Two Koreas Agree To End War This Year, Pursue Denuclearization (bloomberg.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and South Korean President Moon Jae-in agreed Friday to finally end a seven-decade war this year, and pursue the "complete denuclearization" of the Korean Peninsula. Kim and Moon embraced after signing the deal during a historic meeting on their militarized border, the first time a North Korean leader set foot on the southern side. They announced plans to replace the 1953 armistice that ended hostilities with a peace treaty by year's end. Their statement on a "common goal of realizing, through complete denuclearization, a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula," stopped short of the "complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearization" long sought by the U.S. and its allies. The statement didn't elaborate on what the term meant and Kim didn't personally utter the word during remarks Friday. "We have agreed to share a firm determination to open a new era in which all Korean people enjoy prosperity and happiness on a peaceful land without war," Kim told reporters, without taking questions. President Trump hailed the move, declaring "KOREAN WAR TO END!" on Twitter. He has agreed to meet with Kim at a time and place yet to be determined.

Comments

Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[Tulsa_Time]

If Obama can get one for doing nothing... this should be a slam dunk.

Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[Anonymous Coward]

Goaded them on until they neared collapse, and then made them come to the table.

Sometimes the baby wins.

Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[wonkey_monkey]

I think you'd have to show there was some intent. If two people are arguing, then a third person runs through the room flinging their poop at the walls and gibbering like a madman, it doesn't automatically mean the poop flinger is a master negotiator just because the argument gets cut short.

Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[Anonymous Coward]

If Obama can get one for doing nothing... this should be a slam dunk.

I believe he threatened nuclear war over twitter if he didn't get his way. I'm not certain Obama earned the peace prize, but giving one to this? I think not.

What is this a I'm crazier than you and just stupid enough to actually press the button so do what I want or else?

Sorry, if this works out well great, but I see nothing worth praise here. Most likely they simply don't need to be so overt about testing anymore and their program will go underground. We don't test live nuclear weapons any more either, but that doesn't mean we can't build them.

That all being said, I hope it works out, though there is a long record of things not working out that makes me skeptical and no all of his predecessors were not incompetent.

Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[Anonymous Coward]

While I don't think the tweets were helpful, Trump did push for tougher sanctions against North Korea. Meanwhile, Trump also offered to engage in direct talks with North Korea, something past presidents have refused to do. North Korea has walked to negotiate directly with the United States, while previous presidents have insisted that any negotiations should be part of the six party talks. Trump stepped up the pressure, calling it "maximum pressure", while offering North Korea something the direct negotiations they wanted and a possible way out of the sanctions. Both the United States and South Korea have been clear that denuclearization is necessary to get the sanctions lifted. That is a substantial difference from the strategy of past presidents, and is a logical approach to foreign policy.

The tougher sanctions likely had a significant impact on North Korea and made them more willing to negotiate. Trump's willingness for direct talks signaled a willingness for unprecedented direct talks. The tweets weren't helpful, but Trump's foreign policy did influence North Korea to make real concessions. Trump should get credit for that, and you're ignoring the real substance of his foreign policy.

When the policies of several past presidents haven't worked, it's time to try something different. That's the same logic that Obama used to justify normalizing relations with Cuba, which is also a reasonable decision. Let's just hope that Trump's threats to about the Iran nuclear deal are an effort to get Iran to extend their promises past 2025 and not a sincere intent to withdraw. If Trump is taking the role of the bad cop while Macron has the role of the good cop to negotiate more with Iran, it may be effective. If Trump actually withdraws, that's incredibly foolish. Trump is just so erratic that it's hard to distinguish legitimate foreign policy from outbursts and uninformed bluster.

Re: Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[poity]

[x] Not be Bush.
[_] Chant "Yes we can" during a campaign.
[_] Drone strike a bunch of people.

Trump hasn't met all the criteria for the Peace Prize yet, I'm afraid.

Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[Kjella]

More like two people arguing whether Kiss or AC/DC is better with Trump coming in as the crazy friend high on LSD asking if he should bash the other guy's skull in. And then it's like "Uh no we're good, they're both good bands... we're friends, see" because I don't think this happened on its own. I think they realized that Trump might actually set off a new Korean war, regardless if that'd fuck both North and South Korea hard. So when push comes to shove they'd rather come to terms, at least while the crazy guy is in the room...

Re: Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[DNS-and-BIND]

Trump surrounded NK with carriers and flew bombers off the coast. Moreover there are hard hitting sanctions that are harming Kim's ability to keep bribing his generals. This could have been done decades ago, but globalists find North Korea useful as a source of tension. The fact that millions suffer means nothing to them. Trump brought Kim to the table, but naturally nobody wants to give him credit because he's Hitler.

Re: Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[Citizen of Earth]

Trump also got serious about punishing the Chinese corporations that were supplying North Korea in defiance of the sanctions. Just ask ZTE. It's truly bizarre how deluded some people are about what actually happened here. Watch some Scott Adams videos if you want to know about the courtship ritual between Trump and Kim and the choices left open to Kim. While the lunatics were screeching WW3, Scott was explaining how there'd be peace pretty soon.

Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[guruevi]

It’s called negotiation and persuasion. Regardless of whether you agree with him, he has a way of getting under his opponents skins. CNN is still talking about the elections while Trump is changing policies right under our noses.

Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[prisoner-of-enigma]

People like you said the same BS about Reagan and the dissolution of the USSR: it was all accidental, would've happened anyway, Reagan was an incompetent warmonger, blah blah blah. You simply refuse to grasp that a hardline, belligerent stance backed up with credible threats of military action actually work when facing down tyrannical dictatorships.

Here's what really happened, and none of it was by accident:

1. NK developed their nukes with the intention of saber rattling and getting their way since it's worked so well for the last 70 years.
2. Trump let NK know we can and will turn them into a glowing parking lot if they don't stop doing that.
3. Trump let China know he's quite serious about pushing the Big Red Button on NK and put pressure on China via tariffs, probably with the deal being China pushes NK to start behaving and Trump will remove the tariffs.
4. China values their economic ties with the US far more than anything they're getting from NK, and further NK embarrassed the Chinese leadership with his nuclear testing.
5. China, seeing it in their best interests to reign in NK, told them they wouldn't step in if Trump pushed the Big Red Button and Kim finally figured out he's playing with something that will get him burned. China also probably threatened severe economic pressure on NK if they continued to misbehave.
6. NK, unable to survive economically without China and unable to withstand a US military without Chinese backing, wisely decided it's time to come to the the peace table before things get out of control.

Even you ought to be able to put the pieces together. Trump visits China. Then Kim visits China. Shortly thereafter Kim changes its stance. Only a fool would consider this accidental. Trump leaned on China and China leaned on Kim. This is something Obama could've easily done -- and maybe earned a Nobel instead of being given one for "participation" -- but was too naive to do. But no doubt had this happened on his watch you'd have given him full credit and claimed him a master politician. But since it happened on Trump's watch it has to be accidental, right? Can't give Trump credit. That might validate his ideology and invalidate yours and that simply can't be allowed.

Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you always judge people not by the content of their actions and words, but by what you think they think?

Admit it to yourself that if Obama, or Hillary, or literally anyone else did the exact same things Trump did in the exact same ways Trump did you would be posting praise instead of condemnation.

Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[prisoner-of-enigma]

She's more useful not being in jail. Imprison her and she becomes a martyr. Right now she's a washed-up has-been that's so toxic even Democrats don't want anything to do with her anymore.

Trust me, the sting of losing to Trump and having to live in political exile having never eclipsed her philandering husband's name is far more punishing than any cell could ever be.

Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[prisoner-of-enigma]

Nothing you've posted suggests that Trump was doing anything other than being a belligerent asshole rather than acting like one as part of a cunning plan.

And nothing you've observed has made a dent in that hardened cranium of yours to make you understand that Kim wouldn't have buckled to anyone except a belligerent asshole.

Obama wouldn't and couldn't have done it for many reasons, not least that NK would never have bought it coming from him.

Which, whether you realize it or not, proves my point. NK took Trump's threats seriously because they knew he was serious. Obama they laughed at and manipulated him like a child.

Trump being a gibbering lunatic might just be one of several factors that contribute to a lasting peace between NK and SK. That doesn't make him any less of a gibbering lunatic.

It's easier for you to chalk this up to total chance by a gibbering lunatic than to even consider the possibility this was all planned. This despite all the evidence in front of you that Trump's visit to China, Kim's subsequent visit to China, and Kim's sudden about face are very much intertwined.

It's very childish to go stating your baseless conclusions as to what I'm thinking as fact, when you could instead argue your own point constructively.

I have argued it constructively, even to the point of giving a numbered list backed up with observable evidence. You're just too stuck in your own mindset to listen to it. Hence I'm mocking you, as your response is exactly what I expected.

Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[prisoner-of-enigma]

He's willing to act outside the box. I don't think thinking comes into it very much.

Thinking without acting sure got Obama a long way towards solving the Korean Peninsula situation didn't it?

You're the one stuck in the box, unable -- no, unwilling -- to consider that Trump's tactics, while distasteful and odious to you, worked whereas the more genteel, cultured, thoughtful Obama didn't. To consider Trump successful would endanger your worldview. Hence you must assume Trump is a lunatic who by complete accident managed to bring NK to heel after decades worth of other administrations had failed.

I've said it since the election and I stand by it: people like you aren't afraid of Trump being a bad President; you're terrified he will be a good one who succeeds where his predecessors failed. You're fearful such successes will prove your ideas and ideologies don't actually work in the real world. Therefore you deny them any credit for their accomplishments in order to protect your pride. You'll never learn, not because you're stupid but because you're stubborn.

Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[ShanghaiBill]

The notion of giving a US President a Peace Prize is pretty much insane.

Al Gore got his as a consolation prize for not being president.

Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[Mashiki]

You don't make billions of dollars by sitting on your ass and playing safe either. I'm continually surprised at the number of people who have never seen hardline diplomacy or negotiation, and have only lived in the era's of weak presidents. No other president has done that even though the opportunity has presented itself. Hell the clusterfuck with them nuclearizing was because a weak president didn't bargain hard, and push harder when they had the opportunity to. And instead of going hard when they broke the deal, they let it go on.

Re: Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[Bing Tsher E]

It's not 'our' fucking business to prevent peace from breaking out in Korea. It's for the Korean people to decide.

I can't believe it's even necessary to have to say this.

Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[jander]

I would add:

7. NK Nuclear test mountain collapsed in on itself and would require significant resources to rebuild. Resources that they no longer have the economic means to acquire.

Agreeing to denuclearize means they get a win without having to substantiate it....

Re: Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[Mashiki]

You try being black. No, I mean try it. See?? Not so easy...

Ever try being asian/half-asian in the US and being subject to negative affirmative action policies? Blacks at least get pity points on admission, we get them taken away.

Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[quantaman]

While I don't think the tweets were helpful, Trump did push for tougher sanctions against North Korea. Meanwhile, Trump also offered to engage in direct talks with North Korea, something past presidents have refused to do. North Korea has walked to negotiate directly with the United States, while previous presidents have insisted that any negotiations should be part of the six party talks. Trump stepped up the pressure, calling it "maximum pressure", while offering North Korea something the direct negotiations they wanted and a possible way out of the sanctions. Both the United States and South Korea have been clear that denuclearization is necessary to get the sanctions lifted. That is a substantial difference from the strategy of past presidents, and is a logical approach to foreign policy.

The tougher sanctions likely had a significant impact on North Korea and made them more willing to negotiate. Trump's willingness for direct talks signaled a willingness for unprecedented direct talks. The tweets weren't helpful, but Trump's foreign policy did influence North Korea to make real concessions. Trump should get credit for that, and you're ignoring the real substance of his foreign policy.

I was thinking that originally but now I'm not sure it has anything to do with Trump.

NK is pursuing the same thing now it's always pursued, survival.

Previously this took the form of gaining deterrence, first artillery, then Nukes, and finally Nukes that can hit the US. Until they had those things they were never going to engage in serious negotiations.

But now they have all those things their deterrence is kinda maxed out, they can always improve their long range delivery, but realistically they've done the important thing which is prove they can deliver a Nuclear retaliation against the US.

NK isn't talking because of sanctions, or because Trump reached out, they're talking because they got what they've always wanted, Nuclear deterrence, and now they want stability. Denuclearization isn't really on the table, but as long as everyone knows they have long range Nukes they're probably content to stop testing.

Let's just hope that Trump's threats to about the Iran nuclear deal are an effort to get Iran to extend their promises past 2025 and not a sincere intent to withdraw. If Trump is taking the role of the bad cop while Macron has the role of the good cop to negotiate more with Iran, it may be effective. If Trump actually withdraws, that's incredibly foolish. Trump is just so erratic that it's hard to distinguish legitimate foreign policy from outbursts and uninformed bluster.

There's no good cop/bad cop play here. Trump took the narrative that the Iranian deal was a bad deal and ran with it all campaign, it's only through the desperate efforts of his cabinet that he's stayed in.

The problem with the "renegotiate" idea is that Trump has no leverage. It took Obama years to get Europe on board with the sanctions, if Trump decertifies the US sanctions come back but no one else will follow and Iran will be free to develop break-out capability again.

That's not saying the Trump can't negotiate other things with Iran (stop supporting X we'll stop sanctioning Y) but there's no better Nuclear deal to be had.

Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[Burz]

You're forgetting *China* imposed sanctions on NK. *That* is what lit a fire under them.

And what lit a fire under the Chinese was having a madman on their border gain control of some H-bombs.

Sanctions and breast beating from the US was more of the same. Trump deserves little if any credit though its given he'll try to claim it and his followers will mindlessly bleat it.

Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[fatwilbur]

Trump has no leverage?? He played his cards perfectly here - even looking at his "worst" tweets, he was basically calling Kim's bluff. This was literally a country that can't even provide electricity for it's citizens trying to act tough against the world's largest military power. He got China to back off from NK's support by trying to provoke the US. Only NK is that stupid, and perhaps Russia as well but they actually have some power to back up their words.

And most (Chinese) companies violating the sanctions quickly realize the US is a far, far, far more valuable trading partner than NK ever will be if they were called out on their actions.

It finally took someone to play hardball to solve the problem. Same thing will happen with Palestine.

Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[angel'o'sphere]

Trump should get credit for that, and you're ignoring the real substance of his foreign policy.
No he should not.

Despite your "insightful" rant, Trump has nothing to with it. And referring to north Korea as "they" when it is only one single person we are talking about, makes clear you have no clue.

The only two persons deserving credit for this is Kim Jong Un from NK and Moon Jae-in from SK. Unless I miss something and other negotiators are involved.

Hint: NK agreed to this despite of the US sanctions, not because of them.

Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[Uberbah]

She's more useful not being in jail. Imprison her and she becomes a martyr.

She wont go to jail for the same reason her husband dropped the Iran Contra investigation, the same reason Obama didn't prosecute Bush for war crimes, the same reason Trump wont prosecute Obama for starting wars without Congressional authorization. They're all a part of the same club and aren't about to send anyone to prison least they end up there themselves.

Right now she's a washed-up has-been that's so toxic even Democrats don't want anything to do with her anymore.

With the voters, yes, but the party has been working very, very, very hard to make it clear they DGAF about the voters. From the DNC arguing in court they have the right to rig primaries to Steney Hoyer just getting taped on doing just that. The Clintons are still influence peddlers and most Democratic officials owe them favors - favors the Clintons are happy to call in.

Thank you Dennis Rodman!

[Anonymous Coward]

Awesome job Dennis! Thanks for your help!

Re:Thank you Dennis Rodman!

[Citizen of Earth]

No, you're supposed to believe that Obama set this all up in perfect stealth mode over a year ago, or that Hillary should get the credit because this would have spontaneously happened on her watch while she was continuing Obama's failed policies.

Camp Humphries

[PopeRatzo]

It'll be interesting to see how they negotiate the removal of US forces from South Korea. The US has its biggest bases and airfields in all of Asia over there, and I can't imagine removing them is going to sit well with the Pentagon.

Re:Camp Humphries

[phantomfive]

Why? They had no problem closing the German bases fairly recently.

Re:Camp Humphries

[Solandri]

The biggest U.S. military presence in Asia is in Japan. The treaties which ended WWII prohibited Japan from building up a military which it could project overseas. They're only allowed to have a self-defense force (which is why that name often shows up in Japanese anime). In exchange, the U.S. is responsible for protecting Japan from foreign attack. So by necessity it has a large military presence in Japan (though Japan has shoved most of it into Okinawa, whose people are discriminated against by mainland Japanese).

From a logistical standpoint, Japan is an easier destination to reach from the U.S. (and vice versa). A great circle route between the U.S. and South Korea takes you over part of North Korea and Russia, which has resulted in simple mistakes producing tragic consequences in the past.

Re:Camp Humphries

[mapkinase]

Adding: one of the largest US _tank_ brigades in the world is in South Korea.

Trump is cracking on China, America's enemy number one, and it brings the fruits.

Trust, but verify

[TomR teh Pirate]

Kim has made a lot of commitments, none of them worth the paper they were printed on. I'll believe it when the inspectors believe it.

How did we come to this?

[Mystiq]

I'm still confused how this even happened. Is Trump such a dick that North Korea wants to be the good guys again because they're afraid for their safety? What is the state media narrative in North Korea right now?

Re:How did we come to this?

[phantomfive]

It wouldn't have happened if North Korea didn't want it, so they deserve credit. Kim Jong Un has spent a lot of time outside North Korea so he knows how things are.

Beyond that, Trump talks like the "internet tough guy." You know how when someone threatens to punch your face on the internet, you just laugh? Once North Korea realized that Trump's threats ("I have a BIGGER nuclear button!") were just noise, they gained confidence that he wasn't actually trying to destroy them. This contrasts with Bush's way of aggressiveness, which sounded malicious ("Axis of Evil"). (I will allow someone else to analyze Obama's way of talking).

Also Trump pushed China hard to put pressure on North Korea, so that surely helped, too.

Re:How did we come to this?

[eaglesrule]

With Trump making noises about putting tariffs on Chinese imports and adding to the cooling off of Chinese growth, support for North Korea may have come up on the bargaining table.

There is also the matter of the collapse of the nuclear test facility with unknown repercussions within N Korea.

It didn't seem clear that appeasement through saber rattling was going to work with Trump. With peaceful overtures comes a way to ease sanctions and dependence on Chinese support.

Kim won

[rsilvergun]

we've acknowledged him as the legitimate ruler of North Korea. That's what this was about. As soon as Trump said he'd meet with Kim, Kim won. He doesn't need the nukes any more. He's still got enough firepower to flatten South Korea, so he's still got his hostage situation. The nukes were just a trick to get us to the table and to get us to legitimize his reign. Worked too.

On the one hand I should be upset we're giving approval to yet another dictatorship. On the other hand NK is hardly the first and Trump just got outmaneuvered and lost his shot at an Iraq style war. On the other other hand there's still Iran, and they don't have a hostage to protect them.

Re:Kim won

[eaglesrule]

North Korea is ripe for unfettered capitalism and indentured slave labor, though. Surely that has to factor in somehow.

So the Job Creators get to fatten themselves that much more, Kim skims off the top and stays in power to live like a Saudi prince, this frees us up for a war with Iran to the delight of the military industrial complex, and Trump gets to crow that he accomplished something. What's wrong with that plan?

Finally took action that mattered

[thesupraman]

And finally pushed people to take action on taking away the flow of luxury goods to 'the great leader' and his cabal.
Since prior to that, their life of luxury has been untouchable, why why WOULD they want anything to change?

The old approach was to do things that in effect punished the general population, but never EVER touch those in control,
after all they are the ruling elite, and you just cannot do anything to THEM, think of the children!

Re:Prodigy...

[CrimsonAvenger]

US has been in conflict with North Korea beginning 1866

Interesting notion. Especially since North Korea didn't exist until 1945. Before that, Korea was a single nation, ruled variously by the Chinese, the Japanese, and even occasionally the Koreans....

Wow

[93 Escort Wagon]

People are really over-reacting to this - on both sides. It's certainly better news than if the two presidents had walked away from the table shouting "LOCK AND LOAD!" - but, right now, it's just words, and there have been plenty of words before.

Moon isn't an idiot - he's well aware he's got 25 million of his people living in and around a city that's only 35 miles from North Korea. He hasn't committed to much of anything... nor has Kim. "Ending" a war which has effectively been over for 70 years is a symbolic gesture, but little more than that.

Re:Wow

[bussdriver]

People should wise up and watch a good old movie to get some apparently new thoughts:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0...

NK has been saying stuff about deals forever; plenty of informed people realized that they didn't have a nutcase leader and they were going to get a position of power and some form of equality (nukes) so they could negotiate as one of the "big boys." The Iraq war only proved what a lot of smart people thought since the cold war. When they could theoretically nuke US leaders back, I expected them to adopt the same sort of line other nuclear adversaries.

Don't be so naive and think Trump had hardly anything to do with this... NK is going out of it's way to see all the actually important players 1st and do all the real work. China deserves most the 3rd party credit; the next super power... who is shrewd enough to become the unquestionable world power before the formal boasting begins.

Re:Wow

[Uberbah]

NK has been saying stuff about deals forever; plenty of informed people realized that they didn't have a nutcase leader and they were going to get a position of power and some form of equality (nukes) so they could negotiate as one of the "big boys."

North Korea's threats are retaliatory - "we can hit you back if you strike us" - and their nuclear weapons program is pure regime change insurance. Americans may have forgotten that they killed three million Koreans in an illegal war, flattening every city in the north, but they haven't. Nor are they willfully blind to the annual practice invasions the U.S. has been running every year since the Clinton Administration. Which means every year NK has to mobilize a million people in case this time it's for real. During planting season - and then you use the resulting food shortages to complain about those craaaazy North Koreans some more.

What does he need them _for_?

[rsilvergun]

As long as he can blast Seoul into rubble (and he can) I just don't see him needing them. He's got plenty of deterrent right there. It's not like the Israelis who, thanks to anti-Semites and their deeply rooted hate (boarding on psychosis), have to worry about nut cases rolling in to exterminate them and just not caring about conventional weaponry. The NK/SK dynamic has always been a hostage situation. It's odd that the media never really talks about it. Then again like I said we're shopping around for our next big war. Looks like NK is out of the running. Syria & Iran are next up.

Re:MASH

[jwhyche]

Hawkeye wasn't married.

We've been doing that for ages

[rsilvergun]

what triggered this is folks think Trump and his Cabinet are crazy enough to actually go to war and let NK make good on their threat to flatten Seoul.

I still don't like this outcome. We've not acknowledged Kim Jun Un's regime as legitimate. At least legally (and practically, since there's plenty of folks who don't follow politics enough to know NK's a monarchy and not a Democracy).

Re:We've been doing that for ages

[Anonymous Coward]

"folks think Trump and his Cabinet are crazy enough to actually go to war "
Trump is unpredictable and nobody knows exactly what he will do and this is a good thing. He is a poor President but he is necessary. The status quo needs to be challenged on both the domestic and international relations sides. Prior to Trump the US had been 100% predictable when it came to addressing international relations. Being predictable gives your adversaries the upper hand in almost every conflict. If you know what your adversary is going to do you can adjust your actions accordingly. Russia knew it could invade Crimea and start a civil war in Ukraine because the US reaction was totally predictable. Russia figured a few meaningless economic sanctions was a small price to pay for taking control of it's former eastern bloc vassal states. Russia thought they would have a friendly US President who would withdraw the Obama era sanctions instead they have received quite a few hard kicks in the nuts by an unpredictable US President. Trumps unpredictability finally got China to enforce the economic sanctions targeting NK. Trumps tariff war threats against China has also finally got China talking about addressing the US complaints against China for it's unfair trade practices, currency manipulation, and intellectual property theft. China is dealing with an unpredictable US President who thinks the US could actually win a trade war with China. Trumps boisterous Twitter attacks on the NK missile man was unprecedented and certainly not Presidential. Trump's unhinged ramblings about destroying an entire country using the big button on his desk really broke the mold. It's one thing for some little country with a few nuclear bombs to threaten the US but it is an entirely different matter when a country with enough nuclear missiles to blow up the world 3 times over openly threatens to use them. I actually thought Trump sounded rather excited about the prospect of pushing his big button.
When Trump questioned the usefulness of NATO and complained about countries not fulfilling their funding commitments those behind in their payments suddenly ponied up the money owed.

Trump scares people. He is not a politician and never even tries to be one. He is not a Republican or Democrat. He is not a liberal or conservative. He has shown no interest in playing politics with the DC power elite and he seems to enjoy attacking the media. He certainly doesn't play the identity politics practiced today. He is not a statesman or skilled orator. He is everything a President shouldn't be but when his Presidency is over he may be remembered as the President who finally ended the NK-SK war. The President who reminded US allies that relations between countries go both ways. If you are going to constantly criticize and berate the US don't expect US military support and lopsided trade deals to continue. He may be the President who finally forced the Palestinians to face reality, disarm, and sue for peace with Israel. Moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem is just a kick in the head for the Palestinians who need to realize they have lost 3 wars against Israel and if there is a 4th the US will not prevent Israel from ending the conflict any way they see fit.

Re:We've been doing that for ages

[datavirtue]

Spot on.

But I say "Presidential, professional: Who gives a fuck. People want real."

Fake, pretend fuckers have been dragging us down into the ditch for far too long.

Re:We've been doing that for ages

[mjwx]

Spot on.

But I say "Presidential, professional: Who gives a fuck. People want real."

But they ended up with Trump... the most fake and pretend mother fucker of them all.

Trump is an example that people will happily flock to a pleasing lie that makes them feel better than accept a slightly uncomfortable truth. An extreme example.

So what you really meant to say was "Presidential, professional: Who gives a fuck. People want their egos massaged and biases confirmed"... because that's what Trump did. Hes as real as a page 3 girl's tits.

He probably doesn't care

[Okian Warrior]

what triggered this is folks think Trump and his Cabinet are crazy enough to actually go to war and let NK make good on their threat to flatten Seoul.

No! What really triggered this is folks think Trump is literally Hitler!

(Gotta love the gymnastics people are attempting, just to put Trump in a bad light here.)

The reality is that he probably doesn't even care about the Nobel prize - he probably viewed North Korea as another problem to fix, and went and fixed it. Next up: Iran.

My take, after watching his actions over the past couple of years, is that he doesn't actually care what people think or say about him.

So please tell us how he's flinging poo everywhere, has no plan and doesn't think and doesn't read and is stupid and immature and is literally Hitler...

..and has somehow just racked up yet another massive win.

For the world.

Re:He probably doesn't care

[Rockoon]

My take, after watching his actions over the past couple of years, is that he doesn't actually care what people think or say about him.

Trump is in the unique position of being more popular than the press. Flinging dung at him will only work if people like you. The cast of characters that are constantly on the air waves flinging dung, are neither liked nor trusted. Not one bit.

We don't think Trump is Hitler

[rsilvergun]

we think he's a proto-Hitler. He's not competent enough (or brutal enough) to be the next Hitler. What we're afraid of is that he's eroding the institutions that are supposed to stop the next (real) fascist. He's also probably going to tank the economy (between the Walstreet deregulation, massive debt for tax cuts and general graft and incompetence). And nothing helps a fascist rise to power better than an economic crash.

I know this all seems like hyperbole, but I also know that, as a historic fact, folks said the same thing back when Hitler came to power. Patter recognition. We humans can do it if we try...

Re:We don't think Trump is Hitler

[Mashiki]

No, *you* think he's a proto-hitler. The same guy that isn't rounding up people, but is more then happy to come out swinging against him. The same guy who isn't telling the police to shoot people, but is more then happy to attack them publicly win or lose. The same guy who places blame on both groups, but also says both groups have good people in them. And you're screeching "but he didn't DENOUNCE THEM!" just like the media told you. He's put people into place who are ardent believers that the constitution isn't a "living breathing document" but foundational to the point that it's sacrosanct and all law should be build around, and not that the constitution should fit the law. He's doesn't care to play nice with the media, this isn't a fault. It's a bonus. Trust in media is declining worldwide and he isn't the cause of it, the media itself is.

For a fascist, proto-fascist, next hitler he's doing a pretty shit job. You have no pattern recognition in this, if you did you would have been screeching at Obama when he was using EO's to create policy by fiat, and leaving the US in the current cluster fuck with DACA among other massive abuses of executive power bypassing the house and the senate. Hell you would have been screeching when Obama was preforming extra-judicial killings of american citizens without trial. At least Bush Jr. attempted to give some semblance of legal rights how badly it was regardless.

God damn give your fucking head a shake. At this point, it seems like the anti-trumpers would have been happier with another war or three. And considering all the neocons who flipped from Bush Jr's side after the tea party groups drove them out, and to the democrats and progressive left? I'm not fucking surprised.

Re:Who is the more dangerous fool?

[Mashiki]

You should probably pay more attention to S.Korean politics. They just finished having an election there after the previous president was impeached and was a batshit crazy feminist that believed she was the reincarnation of a god and actively operated drugging dens for teen girls and the head of one of their largest multinational companies was directly bribing the president for policy. And, illegally destroyed documents(server wipes) tying all of this together. But was too stupid to destroy handwritten notes. Her daughter is singing like a bird and so loudly that it's damn right hilarious to save herself from life imprisonment. The two other options between Moon were, soft-China and soft-Japan neither won. Moon on the other hand has had a reunification desire after a friend of his was assassinated by Park's father in the 1960's for pushing for reunification.

In the end it doesn't matter what China wants, or even Japan, or the US. It's S.Korea and N.Korea's choice, and it looks like finally it might just happen with help from all parties involved.

Re:War Not Only Inevitable But Imminent

[irving47]

Aw, man... We're DUE for SOMEthing good happening in this arena (international politics). I'm *not* hippy-leaning, but "give peace a chance."

American Exceptionalist BS

[Uberbah]

People like you said the same BS about Reagan and the dissolution of the USSR: it was all accidental, would've happened anyway, Reagan was an incompetent warmonger, blah blah blah. You simply refuse to grasp that a hardline, belligerent stance backed up with credible threats of military action actually work when facing down tyrannical dictatorships.

All that belligerence delayed the collapse of the USSR as aggressive foreign threats only inspire patriotism among the people. Same reason Ahmadinejad enjoyed popular support he wouldn't have had with constant American threats to bomb Iran for a nuclear weapons program that Bush and then Obama knew full well Iran didn't have.

Here's what really happened minus the neocon gaslighting

FTFY.

1) The U.S. killed three million Koreans in an illegal war in the 50's

2) The U.S. flattened every city in North Korea in said illegal war

3) The U.S. has been practicing invasions of North Korea every year since the 90's

North Korea's nuclear weapons are regime change insurance against your imperial warmongering. In some small back corner of your mind even you know you're full of shit here - compare the number of countries attacked by North Korea since the 50's (one, South Korea in tit for tat exchanges of artillery) to the number of countries the U.S. has bombed in just this century.

Re:Trump ran on populism too

[Mashiki]

Yeah, so did Justin Trudeau. Does that mean he's Hitler as well? About Macon? May? They both did as well, gee it's almost like you scream fascist so often that it's losing all it's meaning. Just like "racist, sexist, homophobic" and so on. The fact that you fail to understand that the reason Trump won was because he *is* the warning shot across the bow to the establishment, and you've still not figured that out is rather telling.

Watch the election in Ontario, Canada. Because it's about to happen again, and guess what? It's directly due to the policies, beliefs, ideas, and values that you, and others like yourself have pushed for years.