EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 223
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
Womwomwom
5930 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 25 2018 00:08 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: I wonder if they even got a heads up... I would bet money that Moon had planned for the day when Trump pulled out of the talks. How do you go into these talks and not expect Trump to bail over some petty shit? | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On May 24 2018 23:55 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: Thanks. I was wondering about the wierdly schizophrenic letter. With that context, you can literally read the bits written by Trump, and the bits written by a normal person.Self quote but this is the statement referred to in the letter (source): So the sentence I didn't understand is part of a retarded 'no it was you' game between US and NK for who actually initiated the planned talks. And the use by Trump/Bolton/Pence of the term 'Libya model', as if they didn't realize how Gadaffi ended up, for a denuclearization path is what made NK insult Pence, And now talks are off. Sigh. | ||
|
mozoku
United States708 Posts
If NK made it clear they have no intention of denuclearizing (or making any concessions), then it would be a bad idea to take the summit. It's as simple as that. Talks aren't an end unto themselves, and come with the implicit public expectation that the US should make concessions (which it should not, as that rewards states nuclearizing in a strategic attempt to gain negotiation leverage). China was also ostensibly using these talks as leverage in trade negotiations with the US. Delaying the summit takes that away from China for trade discussions, and the summit can potentially be rescheduled later on. I don't claim to know if this is the right move or not, but it's certainly not clear cut. The "discussion" on this page is literally no more than an assumption Trump is wrong coupled with lots of insults at the administration. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22519 Posts
On May 25 2018 00:08 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: If they got a heads up they wouldn't have had to have a midnight emergency meeting.https://twitter.com/annafifield/status/999665266941284352 I wonder if they even got a heads up... Besides, Trump does what Trump thinks of 5 minutes ago. Can't give an advanced warning of something you didn't know about an hour ago. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22519 Posts
On May 25 2018 00:15 mozoku wrote: NK doesn't want to denuclearize because the US put out the statement that they wanted to remove Kim once he got rid of his nukes. (the Libya model).Man, it's pretty amazing how much you guys are willing to set aside skepticism in your rush to Trump-bash. I might as well be reading a Fox News comment section during the Obama administration. If NK made it clear they have no intention of denuclearizing (or making any concessions), then it would be a bad idea to take the summit. It's as simple as that. Talks aren't an end unto themselves, and come with the implicit public expectation that the US should make concessions (which it should not, as that rewards states nuclearizing in a strategic attempt to gain negotiation leverage). China was also ostensibly using these talks as leverage in trade negotiations with the US. Delaying the summit takes that away from China for trade discussions, and the summit can potentially be rescheduled later on. I don't claim to know if this is the right move or not, but it's certainly not clear cut. The "discussion" on this page is literally no more than an assumption Trump is wrong coupled with lots of insults at the administration. China wants to get rid of the burden of NK but can't accept a US foothold on their doorstop. The concession of US troop withdraw is a dead given to happen. I mean, the US could hardly have to ruin the talks harder if they actually tried. And note how NK only ever threatened to leave the talks so that there is still room for political maneuvering. Unlike Trump who doesn't know the meaning of subtlety and simply says hes done, leaving no room for maneuvering without looking like an even bigger idiot. | ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
On May 25 2018 00:15 mozoku wrote: Man, it's pretty amazing how much you guys are willing to set aside skepticism in your rush to Trump-bash. I might as well be reading a Fox News comment section during the Obama administration. If NK made it clear they have no intention of denuclearizing (or making any concessions), then it would be a bad idea to take the summit. It's as simple as that. Talks aren't an end unto themselves, and come with the implicit public expectation that the US should make concessions (which it should not, as that rewards states nuclearizing in a strategic attempt to gain negotiation leverage). China was also ostensibly using these talks as leverage in trade negotiations with the US. Delaying the summit takes that away from China for trade discussions, and the summit can potentially be rescheduled later on. I don't claim to know if this is the right move or not, but it's certainly not clear cut. The "discussion" on this page is literally no more than an assumption Trump is wrong coupled with lots of insults at the administration. Are we going to ignore the fact that Trump brought on board somebody who openly is against these negotiations and then act surprised when he openly tries to sabotaged the talks? Will we ignore Pence putting his foot in his mouth? His administration cant give a coherent message because there is no control, just chaos. There is a reason no sitting president ever agreed to meeting with Kim; it's a dead end. NK gets what they want by being on the same footing as the US while they string us along. The fact Trump was the only one stupid enough to think he was immune from this play because he is some master negotiator in his addled mind does not earn him any benefit of the doubt. It just showcases his ignorance and rashness. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On May 25 2018 00:15 mozoku wrote: If NK made it clear they have no intention of denuclearizing (or making any concessions), then it would be a bad idea to take the summit. It's as simple as that. If this is the crux of your argument, there's nothing here. Denuclearization is not a necessity for peace. Many instances in history indicate the opposite. NK denuclearizing may feel necessary for Trump, but it is not necessary for peace. Edit: To clarify, the goal is peace and the preservation of human life. If the goal is for nukes to never be used, there are ways to accomplish that without nukes being removed. The US has more than a couple nukes. We haven't used them for quite some time. The existence of nukes does not mean nukes are used. Countries can have nukes and still be peaceful. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On May 25 2018 00:15 mozoku wrote: Man, it's pretty amazing how much you guys are willing to set aside skepticism in your rush to Trump-bash. I might as well be reading a Fox News comment section during the Obama administration. If NK made it clear they have no intention of denuclearizing (or making any concessions), then it would be a bad idea to take the summit. It's as simple as that. Talks aren't an end unto themselves, and come with the implicit public expectation that the US should make concessions (which it should not, as that rewards states nuclearizing in a strategic attempt to gain negotiation leverage). China was also ostensibly using these talks as leverage in trade negotiations with the US. Delaying the summit takes that away from China for trade discussions, and the summit can potentially be rescheduled later on. I don't claim to know if this is the right move or not, but it's certainly not clear cut. The "discussion" on this page is literally no more than an assumption Trump is wrong coupled with lots of insults at the administration. have you considered the possibility that you're simply engaging in an unreasonable degree of skepticism of the possibility of trump having done something very stupid? and/or are otherwise inaccurately assessing the situation? especially since you're making a false equivalency to the utter nonsense that a fox news comment section would be. also that sometimes it's not about the overall action that was done, but how it's done. i.e. the execution was poor. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 25 2018 00:15 mozoku wrote: Man, it's pretty amazing how much you guys are willing to set aside skepticism in your rush to Trump-bash. I might as well be reading a Fox News comment section during the Obama administration. If NK made it clear they have no intention of denuclearizing (or making any concessions), then it would be a bad idea to take the summit. It's as simple as that. Talks aren't an end unto themselves, and come with the implicit public expectation that the US should make concessions (which it should not, as that rewards states nuclearizing in a strategic attempt to gain negotiation leverage). China was also ostensibly using these talks as leverage in trade negotiations with the US. Delaying the summit takes that away from China for trade discussions, and the summit can potentially be rescheduled later on. I don't claim to know if this is the right move or not, but it's certainly not clear cut. The "discussion" on this page is literally no more than an assumption Trump is wrong coupled with lots of insults at the administration. The reason that people are critical of Trump is how hyped these talks were coupled with the hiring of Bolton, a Bush era neocon that advocated bombing NK. Like a lot, the man talked about bombing a lot of countries. This is on top of a gutted state department, including no ambassador to SK. These are all unforced errors that did the talks no favors. So yeah, we are critical of the administration’s handling this historic opportunity, just like people were critical of Obama when NK got nukes. | ||
|
iamthedave
England2814 Posts
On May 24 2018 23:06 Plansix wrote: In the biggest shocker of all, Trump is unable to resolve the NK conflict. I'll be honest, I thought it was over. Done. Finished. The best. Yuge peace incoming. | ||
|
Womwomwom
5930 Posts
On May 25 2018 00:26 Mohdoo wrote: If this is the crux of your argument, there's nothing here. Denuclearization is not a necessity for peace. Many instances in history indicate the opposite. NK denuclearizing may feel necessary for Trump, but it is not necessary for peace. Edit: To clarify, the goal is peace and the preservation of human life. If the goal is for nukes to never be used, there are ways to accomplish that without nukes being removed. The US has more than a couple nukes. We haven't used them for quite some time. The existence of nukes does not mean nukes are used. Countries can have nukes and still be peaceful. That was what basically the whole region minus Japan have already concluded. At this point, North Korea is a nuclear power and there’s nothing you can do about it. You kind of have to concede at this point for letting them get to this point, which is why the Iran deal was important despite whatever flaws it might have had. The problem with the whole Whitehouse’s handling of this is that the US takes the entire blame here. No one rational can blame North Korea because 1) that’s what they have done day in and day out and 2) they were entirely justified in reacting negatively to the threat of getting Gaddafied in two possible ways. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
FYI: we have reporters in NK right now. They have to get out of the country. This is some real shit the administration is pulling. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On May 25 2018 00:43 Womwomwom wrote: That was what basically the whole region minus Japan have already concluded. At this point, North Korea is a nuclear power and there’s nothing you can do about it. You kind of have to concede at this point for letting them get to this point, which is why the Iran deal was important despite whatever flaws it might have had. The problem with the whole Whitehouse’s handling of this is that the US takes the entire blame here. No one rational can blame North Korea because 1) that’s what they have done day in and day out and 2) they were entirely justified in reacting negatively to the threat of getting Gaddafied in two possible ways. Also true. The biggest, most important part of the Iran deal was keeping Iran a tier 2 country militarily. So long as you have no nukes, you are always strong armed into peace. On May 25 2018 00:47 Plansix wrote: https://twitter.com/PeterAlexander/status/999660246275641344 FYI: we have reporters in NK right now. They have to get out of the country. This is some real shit the administration is pulling. If NK pulled something funny, suddenly NK are the actual bad guys and Trump did the right thing. There's no way they would do that. Those reporters are among the safest people in the world right now. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On May 25 2018 01:08 Plansix wrote: I am sure the reporters would be very happy to be the ones to prove NK is “the bad guy” by being detained for an unknown period of time(months? Years?) A responsible administration would have waited until they were out of the country before pulling the plug. I'm not saying the trump admin was a reasonable, responsible actor with regards to reporter safety. I'm just saying I don't think the reporters are in any slight amount of danger. | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On May 25 2018 00:15 mozoku wrote: Man, it's pretty amazing how much you guys are willing to set aside skepticism in your rush to Trump-bash. I might as well be reading a Fox News comment section during the Obama administration. If NK made it clear they have no intention of denuclearizing (or making any concessions), then it would be a bad idea to take the summit. It's as simple as that. Talks aren't an end unto themselves, and come with the implicit public expectation that the US should make concessions (which it should not, as that rewards states nuclearizing in a strategic attempt to gain negotiation leverage). China was also ostensibly using these talks as leverage in trade negotiations with the US. Delaying the summit takes that away from China for trade discussions, and the summit can potentially be rescheduled later on. I don't claim to know if this is the right move or not, but it's certainly not clear cut. The "discussion" on this page is literally no more than an assumption Trump is wrong coupled with lots of insults at the administration. Setting aside the decision.. The execution was pretty shit. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On May 25 2018 01:22 JonnyBNoHo wrote: Setting aside the decision.. The execution was pretty shit. The execution looks like shit. The decision itself could be a very good thing or a very bad thing. NK has used promises of not pursuing nuclear weapons, and afterwards, disarming their nuclear weapon capabilities to gain aid and normalization and less sanctions. They violated these promises in the space of years. If NK came in with preconditions and Trump did act petulantly on the insult of Pence, it’s bad. If the Trump administration has reason to believe the negotiations were just another con to gain time for weapons development, money, normalization, and relief from sanctions, then I like this move. The treasury department has been blacklisting (mostly Chinese) companies that do business with North Korea. Sanctions could be stepped up further in all likelihood. Like mozoku was saying, it’s not clear cut, although some partisans really wish that it were true. I hope more Trump officials and Trump himself explain further in the coming weeks and months. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France8169 Posts
On May 25 2018 01:41 Danglars wrote: The execution looks like shit. The decision itself could be a very good thing or a very bad thing. NK has used promises of not pursuing nuclear weapons, and afterwards, disarming their nuclear weapon capabilities to gain aid and normalization and less sanctions. They violated these promises in the space of years. If NK came in with preconditions and Trump did act petulantly on the insult of Pence, it’s bad. If the Trump administration has reason to believe the negotiations were just another con to gain time for weapons development, money, normalization, and relief from sanctions, then I like this move. The treasury department has been blacklisting (mostly Chinese) companies that do business with North Korea. Sanctions could be stepped up further in all likelihood. Like mozoku was saying, it’s not clear cut, although some partisans really wish that it were true. I hope more Trump officials and Trump himself explain further in the coming weeks and months. If the whole thing, starting with the announcement of a meeting, hadn’t come out of nowhere a month after the two leaders traded schoolboy taunts on twitter, and if the whole thing didn’t look more like a real tv show than international dimplomacy, I would agree. At the moment it just doesn’t look like anyone is manoeuvering the ship. It was pretty obvious that story would not have a happy ending considering the extreme volatility of both parties. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
| ||
