon negotiations can be treated like a real estate deal.

Two things.
1. In a way, yes.
2. Negotiation is negotiation, be it your hourly rate for a new contract, a piece of real estate, food aid, nuclear deals.

Or you can just ship a pallat of money to them in the night like Obama did. But with our current president we don't give the bully our lunch money.

 

[Favourofone]

At least we have a President who is proactive.

So we have sanctions now, we had sanctions before and the regime is not falling while their missiles are getting better.

What is the proactive part ?

Trump tweeting that he is stable genius which sounds like someone working with horses and shoveling manure.

 

[wing2000]

Two things.
1. In a way, yes.
2. Negotiation is negotiation, be it your hourly rate for a new contract, a piece of real estate, food aid, nuclear deals.

The risk of a significant miscalculation are greater when the POTUS is tweeting threatening messages.....and the rconsequences thereof are obviously greater.

As Admiral Mike Mullen's indicated, the U.S. has never been closer to a nuclear exchange with the rogue state.

 

[Mountainmanbob]

What makes you think Kim is not having his way today?

Kim is meeting with So Korea. And he and his country are not doing very good due to the never as seen before sanctions.
M

 

[Mountainmanbob]

As Admiral Mike Mullen's indicated, the U.S. has never been closer to a nuclear exchange with the rogue state.

Probably just a form of a bluff.
M-Bob

 

[Almost there]

The risk of a significant miscalculation are greater when the POTUS is tweeting threatening messages.....and the rconsequences thereof are obviously greater.

As Admiral Mike Mullen's indicated, the U.S. has never been closer to a nuclear exchange with the rogue state.

Reminds me of that "doomsday clock" that has existed for decades, always inching slightly towards, and then slightly away from midnight.

True leaders need a spine.

 

[hislegacy]

So we have sanctions now, we had sanctions before and the regime is not falling while their missiles are getting better.

What is the proactive part ?

Oh, maybe moving warships into the area, or actually going to South Korea, or perhaps pressuring China to do something. Perhaps it is the fighters flying close to their country.

That’s just off the top of my head.

Here is a reference

U.S. practices strikes on North Korean nuclear sites in biggest-ever joint air drill with South Korea

 

[Mountainmanbob]

Oh, maybe moving warships into the area, or actually going to South Korea, or perhaps pressuring China to do something. Perhaps it is the fighters flying close to their country.

That’s just off the top of my head.

Here is a reference

U.S. practices strikes on North Korean nuclear sites in biggest-ever joint air drill with South Korea

That would be a change over past administrations would it not.

Some still refuse to give Trump any credit. That's alright that's just the way they roll.

M-Bob

 

[Favourofone]

True leaders need a spine.

That’s fine as long as it doesn’t replace their brain.

 

[Favourofone]

Yeah big chances here. Before we had North Korea posturing, then making some empty gesture before starting to posture again and politicians went along so they could collect their brownie points during the warmer political times.

Of course not Trump, master of 5 D chess games inside his own head....oh wait

U.S., South Korea agree to delay military exercises during Winter Olympics

And as we know China and Russian couldn’t care less what Trump says while they smuggle oil to North Korea and Trump uses his proactive tweet finger. Scary.

 

[USincognito]

It's a euphemism for what the NORK's have been doing for decades. We're rich.They're not. They need some money so they do some saber rattling and make some threats and we give em one of those money pallats (kinda like what Obama did with Iran, and yes, this is a euphemism too.) and everything's quiet for a while.

Yes, I know. I'm really more focused on specifics about us giving them our lunch money. See, the thing is we've been "giving our lunch money" to a lot of nations for a long time. And some serious coin in some cases - multiple billions to Isreal and Egypt for example to help them all play nice together. It's not a perfect system, but it's actually kept the peace in a lot of areas of the world including the Korean Peninsula. The Kim regime isn't going anywhere and everyone knows that. They act up a little bit, they get sent some food aid or some infrastructure and then they quiet back down. It's Realpolitik.

https://shadowproof.com/2011/06/29/...-55-billion-to-north-korea-to-spend-on-nukes/
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R40095.pdf

Britain hands North Korea £740,000 in aid including funds to open up internet access

US Humanitarian Aid Goes to North Korea Despite Nuclear Tensions

I'm not going to take that first link because it sounds like a place I'd get a virus from, but it's also from 2011 and we gave ZERO dollars to North Korea in 2011 or 2012 or 2013 or 2014 or 2015 or 2016. I don't know how it's supposed to support your assertion that we've been "throwing a few billion" Kim's way.

The second is from 2014 and does not support your assertion that we've been "throwing a few billion" Kim's way.
>> Since early 2009, the United States has provided virtually no aid to North Korea, <<

The third is about the UK so I don't know what it has to do with us "throwing a few billion" Kim's way.

The last one is about humanitarian aid in direct response to Typhoon Lionrock, was made through UNICEF and was the princely sum of $1,000,000. The article also mentions $900,000 being given through Samaritans Purse in 2011 and reiterates, "Since early 2009, the U.S. has withheld all types of humanitarian aid to North Korea" so, again, I don't see how this supports your assertion that we've been "throwing a few billion" Kim's way.

 

[USincognito]

Yet you knew what I meant.

I used that word to "time stamp" the time period I was talking about.

Yeah, that's because I'm old. I actually remember Ayds.
Ayds - Wikipedia

 

[wing2000]

That would be a change over past administrations would it not.

Some still refuse to give Trump any credit. That's alright that's just the way they roll.

M-Bob

...credit for what?

Making the US GOV look completely inept?

 

[Mountainmanbob]

How Bush, Clinton and Obama handled the North Korean threat

 

[Almost there]

That’s fine as long as it doesn’t replace their brain.

Most definitely. I'm not seeing that as a problem - yet. Results speak for themselves:

North Korea agrees to talk to South after U.S.-South Korea postpone dr

[Photo] Convoy of Chinese military trucks seen moving towards North Korea border in late December

North Korea comes close to bombing one of its own cities by accident

 

[Almost there]

Yeah, that's because I'm old. I actually remember Ayds.
Ayds - Wikipedia

Yeah. I remember that too.

 

[Mountainmanbob]

...credit for what?

Making the US GOV look completely inept?

Best we have looked since Reagan.
M-Bob

 

[Almost there]

Best we have looked since Reagan.
M-Bob

This is kinda weird, but I was very anti trump because he sounded like a boob during the primaries and the general. When I voted in the general, I voted against Hillary, and the good news is she lost. But at the time I said that the bad news was that Trump won.

Then a funny thing happened. I started watching how the left and GOPe came unglued after his tweets and I kinda started looking forard to see "who's ox did Trump gore today?"

Then I noticed that, though he still talked like a boob, I not only really liked what he was doing, but surprised by the things he actually chose to do, like move the Israel embassy.

Here we are today. Reagan was my favorite president in my lifetime, but now Trump is. I see him as more conservative, and more productive. He's actually getting it done. And the elimination of the Obamacare mandate is a HUGE one.

 

[Almost there]

How Bush, Clinton and Obama handled the North Korean threat

That is shocking for Newsweek to report in that way. I love this quote:

"Lee said that because of Trump’s 'somewhat unhinged, off the cuff rhetoric,' North Korea, China and Russia actually believe a military strike on the North is possible, which in turn led the two other superpowers to agree to the most recent United Nations' sanctions against Kim Jong Un’s regime. That’s a kind of power or leverage Obama’s administration didn’t necessarily possess or effectively convey."

 

[wing2000]

That is shocking for Newsweek to report in that way. I love this quote:

"Lee said that because of Trump’s 'somewhat unhinged, off the cuff rhetoric,' North Korea, China and Russia actually believe a military strike on the North is possible, which in turn led the two other superpowers to agree to the most recent United Nations' sanctions against Kim Jong Un’s regime. That’s a kind of power or leverage Obama’s administration didn’t necessarily possess or effectively convey."

...ah the Madmen Theory....with Nixon, at least we know there was a strategy behind his words. That isn't the case with Trump.

“For all the differences in the three different administrations, it’s kind of interesting to see how they all end up at the same place and maybe that will happen with these guys too,” Thomas H. Lee, professor of International Law at Fordham University and a former Naval intelligence officer, told Newsweek.

And thus far, nothing has changed on the ground....but the risk of N. Korean miscalculation remains high.