Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

Professor Moriarty

RobertKK wrote: »

There are a lot of people who object to everything Trump does. Both men were involved in name calling. Yet they will now meet at some point.
I didn’t object as it is better than some former presidents like Bush, Obama etc who didn’t name call but did start new wars.
At least these guys are talking.

Yeah, no. Tell me, how are the NAFTA talks going? The Iran Nuclear Agreement - done and dusted? How is engagement with the Paris Climate Change Agreement going - surely The Donald has joined up now? How is he getting on in Syria - more or less drone attacks since he took over? How is he doing in the Palestinian peace process - all good in the hood? The TTIP - he's probably sorted that out?

RobertKK

Wanderer78 wrote: »

'name calling', kinna disturbing from world leaders though?

Nah, one man was firing off lots of rockets and making threats to the US. Little rocket man wasn’t a big deal, neither was calling Trump a dotard.
It did raise tensions but helped lead to where we are now. So one can say it was the right approach in hindsight.
South Korea got worried and stepped up, North Korea got worried and next thing the North Koreans are going to the Olympics in the south, Kim Jong Un making foreign visits to meet allies and foes and meeting the US Secretary of State.

People who hate Trump talked about how everything was going to fall to pieces under him. The US economy is doing fine, and a country that was formally at war with the US for near 7 decades is ending.
I think some Trump haters are disappointed as their sky was going to fall arguments aren’t materialising.
So far his two predecessors have each started more new wars than Trump has. At least one war is ending during the Trump presidency and I don’t think anyone predicted it would be the Korean War.

Wanderer78

RobertKK wrote: »

Nah, one man was firing off lots of rockets and making threats to the US. Little rocket man wasn’t a big deal, neither was calling Trump a dotard.
It did raise tensions but helped lead to where we are now. So one can say it was the right approach in hindsight.
South Korea got worried and stepped up, North Korea got worried and next thing the North Koreans are going to the Olympics in the south, Kim Jong Un making foreign visits to meet allies and foes and meeting the US Secretary of State.

People who hate Trump talked about how everything was going to fall to pieces under him. The US economy is doing fine, and a country that was formally at war with the US for near 7 decades is ending.
I think some Trump haters are disappointed as their sky was going to fall arguments aren’t materialising.
So far his two predecessors have each started more new wars than Trump has. At least one war is ending during the Trump presidency and I don’t think anyone predicted it would be the Korean War.

but the behavior of both leaders is acceptable to resolve potentially serious international issues?

again, this is day 'one' of negotiations!

the american economy isnt as good as you think it is, dont believe everything you hear or read in relation to it

RobertKK

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Yeah, no. Tell me, how are the NAFTA talks going? The Iran Nuclear Agreement - done and dusted? How is engagement with the Paris Climate Change Agreement going - surely The Donald has joined up now? How is he getting on in Syria - more or less drone attacks since he took over? How is he doing in the Palestinian peace process - all good in the hood? The TTIP - he's probably sorted that out?

Are NAFTA talks over?
Has a decision being made on the Iran deal?
President Macron seems to think the US will eventually rejoin the Paris climate accord.
TTIP has issues that European farmers were not happy with and subsequently
Syria, he should follow his instinct and get out rather than listening to warmongers whonwant more death there.

Inquitus

Trump has done little or nothing to influence Kim, the main driver behind the volunteering to stop tests is that he has collapsed his test mountain and as such cannot do any more tests! That's more luck on Trump's side than judgement

http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/2143171/north-koreas-nuclear-test-site-has-collapsed-and-may-be-why-kim-jong-un

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/26/north-korea-nuclear-test-site-collapse-may-be-out-of-action-china

RobertKK

Wanderer78 wrote: »

but the behavior of both leaders is acceptable to resolve potentially serious international issues?

again, this is day 'one' of negotiations!

the american economy isnt as good as you think it is, dont believe everything you hear or read in relation to it

What is important is the end goal.
Have previous presidents succeeded in the way they approached it? I would argue no, a different approach has led to a different outcome along wirh the help of the South Korean President and the Chinese President who Trump just name called on twitter as being “my good friend”.

Day one but the Korean War is to formally end.
Both of the Korean nations agree to work towards total denuclearisation.

RobertKK

Inquitus wrote: »

Trump has done little or nothing to influence Kim, the main driver behind the volunteering to stop tests is that he has collapsed his test mountain and as such cannot do any more tests! That's more luck on Trump's side than judgement

http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/2143171/north-koreas-nuclear-test-site-has-collapsed-and-may-be-why-kim-jong-un

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/26/north-korea-nuclear-test-site-collapse-may-be-out-of-action-china

Yes it collapsed but you don’t think China stopping 90% of exports into North Korea which the US pushed for isn’t having an effect?

Inquitus

RobertKK wrote: »

Yes it collapsed but you don’t think China stopping 90% of exports into North Korea which the US pushed for isn’t having an effect?

Well Kim hasn't given anything up, he has volunteered not to test when he is in fact incapable of testing for the foreseeable future, its being touted by Trump as a huge success, but in reality its just the status quo being maintained.

RobertKK

The thing is look at the naysayers. The Korean War is ending and some still have nothing good to say.
Ignore US sanctions which the US pushed for and got in the UN. Ignore the US Secretary of State went to Pyongyang and met Kim Jong Un.
Ignore that Trump pushed President Xi of China to take a tougher stance.
Then complain Trump called Kim Jong Un names when both were at it because that is easier to say than saying Trump did help get us to where we are today.
A long way to go but getting a war formally declared to be ended is a good start.

RobertKK

Inquitus wrote: »

Well Kim hasn't given anything up, he has volunteered not to test when he is in fact incapable of testing for the foreseeable future, its being touted by Trump as a huge success, but in reality its just the status quo being maintained.

The status quo would have the Korean War still officially not ended or about to end.

jobbridge4life

RobertKK wrote: »

ly
Syria, he should follow his instinct and get out rather than listening to warmongers whonwant more death there.

Three quarters of unintended civilian deaths in Syria occured under Trump's presidency.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/donald-trump-us-civilian-deaths-iraq-syria-isis-coalition-bombing-a8180331.html

Civilian deaths in the Middle East related to US strikes, have increased massively under Trump.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/middle-east-civilian-deaths-have-soared-under-trump-and-the-media-mostly-shrug/2018/03/16/fc344968-2932-11e8-874b-d517e912f125_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7c780b8877bc

...

I'm old enough to remember when you said you'd renounce Trump when he continued to bring death to the Middle East... and yet...

Mr.Micro

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Three quarters of unintended civilian deaths in Syria occured under Trump's presidency.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/donald-trump-us-civilian-deaths-iraq-syria-isis-coalition-bombing-a8180331.html

Civilian deaths in the Middle East related to US strikes, have increased massively under Trump.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/middle-east-civilian-deaths-have-soared-under-trump-and-the-media-mostly-shrug/2018/03/16/fc344968-2932-11e8-874b-d517e912f125_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7c780b8877bc

...

I'm old enough to remember when you said you'd renounce Trump when he continued to bring death to the Middle East... and yet...

Trump can return now to the topic of Iran, now that Kim has put his plans on hold.

RobertKK

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Three quarters of unintended civilian deaths in Syria occured under Trump's presidency.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/donald-trump-us-civilian-deaths-iraq-syria-isis-coalition-bombing-a8180331.html

Civilian deaths in the Middle East related to US strikes, have increased massively under Trump.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/middle-east-civilian-deaths-have-soared-under-trump-and-the-media-mostly-shrug/2018/03/16/fc344968-2932-11e8-874b-d517e912f125_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7c780b8877bc

...

I'm old enough to remember when you said you'd renounce Trump when he continued to bring death to the Middle East... and yet...

I don’t agree with the excessive use of drone strokes. But that cat had left the bad a long time ago, and Trump placed more of the responsibility for drone strikes with the CIA/military commanders.
https://www.google.com/search?q=trump%20hands%20drobe%20control%20to%20military

I don’t think that is right but Trump isn’t taking such a direct approach as Obama did. Obama had his weekly kill list which he looked at and authorised, Trump has left it to the CIA.

josip

Presumably if NK gives over its nukes, it will still keep some nukes and technology hidden away from UN inspectors in case SK/US don't keep their side of the deal?

jobbridge4life

RobertKK wrote: »

I don’t agree with the excessive use of drone strokes. But that cat had left the bad a long time ago, and Trump placed more of the responsibility for drone strikes with the CIA/military commanders.
https://www.google.com/search?q=trump%20hands%20drobe%20control%20to%20military

I don’t think that is right but Trump isn’t taking such a direct approach as Obama did. Obama had his weekly kill list which he looked at and authorised, Trump has left it to the CIA.

In otherwords Robert you are ignoring your previous position, and the fact that deaths have massively increased under Trump, because... Obama.

robinph

RobertKK wrote: »

Ignore US sanctions which the US pushed for and got in the UN.

Do you mean the UN sanctions that were passed in 1993, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2016 or 2017?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_North_Korea

RobertKK

Mr.Micro wrote: »

Trump can return now to the topic of Iran, now that Kim has put his plans on hold.

The biggest problem there is Trump is too easily influence by Benjamin Netanyahu. It comes across unquestioning at times. But maybe that is due to his daughter being a Jew after she converted to be similar to the husband.

RobertKK

robinph wrote: »

Do you mean the UN sanctions that were passed in 1993, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2016 or 2017?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_North_Korea

You seem to ignore that China had been pretty lax at enforcing the exports into North Korea.

RobertKK

jobbridge4life wrote: »

In otherwords Robert you are ignoring your previous position, and the fact that deaths have massively increased under Trump, because... Obama.

Please read what I posted, I even provided a link as proof. I said it is still wrong as it was then. The link shows Trump gave the CIA the power to decide. I still think that is wrong. The fact is Trump is not as directly involved in the drone killings as Obama was.

Professor Moriarty

RobertKK wrote: »

Please read what I posted, I even provided a link as proof. I said it is still wrong as it was then. The link shows Trump gave the CIA the power to decide. I still think that is wrong. The fact is Trump is not as directly involved in the drone killings as Obama was.

So The Donald is involved in all the good stuff but not the bad? You sure about that?

aloyisious

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, Trump is responsible in that Kim has been demanding negotiations for years, and previous Presidents (and indeed Trump, until recently) have refused, on the basis that this would encourage and reward Kim for bullying his way to the negotiating table through pursuing his nuclear strategy.

Trump, obviously, has had second thoughts about this strategy, and has reversed course by agreeing to the negotiations which Kim has long demanded. Describing this as "bringing Kim to the negotiating table" looks a bit disingenuous, though; if anything, it is Kim who has brought Trump to the negotiating table.

Will Trump's change of tack bear good results? That remains to be seen. It's a bit soon to be thinking of Nobel prizes, IMO.

I think that what is now happening betwen N/K and S/K is partly down to Don's style of bargainng. though probably not in the way he thought it would be, so it's a bonus for him [and the world]. I had thought Kim might have been invited to China for a talk about his nuclear aims but it's possible he might have gone to talk with China about his upcoming talks with S/K. Secret talks have had to be going on for some time now, not just blossoming in springtime. China does not seem to have an embassy in S/K but diplomatic ties exist in as far as talks are ongoing between both states.

It seem's the Asian countries are now getting a handle on Don's bargaining-style and stepping past it with the announcements, but leaving him the chance to claim he was the initiating-agent without crediting him.

A bonus would come for all sides if peace was to finally come to the peninsula and the border-status relaxed [though it would take years yet of actual diplomatic talks, with all four countries heads of Govt in the talks. Don could reduce troops numbers which would be a bonus for him, though he probably never ever considered it possible from there.

That Fox and Friends call. Wow. Pure rambling nonsense and even the Fox hosts are embarrassed by it.

RobertKK

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

So The Donald is involved in all the good stuff but not the bad? You sure about that?

Why do you need to twist stuff and imply stuff which I never said?
I said it was wrong with Syria and he was wrong with giving the CIA control over who to kill. There is so much unaccountability with drone strikes.

Pepefrogok

Did anyone see the Owen Jones ranting on CNN about how trump had nothing to do with this the the next interview this happens...
CNN) — South Korea's foreign minister has said she believes President Donald Trump is largely responsible for bringing North Korean leader Kim Jong-un to the negotiating table.

Speaking ahead of Friday's historic summit between the leaders of North and South Korea, Kang Kyung-wha told CNN that the US President had played a significant role in bringing the two sides together.

"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."

https://edition-m.cnn.com/2018/04/26/world/korea-summit-kang-kyung-wha-amanpour-intl/index.html

You could see the hurt in the studio, kinda like in this thread but I sense people starting to make their own opinions about trump instead of following the herd, getting harder to ignore the evidence of succes over the hyperbole and fake outrage.

BabyCheeses

Pepefrogok wrote: »

Did anyone see the Owen Jones ranting on CNN about how trump had nothing to do with this the the next interview this happens...
CNN) — South Korea's foreign minister has said she believes President Donald Trump is largely responsible for bringing North Korean leader Kim Jong-un to the negotiating table.

Speaking ahead of Friday's historic summit between the leaders of North and South Korea, Kang Kyung-wha told CNN that the US President had played a significant role in bringing the two sides together.

"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."

https://edition-m.cnn.com/2018/04/26/world/korea-summit-kang-kyung-wha-amanpour-intl/index.html

You could see the hurt in the studio, kinda like in this thread but I sense people starting to make their own opinions about trump instead of following the herd, getting harder to ignore the evidence of succes over the hyperbole and fake outrage.

Are you just going to repeat the same thing or will you ever explain it?

You have the perfect chance to red pill the normies who are having the truth kept from them because of the deep state, MSM and (((globalists)))

Pepefrogok

BabyCheeses wrote: »

Are you just going to repeat the same thing or will you ever explain it?

You have the perfect chance to red pill the normies who are having the truth kept from them because of the deep state, MSM and (((globalists)))

What do you mean? That's the first time I posted that, oh hang on, did you think this was a repeat post of this ..

South Korea's President Moon Jae-in says his US counterpart, Donald Trump, "deserves big credit" for talks between South and North Korea.

The talks, held on Tuesday, were the first in two years and led to the announcement that North Korea would send a delegation to the Olympics in Pyeongchang later this year.

Mr Moon said he wanted to show Mr Trump his gratitude.

The US president tweeted a week ago that he had brought the talks about.

He said he had done so by being "firm, strong and willing to commit our total 'might' against the North".

Mr Moon told reporters on Wednesday: "I think President Trump deserves big credit for bringing about the inter-Korean talks.

"It could be a resulting work of the US-led sanctions and pressure," he said.


*NOTE* this.....

CNN) — South Korea's foreign minister has said she believes President Donald Trump is largely responsible for bringing North Korean leader Kim Jong-un to the negotiating table.

Speaking ahead of Friday's historic summit between the leaders of North and South Korea, Kang Kyung-wha told CNN that the US President had played a significant role in bringing the two sides together.

"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."


Is a different Korean offical giving deserved high praise to trump.

They can't all be wrong? But people in here know better lol

BabyCheeses

Pepefrogok wrote: »

What do you mean? That's the first time I posted that, oh hang on, did you think this was a repeat post of this ..

South Korea's President Moon Jae-in says his US counterpart, Donald Trump, "deserves big credit" for talks between South and North Korea.

The talks, held on Tuesday, were the first in two years and led to the announcement that North Korea would send a delegation to the Olympics in Pyeongchang later this year.

Mr Moon said he wanted to show Mr Trump his gratitude.

The US president tweeted a week ago that he had brought the talks about.

He said he had done so by being "firm, strong and willing to commit our total 'might' against the North".

Mr Moon told reporters on Wednesday: "I think President Trump deserves big credit for bringing about the inter-Korean talks.

"It could be a resulting work of the US-led sanctions and pressure," he said.


*NOTE* this.....

CNN) — South Korea's foreign minister has said she believes President Donald Trump is largely responsible for bringing North Korean leader Kim Jong-un to the negotiating table.

Speaking ahead of Friday's historic summit between the leaders of North and South Korea, Kang Kyung-wha told CNN that the US President had played a significant role in bringing the two sides together.

"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."


Is a different Korean offical giving deserved high praise to trump.

They can't all be wrong? But people in here know better lol

And what is it Trump has done to deserve this credit? You wouldn't be just trusting the MSM at their word would you?

pixelburp

I'm curious how Trump supporters square his noted inconsistency of opinion (most recently his conflicting stories about Cohen's relationship with him), his rambling sensibilities (see the recent Fox and Friends ... brainfart, I can politely call it), and this supposed genius of diplomacy that's heralding a shiny new dawn in Korea?

Where was this genius when the Republican healthcare bill nearly died on the floor, with many reports pointing towards Trump's open refusal to negotiate or even take part in the horse-trading during discussion with holdouts? He was the quintessential hurler on the ditch then, cribbing from the sidelines at Ryan & co. without actually taking part. Is this suddenly different because it's seen as a 'win'??

If genuine peace breaks out in Korea, that'd be a truly outstanding achievement, one for the history books. But to IMMEDIATELY presume Trump as primary source, given all the open, reported evidence of the man's temperament and refusal to engage in even the basic structures of governance, it's not asking much to cast a questioning eye on whether a.) these talks will lead anywhere, and b.) how much of a hand Trump has.

RobertKK

RobertKK wrote: »

Please read what I posted, I even provided a link as proof. I said it is still wrong as it was then. The link shows Trump gave the CIA the power to decide. I still think that is wrong. The fact is Trump is not as directly involved in the drone killings as Obama was.

Looks to me like he's allowing the drone strikes to continue while trying to make it look like it's nothing to do with him.

jobbridge4life

RobertKK wrote: »

Please read what I posted, I even provided a link as proof. I said it is still wrong as it was then. The link shows Trump gave the CIA the power to decide. I still think that is wrong. The fact is Trump is not as directly involved in the drone killings as Obama was.

Robert, under Trump deaths have have risen. That is the pertinent fact. As a result of the Trump administration deaths have risen.