Octopus Overlords

The water cooler talk from my Trump voting co-workers is that (according to their sources) Kim Jong Un came to the table because Trump threatened to assassinate him in 30 days if he didn't give up his nuke program.

This thing is so slapdash that they don't even know whether they're walking it back or not.


link

link

So... it's not def happening in May? @PressSec: "The president will not have the meeting without seeing concrete steps and concrete actions take place by North Korea."

And now this from @MichaelCBender:

White House clarifies Sarah Sanders’ statement on N Korea that “president will not agree to the meeting without concrete steps and action."

Not so fast: “The invitation has been extended and accepted, and that stands,” WH official tells WSJ.

Can we add a forum emoji of a chicken running around with it's head cut-off? Because that's what I always picture when reading reports of this White House.

ImLawBoy wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 3:42 pm Well, he kept getting deals done to build his hotels and properties, even with people who should have known better than to trust him.

Given that he is almost certainly indebted up to his eyeballs to the Russian mafia and no American bank will lend to him, I'm unsure your point is valid.

It's not like all of his real estate developments have lost money, only most of them.

YellowKing wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 5:33 pm The water cooler talk from my Trump voting co-workers is that (according to their sources) Kim Jong Un came to the table because Trump threatened to assassinate him in 30 days if he didn't give up his nuke program.

That...is amazing.

YellowKing wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 5:33 pm The water cooler talk from my Trump voting co-workers is that (according to their sources) Kim Jong Un came to the table because Trump threatened to assassinate him in 30 days if he didn't give up his nuke program.

Stay strong. I think I would be tempted to quit that job suddenly and through the highest window.

Defiant wrote: ↑Tue Apr 17, 2018 9:24 am North and South Korea reportedly set to announce official end to war

I don't think this is getting enough attention. There are two competing issues and it saddens me that I'm going here.

1. The end of the "war" would be a huge deal. It could deescalate tension in the region, allow the US to bring home ~30,000 permanently stationed troops, reducing stress on the military. I can't even imagine the benefits and relief for people in South Korea. The opportunity exists that once the border is at least reduced in militarization, that the people of the North Korea can begin to move towards freedom.

2. If this happens, Trump is going to get credit. The 2018 "blue wave" is already shrinking. I can hope that's an outlier and not a sign of what's coming. Trump needs a bigger check than the filibuster currently provides. Just the House would be fine with me. However, should there be an announcement of peace in Korea in the coming months, I suspect all bets are off in regards to the 2018 election.

Democrats will surely try to give credit to South Korean leadership, but Americans are not that subtle. It will be seen as a HUGE win for Trump. I cannot imagine how, if this happens, it doesn't greatly diminish the Democrats chances if not outright eliminate them.

So I'm left in the spot of knowing peace is needed. The people of Korea have been under this threat too long and the North Koreans live horrific lives from everything I've read. A real re-igniting of the diplomacy process is essential.

Yet, the horrifying belief I'm facing is this could cement Trump and the current heavily right leaning GOP into power for the next 2 years, if not beyond 2020.

The best I can hope for is a deescalation in tension and the negotiations dragging out for years. Or Kim kidnaps Trump during the meeting.

However, whatever the result, I wish people could realize Trump is a fucking narcissistic asshole with no business being near the controls of power.

"Without us and without me in particular, I guess, they wouldn’t be discussing anything and the Olympics would have been a failure."

“They do have my blessing to discuss the end of the war,"

Fuck you!

I don't think North Korea will be anything but a talking point. Trump supporters will constantly bring it up on TV, but Trump's base has made it very clear they don't care about foreigners and everyone else will still be energized to get rid of him.

Besides, Nixon ended the Vietnam War. It didn't protect him.

A breakthrough in the NK problem would be a legitimately big deal, but unless it leads to de-nuclearization or Kim giving up ICBMs I don't see it affecting US politics all that much...and I still have faith in Trump's proclivity for screwing things up in an unscripted face-to-face, especially against a backdrop of high expectations. Still, if regional tensions ease and the threat of nuclear attack recedes, I'll grudgingly give credit where it's due. It is important to acknowledge your adversary's successes.

I don't think Kim is doing what Trump thinks he's doing. NK's goal is what they call "Denuclearization," and that's what they'll be proposing in the upcoming talks, but it's something they've brought up before.

Trump seems to believe that the term means that NK will get rid of its nuclear weapons and return to purely conventional power, but that's never been what it has meant. "Denuclearization," in NK terms, has always meant de-militarization of the entire peninsula, and it has always been proposed as the US first removing its military from South Korea, after which (after a period of years) NK will begin to scale down its own.

Past presidents have understood the sucker's deal that is being offered here, and they have never engaged with it. The question is whether Trump is dumb and egotistical enough to fall for the appearance of a political win while saddling the next president and our allies with more problems.

Even agreeing to the talks is a win for NK, though. If we back away now, they get to present the US as having scuttled their sincere efforts at peace.

My gut feeling is that Trump's diplomatic coup will be to negotiate the complete withdrawal of American forces from the Korean peninsula, which will be followed (after a respectful interval) by the Korean War of Unification.

Max Peck wrote: ↑Wed Apr 18, 2018 12:27 pm My gut feeling is that Trump's diplomatic coup will be to negotiate the complete withdrawal of American forces from the Korean peninsula, which will be followed (after a respectful interval) by the Korean War of Unification.

That's kind of my suspicion too. I also suspect that China would be thrilled to have the US completely out of Korea. Russia probably wouldn't hate it either.

Fitzy wrote: ↑Wed Apr 18, 2018 10:04 am I don't think this is getting enough attention. There are two competing issues and it saddens me that I'm going here.

1. The end of the "war" would be a huge deal. It could deescalate tension in the region, allow the US to bring home ~30,000 permanently stationed troops, reducing stress on the military. I can't even imagine the benefits and relief for people in South Korea. The opportunity exists that once the border is at least reduced in militarization, that the people of the North Korea can begin to move towards freedom.

No, not really. And "end of the war" without a reduction in NK cnuclear and conventional forces means nothing. Though armed with largely obsolete equipment, the NK army is pretty big. The signing of a piece of paper will be worthless without the removal of nuclear weapons and a reduction in their conventional forces.

Kraken wrote: ↑Wed Apr 18, 2018 11:47 am A breakthrough in the NK problem would be a legitimately big deal, but unless it leads to de-nuclearization or Kim giving up ICBMs I don't see it affecting US politics all that much...and I still have faith in Trump's proclivity for screwing things up in an unscripted face-to-face, especially against a backdrop of high expectations. Still, if regional tensions ease and the threat of nuclear attack recedes, I'll grudgingly give credit where it's due. It is important to acknowledge your adversary's successes.

The credit for this should go almost entirely to Kim and Moon...more so Kim. He is truly a gifted but brutal dictator. Still Trump has lucked into a great hand on NK. I don't think it'll play much in domestic politics and history will correctly leave Trump a minor character in this one.

malchior wrote: ↑Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:51 pm

Kraken wrote: ↑Wed Apr 18, 2018 11:47 am A breakthrough in the NK problem would be a legitimately big deal, but unless it leads to de-nuclearization or Kim giving up ICBMs I don't see it affecting US politics all that much...and I still have faith in Trump's proclivity for screwing things up in an unscripted face-to-face, especially against a backdrop of high expectations. Still, if regional tensions ease and the threat of nuclear attack recedes, I'll grudgingly give credit where it's due. It is important to acknowledge your adversary's successes.

The credit for this should go almost entirely to Kim and Moon...more so Kim. He is truly a gifted but brutal dictator. Still Trump has lucked into a great hand on NK. I don't think it'll play much in domestic politics and history will correctly leave Trump a minor character in this one.

That's why I said "credit where it's due." It will take some convincing to make me believe that any is due to Trump. But I'm open to persuasion if the facts support it. (Assuming, of course, that anything creditable actually happens...I can imagine Kim dangling the possibility and then snatching it away after meeting with Trump, in order to paint the president as a spoiler. Kim is shrewd.)

I predict great success for Kim as soon as the Ryugyong Hotel is outfitted with stain-resistant mattresses.

You're all way more optimistic than I am.

It seems like whenever Trump manages something that's almost presidential the press goes nuts and he gets a bit of a boost. Fortunately, he usually throws it away in a Tweet.

However, any diplomatic breakthrough in Korea would be massive. I suspect it would be the Koreans doing the work, but Trump taking the credit. With that "accomplishment" on his belt, he suddenly looks presidential, enough to give never-Trump and conservative leaning independents a guilt free way to vote Republican. With the Republican advantage in off years, plus gerrymandering, and apathy, that could be enough to fizzle the blue wave.

I do hope all of you are right though.

What Kim won't say publicly is that he no longer has a site to perform nuclear tests safely as the one he used for his tests was extensively damaged after a series of earthquakes last year.

More from Newsweek.

NK is buying time and getting goodwill for free.

No doubt that Kim is playing a long game, and he is not naive enough to actually give up his nukes. The big question is how far he can reel in Trump (and the rest of us who would genuinely love to see peace between the Koreas).

It will be ironic if the next D administration is as alarmed about a NK treaty as Trump is about the Iran treaty.

AP:

President Donald Trump says North Korea wants to hold a high-stakes meeting “as soon as possible” and he is praising Kim Jong Un as “very open” and “very honorable.”

We are going to get played so hard.

https://twitter.com/PressSec/status/989593842944036864

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/27/politics ... index.html

Any way you cut it, President Donald Trump is entitled to significant credit for Friday's historic opening between the two Koreas.

Whether he deserves as much as he's claiming or whether he's wise to bullishly declare a new era of denuclearized peace on the peninsula seems much more doubtful.
Still, the summit between North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and South Korean President Moon Jae-in keeps alive the possibility of a legacy win for Trump that would rank as one of the top presidential achievements since World War II.
If he were to preside over the verifiable destruction of the North's nuclear and missile programs, formally end the 1950-53 Korean War and usher in the destruction of the world's last Cold War-era frontier, Trump would claim a feat that has eluded all of his most recent predecessors.

Peace prize incoming.

He did jack shit. His only contribution is claiming credit for other people’s work. He’s been duping poor saps like you his entire life though, so I don’t expect you to open your eyes anytime soon.

Rip wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 10:23 pm

Sure. Awesome. *if* history is kind and decides to give him credit, it will be a footnote, just like Nixon's opening trade with China.

For me, he's not capable of tying his shoes in the morning, I have little reason to believe he had anything to do with what's happening between North and South Korea, so I absolutely do not give him credit, and it is almost entirely the change in leadership in South Korea combined with Kim just being relieved to talk to an adult.

But mostly the new president in South Korea.

hepcat wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 10:38 pm He did jack shit. His only contribution is claiming credit for other people’s work. He’s been duping poor saps like you his entire life though, so I don’t expect you to open your eyes anytime soon.

Trump might deserve credit for terrifying the South Koreans into deciding to make necessary concessions to the North. Time will tell.

In the mean time, is there an Ig Nobel Peace Prize? If not, maybe there should be...

Rip wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 10:23 pm Peace prize incoming.

Wouldn't that cause a few aneurysms!

hepcat wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 10:38 pm He did jack shit. His only contribution is claiming credit for other people’s work. He’s been duping poor saps like you his entire life though, so I don’t expect you to open your eyes anytime soon.

What other people? There isn't hardly anyone left at the state department so I hope you are talking about them.....

em2nought wrote: ↑Sat Apr 28, 2018 1:31 am

Rip wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 10:23 pm Peace prize incoming.

Wouldn't that cause a few aneurysms!

No more so than when Obama got it, which is what Rip's referencing here.

For me I never understood why they gave it to Obama. I assumed to try to guilt him into ending the wars that Bush started. It was dumb, and I am not responsible nor support the Nobel committee in this particular case. That one is on them, not liberals/dems/left wingers/Obama.

Let's see how it plays out before we assign credit or blame. So far it's all theater.

If this ends with a peace treaty and verifiable de-nuclearization, I'll concede some of the credit to Trump. This is too important to hope that it fails for political gain.

Rip wrote: ↑Sat Apr 28, 2018 1:31 am

hepcat wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 10:38 pm He did jack shit. His only contribution is claiming credit for other people’s work. He’s been duping poor saps like you his entire life though, so I don’t expect you to open your eyes anytime soon.

What other people? There isn't hardly anyone left at the state department so I hope you are talking about them.....

Nope, as mentioned before, South Korea did all the heavy lifting. Trump just likes to say it was due in part to him because his entire life has been all about taking credit for the work of others.

There's also the fact that NK's one viable test site has been damaged and made unusable in an earthquake, although I'm sure Trump will be happy to claim that his deal-making excellence forced them into shutting it down.

Rip wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 10:23 pm Peace prize incoming.

Trump should get the Nobel Peace Prize for North Korea talks, says South’s Moon

If anyone were to win the Nobel Peace Prize for the current effort to solve the North Korean nuclear problem, it should be President Trump. That’s what South Korea’s president said Monday when it was suggested he himself should be in line for the award.

As Moon tries to get Trump to buy into diplomatic efforts to resolve the North Korean nuclear issue — and dismiss suggestions that military action might be the answer — he has sought to pass all the credit onto Trump.

In January, after Kim Jong Un said that he was willing to talk to South Korea, Trump tweeted that this was because he, the American president, had been “firm, strong and willing to commit our total ‘might’ against the North.”

Asked a few days later if this was correct, Moon said it was.

“I give President Trump huge credit for bringing about the inter-Korean talks, and I’d like to thank him for that,” Moon said at a New Year’s news conference in Seoul.

It turned out that Trump had asked Moon to publicly give him the credit for creating the environment for the talks, people familiar with the conversation told the Washington Post at the time.

It's a nice system. Flatter Trump to keep him mollified, but everyone that isn't Trump knows that it's just empty flattery.

Hilarious. How long will it take for Drumpf to tweet Moon's words?

People are focusing on today's NBC story detailing that Kelly has called Trump an "idiot," but this... HOLY SHIT.

Kelly entered the White House with a mandate to instill order in a West Wing where aides regularly had unfettered access to the president. He adopted some key changes, such as shrinking the number of people in meetings and limiting access to the Oval Office.

He has also pushed back against the president on some foreign policy and military issues, current and former White House officials said.

In one heated exchange between the two men before February's Winter Olympics in South Korea, Kelly strongly — and successfully — dissuaded Trump from ordering the withdrawal of all U.S. troops from the Korean Peninsula, according to two officials.

Kim is going to play him like a deck of marked cards.

"Mr. Trump, we North Koreans very much love your steaks and television programs."
"My steaks and ratings are the greatest! You are the greatest! Would you like to have Tokyo??"

Holman wrote: ↑Mon Apr 30, 2018 9:15 pm but this... HOLY SHIT.

Kelly strongly — and successfully — dissuaded Trump from ordering the withdrawal of all U.S. troops from the Korean Peninsula, according to two officials.[/u]

Well there went the perfect opportunity to get the hell out of that $en$ele$$ me$$ for good. Trump should get rid of Kelly and pronto for that advice alone. We didn't need to be in Korea any more than we needed to be in Vietnam. Just a waste of good conservative voters, no sense in doubling down on it for another 70 years.

In exchange for a peace accord Trump should offer to sign an agreement saying that not only are we pulling out, but that our presence there was a mistake, and that we're also promising to never return as long as Dear Leader leaves us alone.

The Koreas have a long history of diplomatic meetings followed by peaceable proclamations at which point they retreat to their corners and nothing changes. If neither country actually signed anything then don't hold your breath for this time being any different.

This is N. Korea's by-the-book play when they want to get some of their sanctions eased up.

Holman wrote: ↑Mon Apr 30, 2018 9:15 pm
Kim is going to play him like a deck of marked cards.

How is this different then the last 24 years? DPRK has been playing the game solid for some time. What is somewhat different is China has become less patient with its former puppet. This is likely the biggest factor now. Trump or whoever should cut a deal with China - If Korean pennisula truly stabilized, US troops withdraw in X years. Watch how fast things happen then.

Nearly 80% of South Koreans Say They Trust Kim Jong Un

And here I thought the most foolish people in the world were those that trusted Donald Trump. I stand corrected.