|
|
|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
This is huge news if it actually sticks. I wonder if it will end the mandatory military service. Could we get Bisu back early?
Damn, I realy hope this works purely for the families that were ripped apart by this and also hopefully it'll lead to a humanitarian effort to save the North Koreans who are suffering.
|
On April 27 2018 19:03 Qikz wrote:
This is huge news if it actually sticks. I wonder if it will end the mandatory military service. Could we get Bisu back early?
Damn, I realy hope this works purely for the families that were ripped apart by this and also hopefully it'll lead to a humanitarian effort to save the North Koreans who are suffering.
It's probably 4-6 years before the South Koreans would go about changing mandatory military service, so, unfortunately, it's unlikely we'll get Bisu back early.
As for North Korea, expect it to still be a really, really terrible place. It's just going to stop being one threatening its neighbors on a regular basis. They also have a political culture so poisoned that some form of Self-Government are at least a generation away, plus any pressure for such reforms is extremely unlikely.
|
On April 27 2018 19:17 Taf the Ghost wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2018 19:03 Qikz wrote:
This is huge news if it actually sticks. I wonder if it will end the mandatory military service. Could we get Bisu back early?
Damn, I realy hope this works purely for the families that were ripped apart by this and also hopefully it'll lead to a humanitarian effort to save the North Koreans who are suffering. It's probably 4-6 years before the South Koreans would go about changing mandatory military service, so, unfortunately, it's unlikely we'll get Bisu back early. As for North Korea, expect it to still be a really, really terrible place. It's just going to stop being one threatening its neighbors on a regular basis. They also have a political culture so poisoned that some form of Self-Government are at least a generation away, plus any pressure for such reforms is extremely unlikely.
4-6 Years is really optimistic too. If stuff unfolds similar to Germany (Which i doubt, since NK still exists and still is a threat to SK), mandatory time will slowly get reduced over time. It took us more than 20 years to end mandatory service after the fall of the Berlin Wall. (Though the two are not directly linked, they are definitively related)
|
On April 26 2018 15:37 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2018 14:34 LegalLord wrote:On April 26 2018 13:44 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On April 26 2018 07:46 LegalLord wrote:On April 26 2018 07:38 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
I've called Obama out on multiple issues I've felt he could have handled better. I've seen more apologism than anything else, honestly. Especially here. In any case, I don't think this is going anywhere, and I don't think you're getting what I'm trying to say, so I'll just leave it at that.On April 26 2018 07:22 micronesia wrote:
If the gossip about the NK nuclear test sight collapsing is true, and there is a significant risk of large uncontrolled releases of radioactivity from the test sight, then I think some reputable scientific organizations need to publicly analyze the risk and put it into perspective. While I wouldn't want to live next door to that test sight, the US and the USSR both detonated quite a few nuclear bombs in the open atmosphere over the years. At least in this case, the short to medium lived isotopes have had a chance to decay away due to the duration since the previous underground weapons tests in NK.
The little bit of coverage I've read about this so far seems to have appropriately bounded the immediate 'danger' to nearby neighboring countries and hasn't been egregious. Still, NK can't afford to piss of China by sending nontrivial quantities of strontium-90 and cesium-137 their way. From what I saw this looks like about as bad as a bungled mining operation leading to spills in the immediate area and in nearby water routes. That could be fairly bad, largely localized but not entirely, and probably something you need to handle with care. They would be right to want to ask for help and to make concessions to stop it. But it's also not an immediate total catastrophe either. No, I don't get what you're saying because you aren't saying a fucking thing. Mohdoo asked and you gave the weakest fucking examples. Like in the NASA thread and in US poli, you give vague fucking answers and expect people to read between the lines. I get that you expected more from Obama and was let down. But dude, come the hell on. What more could he have done to stop NK from getting nukes? What has trump done, himself or his admin, to get Kim to the table? I had something longer written up, but given that this seems to be primarily airing grudges, again, I'll be rather succinct instead: The thing Obama failed to do that would have led to a better result is to develop cooperative relations with nations that could have helped defuse the threat if they were inclined to cooperate, and to have the foresight to see how an influx of foreign technology could make the problem a lot worse, a lot faster. No such solution is perfect or without tradeoffs, but given that we have the once preventable reality that a rogue nation has nuclear ICBMs, using the "there's nothing that could have been done" defense to try to exonerate Obama at every turn (and trying to strawman every point into "nah the only other option is war") is disingenuous as fuck. That's the last I will say - I'm not seeing any desire for a real discussion from your end. But in case you wanted a real answer, I provide the above as an attempt at clarifying my main point. Emphasis mine. Again. What nations? What were the options, specifically? What has trump or his admin done that got us here? I'm not exonerating Obama. Stop that. I'm saying you can't blame him for where we are. You think the UN or USA should just throw money at Kim and tell him to stop? Give him the resources he needs to feed his people or to help introduce cleaner, healthier technology besides farming with literal human shit? Open the economy somewhat to allow foreign aid and workers to get the people on the right track to joining the rest of the modern world? Should SK bend over and say, "Hey, we don't want a war or to cause any harm to either of our people. You can be the rulers of a unified Korea, just give up the nukes." ? Is that what you're saying? Or are you saying that Obama should have seen into the future where NK would develop ICBMs that could "potentially" reach the continental US and have acted accordingly (read: militarily), all the while risking "worsening" relations with China? (no US company is barred from dealing with China and they will continue to do so when the economy is basically US ver 2.) You're obvious dislike for Obama is apparent and known. I'm asking, what has trump and his admin done to get us this close to a peace deal with NK? Answer that and I'll drop it. Explain to me, how Obama could have essentially forced sovereign nations to get NK to the table. Explain to me, how short of anything military that wasn't already tried, would have worked.
Actually treated it like it's a problem. Obama was a very ambitious Man & brilliant campaigner, but he never had the skill set for the Presidency in domestic affairs. In Foreign Policy, everyone loved him because they could keep playing the USA for fools at every turn. Foreign Elites loved the Obama Administration because they got everything they wanted, at the cost to the normal Americans. (This is, in many ways, why we got Trump.)
What the Trump Administration has done is actually call the bluff & put pressure where it actually hurts North Korea. The Missiles are the public-facing issue, but the real issue is sub-launched missiles. North Korea has the missiles & now a missile submarine to put all of the major cities of SK, China & Japan at risk. (Likely those in SE Asia as well, but that might be a 1-way trip for a sub of that size.)
The main vector has all been Economic in nature, though there are 2 Carrier groups in the region to make the Economic vector have a fallback position. In most cases, International "sanctions" are toothless things, and they're constantly gotten around, with ease, for the ruling elites in the country facing the sanctions. Sure, some of their people might starve, but they're eating well, what do they care? There are ways to make sanctions hurt, it's just normally never done. That changed last year, which is also why China & Russia were "willing" to vote for the sanctions at the UN.
The Yes votes from China & Russia were likely part of a deal cut, such that the USA wouldn't attack several important banks & companies, in both countries, with removal from the global financial system. That's speculation, but it would fit with where the targeted actions went, especially as North Korea has worked as a proxy for factions within the Chinese Military for years.
The layer we won't get real information about for 20-50 years is who held what strings over North Korea. Kim & NK are acting in their own strategic best interests. Ruthless dictators aren't known for doing things for the attention, especially not with the costs associated with both the ICBMs and the Nukes. Something has clearly changed, which is why they want to deal now. Either there was never a deal before from the rest of the members of the Six Party talks, or North Korea wasn't free to make such a deal. From where the public information sits, no one knows the answer to that question. As I said some pages back, we really don't know the actual story of what has been going on with North Korea without knowing why Kim's older half-brother was killed in Malaysia. Answer the questions "Who killed him?" and "Why?", then you know the reason all of this stuff has happened the way it has.
Though there is several things Obama could have done wildly differently, but that'd have required firing his entire FP staff. The "joy" of Twitter is you can go get the thoughts of most of his top officials. Most of the people are so blindly incompetent, it's no wonder everything went poorly for Obama. He was outmatched for the job, but his administration was staffed with possibly the largest collection of highly educated idiots you'll ever find.
Oh, and do realize most of the major governments across the globe were reading Obama's intelligence briefings before he was. That's why Hillary's Emails were such an issue. It was an Enigma/Purple level of counter-intelligence failure. If you like Obama, do realize that the actions of those within his administration prevented him from ever doing anything productive. A lot of intelligence agencies must have been pissed when Hillary left the SoS role.
|
|
|
On April 27 2018 19:23 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2018 19:17 Taf the Ghost wrote:On April 27 2018 19:03 Qikz wrote:
This is huge news if it actually sticks. I wonder if it will end the mandatory military service. Could we get Bisu back early?
Damn, I realy hope this works purely for the families that were ripped apart by this and also hopefully it'll lead to a humanitarian effort to save the North Koreans who are suffering. It's probably 4-6 years before the South Koreans would go about changing mandatory military service, so, unfortunately, it's unlikely we'll get Bisu back early. As for North Korea, expect it to still be a really, really terrible place. It's just going to stop being one threatening its neighbors on a regular basis. They also have a political culture so poisoned that some form of Self-Government are at least a generation away, plus any pressure for such reforms is extremely unlikely. 4-6 Years is really optimistic too. If stuff unfolds similar to Germany (Which i doubt, since NK still exists and still is a threat to SK), mandatory time will slowly get reduced over time. It took us more than 20 years to end mandatory service after the fall of the Berlin Wall. (Though the two are not directly linked, they are definitively related)
I agree, but in about 5 years, they'd probably look to change the situation somewhat. My guess, for cost reasons, they'd probably want to drop the time down to about 18 months rather than 2 years. And there might be more ways to opt-out of serving.
Budgetary pressures alone will push SK to cut back in the future, but it'll be a bit. We have to see how North Korea actually acts.
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51449 Posts
Plus if South Korea don't have to strengthen military defense all the time constantly, then can put that budget into other sectors and boost that. But just having these two countries in "peace" and talking regularly just helps both countries which is awesome.
|
On April 27 2018 20:19 Pandemona wrote:
Plus if South Korea don't have to strengthen military defense all the time constantly, then can put that budget into other sectors and boost that. But just having these two countries in "peace" and talking regularly just helps both countries which is awesome.
Very much so. As an American, the US-North Korea war is the longest on the books and there is still over 10,000 US Troops stationed in SK. It's better for everyone if all of this ends, as it improves the situation for everyone.
One detail that's probably important, but North Korea is sitting on some very mineral, metal & (possibly) oil rich regions in the north of the country. There's a lot of wealth to be had from knowing how to gather those materials, which will be of large interest to both Koreas to actually do something productive with.
And, just as a cherry on top, we all know Dennis Rodman is getting a part of the Nobel Peace Prize out of this. That's just the way the world is now.
|
|
|
5930 Posts
On April 27 2018 19:57 Taf the Ghost wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2018 15:37 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On April 26 2018 14:34 LegalLord wrote:On April 26 2018 13:44 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On April 26 2018 07:46 LegalLord wrote:On April 26 2018 07:38 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
I've called Obama out on multiple issues I've felt he could have handled better. I've seen more apologism than anything else, honestly. Especially here. In any case, I don't think this is going anywhere, and I don't think you're getting what I'm trying to say, so I'll just leave it at that.On April 26 2018 07:22 micronesia wrote:
If the gossip about the NK nuclear test sight collapsing is true, and there is a significant risk of large uncontrolled releases of radioactivity from the test sight, then I think some reputable scientific organizations need to publicly analyze the risk and put it into perspective. While I wouldn't want to live next door to that test sight, the US and the USSR both detonated quite a few nuclear bombs in the open atmosphere over the years. At least in this case, the short to medium lived isotopes have had a chance to decay away due to the duration since the previous underground weapons tests in NK.
The little bit of coverage I've read about this so far seems to have appropriately bounded the immediate 'danger' to nearby neighboring countries and hasn't been egregious. Still, NK can't afford to piss of China by sending nontrivial quantities of strontium-90 and cesium-137 their way. From what I saw this looks like about as bad as a bungled mining operation leading to spills in the immediate area and in nearby water routes. That could be fairly bad, largely localized but not entirely, and probably something you need to handle with care. They would be right to want to ask for help and to make concessions to stop it. But it's also not an immediate total catastrophe either. No, I don't get what you're saying because you aren't saying a fucking thing. Mohdoo asked and you gave the weakest fucking examples. Like in the NASA thread and in US poli, you give vague fucking answers and expect people to read between the lines. I get that you expected more from Obama and was let down. But dude, come the hell on. What more could he have done to stop NK from getting nukes? What has trump done, himself or his admin, to get Kim to the table? I had something longer written up, but given that this seems to be primarily airing grudges, again, I'll be rather succinct instead: The thing Obama failed to do that would have led to a better result is to develop cooperative relations with nations that could have helped defuse the threat if they were inclined to cooperate, and to have the foresight to see how an influx of foreign technology could make the problem a lot worse, a lot faster. No such solution is perfect or without tradeoffs, but given that we have the once preventable reality that a rogue nation has nuclear ICBMs, using the "there's nothing that could have been done" defense to try to exonerate Obama at every turn (and trying to strawman every point into "nah the only other option is war") is disingenuous as fuck. That's the last I will say - I'm not seeing any desire for a real discussion from your end. But in case you wanted a real answer, I provide the above as an attempt at clarifying my main point. Emphasis mine. Again. What nations? What were the options, specifically? What has trump or his admin done that got us here? I'm not exonerating Obama. Stop that. I'm saying you can't blame him for where we are. You think the UN or USA should just throw money at Kim and tell him to stop? Give him the resources he needs to feed his people or to help introduce cleaner, healthier technology besides farming with literal human shit? Open the economy somewhat to allow foreign aid and workers to get the people on the right track to joining the rest of the modern world? Should SK bend over and say, "Hey, we don't want a war or to cause any harm to either of our people. You can be the rulers of a unified Korea, just give up the nukes." ? Is that what you're saying? Or are you saying that Obama should have seen into the future where NK would develop ICBMs that could "potentially" reach the continental US and have acted accordingly (read: militarily), all the while risking "worsening" relations with China? (no US company is barred from dealing with China and they will continue to do so when the economy is basically US ver 2.) You're obvious dislike for Obama is apparent and known. I'm asking, what has trump and his admin done to get us this close to a peace deal with NK? Answer that and I'll drop it. Explain to me, how Obama could have essentially forced sovereign nations to get NK to the table. Explain to me, how short of anything military that wasn't already tried, would have worked. Though there is several things Obama could have done wildly differently, but that'd have required firing his entire FP staff. The "joy" of Twitter is you can go get the thoughts of most of his top officials. Most of the people are so blindly incompetent, it's no wonder everything went poorly for Obama. He was outmatched for the job, but his administration was staffed with possibly the largest collection of highly educated idiots you'll ever find.
I think that's a pretty bad take on the Obama administration (and past administrations) with regards to North Korea.
They're not incompetent, their actions were to maintain the status quo in region as that provided justification for the US military presence. With the foreign office in shambles and Trump not really giving a shit about the United States presence in Asia outside looking like a winner/dealmaker, there's no one to willing to undermine the peace process like what happened with George W Bush.
|
United States42004 Posts
On April 27 2018 19:57 Taf the Ghost wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2018 15:37 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On April 26 2018 14:34 LegalLord wrote:On April 26 2018 13:44 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On April 26 2018 07:46 LegalLord wrote:On April 26 2018 07:38 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
I've called Obama out on multiple issues I've felt he could have handled better. I've seen more apologism than anything else, honestly. Especially here. In any case, I don't think this is going anywhere, and I don't think you're getting what I'm trying to say, so I'll just leave it at that.On April 26 2018 07:22 micronesia wrote:
If the gossip about the NK nuclear test sight collapsing is true, and there is a significant risk of large uncontrolled releases of radioactivity from the test sight, then I think some reputable scientific organizations need to publicly analyze the risk and put it into perspective. While I wouldn't want to live next door to that test sight, the US and the USSR both detonated quite a few nuclear bombs in the open atmosphere over the years. At least in this case, the short to medium lived isotopes have had a chance to decay away due to the duration since the previous underground weapons tests in NK.
The little bit of coverage I've read about this so far seems to have appropriately bounded the immediate 'danger' to nearby neighboring countries and hasn't been egregious. Still, NK can't afford to piss of China by sending nontrivial quantities of strontium-90 and cesium-137 their way. From what I saw this looks like about as bad as a bungled mining operation leading to spills in the immediate area and in nearby water routes. That could be fairly bad, largely localized but not entirely, and probably something you need to handle with care. They would be right to want to ask for help and to make concessions to stop it. But it's also not an immediate total catastrophe either. No, I don't get what you're saying because you aren't saying a fucking thing. Mohdoo asked and you gave the weakest fucking examples. Like in the NASA thread and in US poli, you give vague fucking answers and expect people to read between the lines. I get that you expected more from Obama and was let down. But dude, come the hell on. What more could he have done to stop NK from getting nukes? What has trump done, himself or his admin, to get Kim to the table? I had something longer written up, but given that this seems to be primarily airing grudges, again, I'll be rather succinct instead: The thing Obama failed to do that would have led to a better result is to develop cooperative relations with nations that could have helped defuse the threat if they were inclined to cooperate, and to have the foresight to see how an influx of foreign technology could make the problem a lot worse, a lot faster. No such solution is perfect or without tradeoffs, but given that we have the once preventable reality that a rogue nation has nuclear ICBMs, using the "there's nothing that could have been done" defense to try to exonerate Obama at every turn (and trying to strawman every point into "nah the only other option is war") is disingenuous as fuck. That's the last I will say - I'm not seeing any desire for a real discussion from your end. But in case you wanted a real answer, I provide the above as an attempt at clarifying my main point. Emphasis mine. Again. What nations? What were the options, specifically? What has trump or his admin done that got us here? I'm not exonerating Obama. Stop that. I'm saying you can't blame him for where we are. You think the UN or USA should just throw money at Kim and tell him to stop? Give him the resources he needs to feed his people or to help introduce cleaner, healthier technology besides farming with literal human shit? Open the economy somewhat to allow foreign aid and workers to get the people on the right track to joining the rest of the modern world? Should SK bend over and say, "Hey, we don't want a war or to cause any harm to either of our people. You can be the rulers of a unified Korea, just give up the nukes." ? Is that what you're saying? Or are you saying that Obama should have seen into the future where NK would develop ICBMs that could "potentially" reach the continental US and have acted accordingly (read: militarily), all the while risking "worsening" relations with China? (no US company is barred from dealing with China and they will continue to do so when the economy is basically US ver 2.) You're obvious dislike for Obama is apparent and known. I'm asking, what has trump and his admin done to get us this close to a peace deal with NK? Answer that and I'll drop it. Explain to me, how Obama could have essentially forced sovereign nations to get NK to the table. Explain to me, how short of anything military that wasn't already tried, would have worked. Actually treated it like it's a problem. Obama was a very ambitious Man & brilliant campaigner, but he never had the skill set for the Presidency in domestic affairs. In Foreign Policy, everyone loved him because they could keep playing the USA for fools at every turn. Foreign Elites loved the Obama Administration because they got everything they wanted, at the cost to the normal Americans. (This is, in many ways, why we got Trump.) What the Trump Administration has done is actually call the bluff & put pressure where it actually hurts North Korea. The Missiles are the public-facing issue, but the real issue is sub-launched missiles. North Korea has the missiles & now a missile submarine to put all of the major cities of SK, China & Japan at risk. (Likely those in SE Asia as well, but that might be a 1-way trip for a sub of that size.) The main vector has all been Economic in nature, though there are 2 Carrier groups in the region to make the Economic vector have a fallback position. In most cases, International "sanctions" are toothless things, and they're constantly gotten around, with ease, for the ruling elites in the country facing the sanctions. Sure, some of their people might starve, but they're eating well, what do they care? There are ways to make sanctions hurt, it's just normally never done. That changed last year, which is also why China & Russia were "willing" to vote for the sanctions at the UN. The Yes votes from China & Russia were likely part of a deal cut, such that the USA wouldn't attack several important banks & companies, in both countries, with removal from the global financial system. That's speculation, but it would fit with where the targeted actions went, especially as North Korea has worked as a proxy for factions within the Chinese Military for years. The layer we won't get real information about for 20-50 years is who held what strings over North Korea. Kim & NK are acting in their own strategic best interests. Ruthless dictators aren't known for doing things for the attention, especially not with the costs associated with both the ICBMs and the Nukes. Something has clearly changed, which is why they want to deal now. Either there was never a deal before from the rest of the members of the Six Party talks, or North Korea wasn't free to make such a deal. From where the public information sits, no one knows the answer to that question. As I said some pages back, we really don't know the actual story of what has been going on with North Korea without knowing why Kim's older half-brother was killed in Malaysia. Answer the questions "Who killed him?" and "Why?", then you know the reason all of this stuff has happened the way it has. Though there is several things Obama could have done wildly differently, but that'd have required firing his entire FP staff. The "joy" of Twitter is you can go get the thoughts of most of his top officials. Most of the people are so blindly incompetent, it's no wonder everything went poorly for Obama. He was outmatched for the job, but his administration was staffed with possibly the largest collection of highly educated idiots you'll ever find. Oh, and do realize most of the major governments across the globe were reading Obama's intelligence briefings before he was. That's why Hillary's Emails were such an issue. It was an Enigma/Purple level of counter-intelligence failure. If you like Obama, do realize that the actions of those within his administration prevented him from ever doing anything productive. A lot of intelligence agencies must have been pissed when Hillary left the SoS role.
Literally nothing in this post is factually accurate.
|
I have to agree. I think the credit goes to the South Korean president running on and actively trying to open lines of communication with North Korea. And North Korea being willing to drop the demand that US troops leave South Korea.
|
How and why did this happen?
|
On April 27 2018 22:22 Womwomwom wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2018 19:57 Taf the Ghost wrote:On April 26 2018 15:37 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On April 26 2018 14:34 LegalLord wrote:On April 26 2018 13:44 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On April 26 2018 07:46 LegalLord wrote:On April 26 2018 07:38 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
I've called Obama out on multiple issues I've felt he could have handled better. I've seen more apologism than anything else, honestly. Especially here. In any case, I don't think this is going anywhere, and I don't think you're getting what I'm trying to say, so I'll just leave it at that.On April 26 2018 07:22 micronesia wrote:
If the gossip about the NK nuclear test sight collapsing is true, and there is a significant risk of large uncontrolled releases of radioactivity from the test sight, then I think some reputable scientific organizations need to publicly analyze the risk and put it into perspective. While I wouldn't want to live next door to that test sight, the US and the USSR both detonated quite a few nuclear bombs in the open atmosphere over the years. At least in this case, the short to medium lived isotopes have had a chance to decay away due to the duration since the previous underground weapons tests in NK.
The little bit of coverage I've read about this so far seems to have appropriately bounded the immediate 'danger' to nearby neighboring countries and hasn't been egregious. Still, NK can't afford to piss of China by sending nontrivial quantities of strontium-90 and cesium-137 their way. From what I saw this looks like about as bad as a bungled mining operation leading to spills in the immediate area and in nearby water routes. That could be fairly bad, largely localized but not entirely, and probably something you need to handle with care. They would be right to want to ask for help and to make concessions to stop it. But it's also not an immediate total catastrophe either. No, I don't get what you're saying because you aren't saying a fucking thing. Mohdoo asked and you gave the weakest fucking examples. Like in the NASA thread and in US poli, you give vague fucking answers and expect people to read between the lines. I get that you expected more from Obama and was let down. But dude, come the hell on. What more could he have done to stop NK from getting nukes? What has trump done, himself or his admin, to get Kim to the table? I had something longer written up, but given that this seems to be primarily airing grudges, again, I'll be rather succinct instead: The thing Obama failed to do that would have led to a better result is to develop cooperative relations with nations that could have helped defuse the threat if they were inclined to cooperate, and to have the foresight to see how an influx of foreign technology could make the problem a lot worse, a lot faster. No such solution is perfect or without tradeoffs, but given that we have the once preventable reality that a rogue nation has nuclear ICBMs, using the "there's nothing that could have been done" defense to try to exonerate Obama at every turn (and trying to strawman every point into "nah the only other option is war") is disingenuous as fuck. That's the last I will say - I'm not seeing any desire for a real discussion from your end. But in case you wanted a real answer, I provide the above as an attempt at clarifying my main point. Emphasis mine. Again. What nations? What were the options, specifically? What has trump or his admin done that got us here? I'm not exonerating Obama. Stop that. I'm saying you can't blame him for where we are. You think the UN or USA should just throw money at Kim and tell him to stop? Give him the resources he needs to feed his people or to help introduce cleaner, healthier technology besides farming with literal human shit? Open the economy somewhat to allow foreign aid and workers to get the people on the right track to joining the rest of the modern world? Should SK bend over and say, "Hey, we don't want a war or to cause any harm to either of our people. You can be the rulers of a unified Korea, just give up the nukes." ? Is that what you're saying? Or are you saying that Obama should have seen into the future where NK would develop ICBMs that could "potentially" reach the continental US and have acted accordingly (read: militarily), all the while risking "worsening" relations with China? (no US company is barred from dealing with China and they will continue to do so when the economy is basically US ver 2.) You're obvious dislike for Obama is apparent and known. I'm asking, what has trump and his admin done to get us this close to a peace deal with NK? Answer that and I'll drop it. Explain to me, how Obama could have essentially forced sovereign nations to get NK to the table. Explain to me, how short of anything military that wasn't already tried, would have worked. Though there is several things Obama could have done wildly differently, but that'd have required firing his entire FP staff. The "joy" of Twitter is you can go get the thoughts of most of his top officials. Most of the people are so blindly incompetent, it's no wonder everything went poorly for Obama. He was outmatched for the job, but his administration was staffed with possibly the largest collection of highly educated idiots you'll ever find. I think that's a pretty bad take on the Obama administration (and past administrations) with regards to North Korea. They're not incompetent, their actions were to maintain the status quo in region as that provided justification for the US military presence. With the foreign office in shambles and Trump not really giving a shit about the United States presence in Asia outside looking like a winner/dealmaker, there's no one to willing to undermine the peace process like what happened with George W Bush.
It's a very charitable take on the Obama Administration's Foreign Policy. A more direct take is that they consistently worked to advance the interests of non-Americans over America for their own personal & ideological gain, though they were still amazingly incompetent at even achieving that. It's why the Trump Administration can get so much done on so many fronts: the last several administrations just really weren't that competent, and we get to see the comparison in real-time.
A kinder-to-the-staff take is that it didn't matter if they were the best FP staff in history because every other country on the planet with any intelligence capabilities was reading everything that cross Hillary's email, thus the entire world knew all American FP planning, in real-time, & before most of the staff was informed. For all of issues wrapped up in the criminal aspect of Hillary's Server, everyone skips over how massive of a National Security disaster it was. It was an Enigma-level disaster and everyone just skips right over it.
As for the western Pacific, the USA and the Trump Administration are quite invested in Asia, it's just that Trump isn't interested in selling out Americans to foreign power elites. That's the main reason he's currently President. The Trump Administration's goals are strategic economic ones, and has been operating around those vectors the entire time. Dealing with North Korea is just an off-shoot of that, as cutting off China's lifelines to North Korea were necessary to deal with that issue, thus it was a leverage point the USA could use on China with regards to trade. "Normalization of Trade" is a problem when you're getting the best deal, but it also means the other side has massive leverage in the situation.
|
On April 27 2018 22:24 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2018 19:57 Taf the Ghost wrote:On April 26 2018 15:37 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On April 26 2018 14:34 LegalLord wrote:On April 26 2018 13:44 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On April 26 2018 07:46 LegalLord wrote:On April 26 2018 07:38 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
I've called Obama out on multiple issues I've felt he could have handled better. I've seen more apologism than anything else, honestly. Especially here. In any case, I don't think this is going anywhere, and I don't think you're getting what I'm trying to say, so I'll just leave it at that.On April 26 2018 07:22 micronesia wrote:
If the gossip about the NK nuclear test sight collapsing is true, and there is a significant risk of large uncontrolled releases of radioactivity from the test sight, then I think some reputable scientific organizations need to publicly analyze the risk and put it into perspective. While I wouldn't want to live next door to that test sight, the US and the USSR both detonated quite a few nuclear bombs in the open atmosphere over the years. At least in this case, the short to medium lived isotopes have had a chance to decay away due to the duration since the previous underground weapons tests in NK.
The little bit of coverage I've read about this so far seems to have appropriately bounded the immediate 'danger' to nearby neighboring countries and hasn't been egregious. Still, NK can't afford to piss of China by sending nontrivial quantities of strontium-90 and cesium-137 their way. From what I saw this looks like about as bad as a bungled mining operation leading to spills in the immediate area and in nearby water routes. That could be fairly bad, largely localized but not entirely, and probably something you need to handle with care. They would be right to want to ask for help and to make concessions to stop it. But it's also not an immediate total catastrophe either. No, I don't get what you're saying because you aren't saying a fucking thing. Mohdoo asked and you gave the weakest fucking examples. Like in the NASA thread and in US poli, you give vague fucking answers and expect people to read between the lines. I get that you expected more from Obama and was let down. But dude, come the hell on. What more could he have done to stop NK from getting nukes? What has trump done, himself or his admin, to get Kim to the table? I had something longer written up, but given that this seems to be primarily airing grudges, again, I'll be rather succinct instead: The thing Obama failed to do that would have led to a better result is to develop cooperative relations with nations that could have helped defuse the threat if they were inclined to cooperate, and to have the foresight to see how an influx of foreign technology could make the problem a lot worse, a lot faster. No such solution is perfect or without tradeoffs, but given that we have the once preventable reality that a rogue nation has nuclear ICBMs, using the "there's nothing that could have been done" defense to try to exonerate Obama at every turn (and trying to strawman every point into "nah the only other option is war") is disingenuous as fuck. That's the last I will say - I'm not seeing any desire for a real discussion from your end. But in case you wanted a real answer, I provide the above as an attempt at clarifying my main point. Emphasis mine. Again. What nations? What were the options, specifically? What has trump or his admin done that got us here? I'm not exonerating Obama. Stop that. I'm saying you can't blame him for where we are. You think the UN or USA should just throw money at Kim and tell him to stop? Give him the resources he needs to feed his people or to help introduce cleaner, healthier technology besides farming with literal human shit? Open the economy somewhat to allow foreign aid and workers to get the people on the right track to joining the rest of the modern world? Should SK bend over and say, "Hey, we don't want a war or to cause any harm to either of our people. You can be the rulers of a unified Korea, just give up the nukes." ? Is that what you're saying? Or are you saying that Obama should have seen into the future where NK would develop ICBMs that could "potentially" reach the continental US and have acted accordingly (read: militarily), all the while risking "worsening" relations with China? (no US company is barred from dealing with China and they will continue to do so when the economy is basically US ver 2.) You're obvious dislike for Obama is apparent and known. I'm asking, what has trump and his admin done to get us this close to a peace deal with NK? Answer that and I'll drop it. Explain to me, how Obama could have essentially forced sovereign nations to get NK to the table. Explain to me, how short of anything military that wasn't already tried, would have worked. Actually treated it like it's a problem. Obama was a very ambitious Man & brilliant campaigner, but he never had the skill set for the Presidency in domestic affairs. In Foreign Policy, everyone loved him because they could keep playing the USA for fools at every turn. Foreign Elites loved the Obama Administration because they got everything they wanted, at the cost to the normal Americans. (This is, in many ways, why we got Trump.) What the Trump Administration has done is actually call the bluff & put pressure where it actually hurts North Korea. The Missiles are the public-facing issue, but the real issue is sub-launched missiles. North Korea has the missiles & now a missile submarine to put all of the major cities of SK, China & Japan at risk. (Likely those in SE Asia as well, but that might be a 1-way trip for a sub of that size.) The main vector has all been Economic in nature, though there are 2 Carrier groups in the region to make the Economic vector have a fallback position. In most cases, International "sanctions" are toothless things, and they're constantly gotten around, with ease, for the ruling elites in the country facing the sanctions. Sure, some of their people might starve, but they're eating well, what do they care? There are ways to make sanctions hurt, it's just normally never done. That changed last year, which is also why China & Russia were "willing" to vote for the sanctions at the UN. The Yes votes from China & Russia were likely part of a deal cut, such that the USA wouldn't attack several important banks & companies, in both countries, with removal from the global financial system. That's speculation, but it would fit with where the targeted actions went, especially as North Korea has worked as a proxy for factions within the Chinese Military for years. The layer we won't get real information about for 20-50 years is who held what strings over North Korea. Kim & NK are acting in their own strategic best interests. Ruthless dictators aren't known for doing things for the attention, especially not with the costs associated with both the ICBMs and the Nukes. Something has clearly changed, which is why they want to deal now. Either there was never a deal before from the rest of the members of the Six Party talks, or North Korea wasn't free to make such a deal. From where the public information sits, no one knows the answer to that question. As I said some pages back, we really don't know the actual story of what has been going on with North Korea without knowing why Kim's older half-brother was killed in Malaysia. Answer the questions "Who killed him?" and "Why?", then you know the reason all of this stuff has happened the way it has. Though there is several things Obama could have done wildly differently, but that'd have required firing his entire FP staff. The "joy" of Twitter is you can go get the thoughts of most of his top officials. Most of the people are so blindly incompetent, it's no wonder everything went poorly for Obama. He was outmatched for the job, but his administration was staffed with possibly the largest collection of highly educated idiots you'll ever find. Oh, and do realize most of the major governments across the globe were reading Obama's intelligence briefings before he was. That's why Hillary's Emails were such an issue. It was an Enigma/Purple level of counter-intelligence failure. If you like Obama, do realize that the actions of those within his administration prevented him from ever doing anything productive. A lot of intelligence agencies must have been pissed when Hillary left the SoS role. Literally nothing in this post is factually accurate.
Kim Jong-nam is alive? That's a shocking development!
|
On April 27 2018 22:45 Plansix wrote:
I have to agree. I think the credit goes to the South Korean president running on and actively trying to open lines of communication with North Korea. And North Korea being willing to drop the demand that US troops leave South Korea.
ah, so trump had nothing to do with it?
then why are south korea thanking trump multiple times for the last 4 months, and their foreign minister saying "Clearly, credit goes to President Trump," Kang told CNN's Christiane Amanpour in Seoul. "He's been determined to come to grips with this from day one."? http://www.erienewsnow.com/story/38047273/south-korea-credits-trump-for-opening-door-to-talks-with-north
what any U.S. citizen should be asking is why Trump was able to so easily move things towards this, and yet it didn't happen under any other president.
|
5930 Posts
On April 27 2018 23:10 Taf the Ghost wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2018 22:22 Womwomwom wrote:On April 27 2018 19:57 Taf the Ghost wrote:On April 26 2018 15:37 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On April 26 2018 14:34 LegalLord wrote:On April 26 2018 13:44 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On April 26 2018 07:46 LegalLord wrote:On April 26 2018 07:38 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
I've called Obama out on multiple issues I've felt he could have handled better. I've seen more apologism than anything else, honestly. Especially here. In any case, I don't think this is going anywhere, and I don't think you're getting what I'm trying to say, so I'll just leave it at that.On April 26 2018 07:22 micronesia wrote:
If the gossip about the NK nuclear test sight collapsing is true, and there is a significant risk of large uncontrolled releases of radioactivity from the test sight, then I think some reputable scientific organizations need to publicly analyze the risk and put it into perspective. While I wouldn't want to live next door to that test sight, the US and the USSR both detonated quite a few nuclear bombs in the open atmosphere over the years. At least in this case, the short to medium lived isotopes have had a chance to decay away due to the duration since the previous underground weapons tests in NK.
The little bit of coverage I've read about this so far seems to have appropriately bounded the immediate 'danger' to nearby neighboring countries and hasn't been egregious. Still, NK can't afford to piss of China by sending nontrivial quantities of strontium-90 and cesium-137 their way. From what I saw this looks like about as bad as a bungled mining operation leading to spills in the immediate area and in nearby water routes. That could be fairly bad, largely localized but not entirely, and probably something you need to handle with care. They would be right to want to ask for help and to make concessions to stop it. But it's also not an immediate total catastrophe either. No, I don't get what you're saying because you aren't saying a fucking thing. Mohdoo asked and you gave the weakest fucking examples. Like in the NASA thread and in US poli, you give vague fucking answers and expect people to read between the lines. I get that you expected more from Obama and was let down. But dude, come the hell on. What more could he have done to stop NK from getting nukes? What has trump done, himself or his admin, to get Kim to the table? I had something longer written up, but given that this seems to be primarily airing grudges, again, I'll be rather succinct instead: The thing Obama failed to do that would have led to a better result is to develop cooperative relations with nations that could have helped defuse the threat if they were inclined to cooperate, and to have the foresight to see how an influx of foreign technology could make the problem a lot worse, a lot faster. No such solution is perfect or without tradeoffs, but given that we have the once preventable reality that a rogue nation has nuclear ICBMs, using the "there's nothing that could have been done" defense to try to exonerate Obama at every turn (and trying to strawman every point into "nah the only other option is war") is disingenuous as fuck. That's the last I will say - I'm not seeing any desire for a real discussion from your end. But in case you wanted a real answer, I provide the above as an attempt at clarifying my main point. Emphasis mine. Again. What nations? What were the options, specifically? What has trump or his admin done that got us here? I'm not exonerating Obama. Stop that. I'm saying you can't blame him for where we are. You think the UN or USA should just throw money at Kim and tell him to stop? Give him the resources he needs to feed his people or to help introduce cleaner, healthier technology besides farming with literal human shit? Open the economy somewhat to allow foreign aid and workers to get the people on the right track to joining the rest of the modern world? Should SK bend over and say, "Hey, we don't want a war or to cause any harm to either of our people. You can be the rulers of a unified Korea, just give up the nukes." ? Is that what you're saying? Or are you saying that Obama should have seen into the future where NK would develop ICBMs that could "potentially" reach the continental US and have acted accordingly (read: militarily), all the while risking "worsening" relations with China? (no US company is barred from dealing with China and they will continue to do so when the economy is basically US ver 2.) You're obvious dislike for Obama is apparent and known. I'm asking, what has trump and his admin done to get us this close to a peace deal with NK? Answer that and I'll drop it. Explain to me, how Obama could have essentially forced sovereign nations to get NK to the table. Explain to me, how short of anything military that wasn't already tried, would have worked. Though there is several things Obama could have done wildly differently, but that'd have required firing his entire FP staff. The "joy" of Twitter is you can go get the thoughts of most of his top officials. Most of the people are so blindly incompetent, it's no wonder everything went poorly for Obama. He was outmatched for the job, but his administration was staffed with possibly the largest collection of highly educated idiots you'll ever find. I think that's a pretty bad take on the Obama administration (and past administrations) with regards to North Korea. They're not incompetent, their actions were to maintain the status quo in region as that provided justification for the US military presence. With the foreign office in shambles and Trump not really giving a shit about the United States presence in Asia outside looking like a winner/dealmaker, there's no one to willing to undermine the peace process like what happened with George W Bush. A kinder-to-the-staff take is that it didn't matter if they were the best FP staff in history because every other country on the planet with any intelligence capabilities was reading everything that cross Hillary's email, thus the entire world knew all American FP planning, in real-time, & before most of the staff was informed. For all of issues wrapped up in the criminal aspect of Hillary's Server, everyone skips over how massive of a National Security disaster it was. It was an Enigma-level disaster and everyone just skips right over it.
Most people really doesn't care about Hillary Clinton's emails, beyond the fact it makes her look untrustworthy, because the repeated findings have concluded that the contents were innocuous.
If you want to say that foreign adversaries took advantage of the United States because of Clintons' email server, feel free to provide sources to that claim.
On April 27 2018 23:58 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2018 22:45 Plansix wrote:
I have to agree. I think the credit goes to the South Korean president running on and actively trying to open lines of communication with North Korea. And North Korea being willing to drop the demand that US troops leave South Korea. ah, so trump had nothing to do with it? then why are south korea thanking trump multiple times for the last 4 months, and their foreign minister saying "Clearly, credit goes to President Trump," Kang told CNN's Christiane Amanpour in Seoul. "He's been determined to come to grips with this from day one."? http://www.erienewsnow.com/story/38047273/south-korea-credits-trump-for-opening-door-to-talks-with-northwhat any U.S. citizen should be asking is why Trump was able to so easily move things towards this, and yet it didn't happen under any other president.
Sanctions, North Korea having negotiating power via having actual nuke capacity, a left wing South Korean administrations after a whole decade of nationalist South Korean administrations, a South Korean president who campaigned on reunification as a campaign promise, an US administration unwilling/unable to interfere with their biliteral negotiations. Those are the main reasons why there's some degree of movement in these peace talks, which we barely even know about the details besides some nice gestures and the same proclamations as the last three times (1992, 2000, 2008?) this has happened.
As for praising Trump, just about every world leader has been doing it when they want to get something out of him. That's nothing new, Macron and Abe's sycophantic acts aren't new and they're pretty transparent about it too.
|
On April 27 2018 23:58 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2018 22:45 Plansix wrote:
I have to agree. I think the credit goes to the South Korean president running on and actively trying to open lines of communication with North Korea. And North Korea being willing to drop the demand that US troops leave South Korea. ah, so trump had nothing to do with it? then why are south korea thanking trump multiple times for the last 4 months, and their foreign minister saying "Clearly, credit goes to President Trump," Kang told CNN's Christiane Amanpour in Seoul. "He's been determined to come to grips with this from day one."? http://www.erienewsnow.com/story/38047273/south-korea-credits-trump-for-opening-door-to-talks-with-north
Because they figured out the super top secret trick that praising the US president on TV is an easy way to get him to agree to whatever you are saying? He is not a complex creature. I am sure his existence in office did something to move this matter forward.
|
oh okay, so it's a series of coincidences, and south korean officials are lying. yeah that makes more sense than Trump simply making some decisions that establishment-based presidencies wouldn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
