nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

Quin_Dub

This thread is for the continuing discussion of Donald Trumps's presidency in the US and any related matters.

Please ensure that you are familiar with the charter before posting.

Thanks.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

kilns

This could not have gone better for both men, both got what they wanted. Kim now has been recognised as a world leader and has gained the respect of the president of the USA, while in turn getting sanctions eased and bringing much needed benefits to his country.
Trump on the other side can use this as the legacy of his presidency and can keep referring back to this moment depsite all the other crap. Like can the average person recall anything else from Reagans presidency apart from the "pull this wall down" quote

Beechwoodspark

“This is gonna lead to more and more and more” says trump.

That can go either way I guess.

[Deleted User]

If he doesn't mess it up, and Democrats continue to attack him for it anyway, his supporters will use it to deflect and say "Look what they said about __."

The best thing the Democrats and CNN could do today would be to congratulate Trump on his achievement. Immediately, their other criticisms would regain an audience. Most people ignore it because it's all negative even though America is booming and people are happy.

Igotadose, I can't say I agree with you on the China angle.

pixelburp

I think best policy is to wait and see here, find out what the exact details are; peace is not achieved in one meeting. As said elsewhere the meat of any deal will be likely developed by Pompeo and whatever (decent) diplomats are left in the State Department.

Trump went for the pomp & show, got his friendly photo-op and can crow about it for a spell in between his inexplicable fights with the US's biggest allies and diplomatic friends :rolleyes:

[Deleted User]

Peregrinus wrote: »

Fair point.

But of course we can turn it around; if Hillary had won the election, and then met Kim in the present circumstances, what would Trump and the Trumpistas say? They would say that Hillary was rewarding Kim's illegality; that she had allowed him to bomb his way to the negotiating table, and that her treatment of him would encourage other rogue countries to follow the same course. All of which are points that could be made against Trump now.

And you'd think they were fools for making such points, the same points being made today all over the media.

Peregrinus wrote: »

But, as I perhaps didn't make clear enough, I'm not saying that Trump is wrong to meet Kim, or that he should be criticised for it. I'm just saying (a) that getting Kim to a meeting is not the triumph that some seem to think. Any US president could have met Kim at any time; it's what Kim has been consistently seeking. And (b) the meeting with Kim has not, thus far, had a good outcome. All we can say is that it hasn't broken down yet. The Joint Statement could hardly have had less substance than it has.

That's fair.

EdgeCase

I think I’ll give it a few weeks before I decide whether it’s a success or failure. Kim still has to go home and digest what just happened and Trump has to avoid tweeting anything that might undermine everything.

Pelvis

Deleted User wrote: »

If he doesn't mess it up, and Democrats continue to attack him for it anyway, his supporters will use it to deflect and say "Look what they said about __."

The best thing the Democrats and CNN could do today would be to congratulate Trump on his achievement. Immediately, their other criticisms would regain an audience. Most people ignore it because it's all negative even though America is booming and people are happy.

Igotadose, I can't say I agree with you on the China angle.

Trump has not achieve anything yet. He granted a meeting to a man who has wanted the meeting all along, and he did so without any concessions in return.

Beechwoodspark

Trump just said that *after* they signed the document Kim agreed to further measures.

kilns

Is it true one of the first "western" things to go into NK will be a Trump Hotel?

listermint

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Peregrinus, if NK had tested a thermonuclear bomb at the start of Obama's or Bush's presidency, they'd have almost certainly met NK just like Trump did. Likewise, Hillary would probably meet if she were president. The days of kicking this issue down the road ended with that blast.

What would you have said if Moon met Kim, but Trump didn't? I respect your political posts on here, so I'm honestly interested in what you'd have called that. Meeting was "caving" so not meeting would have been "___"? Most posters on here would lambaste him for not chasing peace.

But that's completely untrue. You could be on here complaining how Obama or hilary was weak for meeting him and the US doesn't negotiate with terrorist's or whatever was the flavour of the day from fox broadcast.

Your being very desingenous to say it wouldn't have gone that way.

[Deleted User]

Pelvis wrote: »

Trump has not achieve anything yet. He granted a meeting to a man who has wanted the meeting all along, and he did so without any concessions in return.

Thank you very much for giving a perfect example of what I was talking about.

Your criticisms now mean nothing as you can't give him even the tiniest victory.

spacecoyote

It makes sense for Trump & the Reps to play this up as much as possible & not torpedo it until the mid-terms are dealt with.

I'm pretty sure that I read a poll that stated that a majority of the US population approved of how Trump has approached the NK situation (Dems & Reps). So, if they can gloss over all the appalling behaviour towards Canada, Mexico, immigrants, etc... & focus in on this, it could give them a strong enough bump to come out of the elections in considerably better condition than they would have expected 6 months ago.

Trump, whilst an awful human being, is a good message man. This gives him, and the Reps, a simple strong message. I'm yet to see the Dems come up with any decent messaging or slogan to run on. Bernie was on Bill Maher a couple of weeks ago, and he put it to him. He couldn't really come up with anything blunt & effective, which is surprising. They hit the nail on the head with the Obama messaging, they seem to have lost that ability, for now

[Deleted User]

listermint wrote: »

But that's completely untrue. You could be on here complaining how Obama or hilary was weak for meeting him and the US doesn't negotiate with terrorist's or whatever was the flavour of the day from fox broadcast.

Your being very desingenous to say it wouldn't have gone that way.

Each side will always do it. What's your point?

Franz Von Peppercorn

Pelvis wrote: »

Trump has not achieve anything yet. He granted a meeting to a man who has wanted the meeting all along, and he did so without any concessions in return.

Who grants concessions before meetings?

Anyway this is one of the few times the US is living up to its claim of being a useful world policeman rather than an imperialistic bully and Irish people have adopted American partisanship on the issue.

StringerBell

Listening to this waffle at his press conference, everything is we will see, at the appropriate time, little early for that etc.

Very clearly nothing has been done barring Kim getting some concessions, Trump getting his ego stroked and an aspirational statement (which does not even go as far as the "worst deal ever" Iran deal) signed by two guys whos word means the sum total of zero

[Deleted User]

StringerBell wrote: »

Listening to this waffle at his press conference, everything is we will see, at the appropriate time, little early for that etc.

Very clearly nothing has been done barring Kim getting some concessions, Trump getting his ego stroked and an aspirational statement (which does not even go as far as the "worst deal ever" Iran deal) signed by two guys whos word means the sum total of zero

Aye, waste of time. He shouldn't have bothered, right?

StringerBell

Oh also, great for the Republicans in the mid terms this, hasn't been discussed at all on North Korean tv yet. I assume they will want to edit the footage etc before it is ready for public consumption.

Definitely great for propaganda purposes for both sides though.

Hande hoche!

StringerBell wrote: »

Listening to this waffle at his press conference, everything is we will see, at the appropriate time, little early for that etc.

Very clearly nothing has been done barring Kim getting some concessions, Trump getting his ego stroked and an aspirational statement (which does not even go as far as the "worst deal ever" Iran deal) signed by two guys whos word means the sum total of zero

That describes most first meetings between heads of state in these kind of situation. Regan and Gorbachev, Israelis and the Egyptians. A building block for further progress.

Peregrinus

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Who grants concessions before meetings?

People who want meetings, if they want them badly enough!

StringerBell

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Aye, waste of time. He shouldn't have bothered, right?

Probably best to keep your words in your own mouth rather than try put them in someone else's?

StringerBell

Hande hoche! wrote: »

That describes most first meetings between heads of state in these kind of situation. Regan and Gorbachev, Israelis and the Egyptians. A building block for further progress.

I'm sure it does.

Leroy42

It is always very unlikely that anything concrete was ever going to come out of the meeting, the meeting itself is the prize.

Sure Kim has got what he wanted in terms of the meeting and recognition, but at what cost to the rest of the world? None that I can see.

Perhaps the previous US stance of no talks with disarming first has been shown to be the failure it always is. The fault of the previous POTUS is that they went along with that notion, while POTUS (and I think it was not because of any ideology but rather for himself) cast aside that position to agree to a meeting.

We have seen in NI, up till recently Iran, previously in Libya, that talking works. The question now need to be asked why the Iran deal was scuppered why it appears to have been far more detailed that what we have (although I expect that it will develop).

Of course the meeting could have happened previously, and you can be sure that had Obama met NK under the same circumstances (lets recall NK threatened the US only a few months ago) he would have been thorn apart by the GOP and Fox News. Luckily, the hated MSM are willing to give credit where it is due and you can see that in the blanket coverage the likes of MSNBC and CNN have given to this. Any calls that the MSM is not is simply untrue. There is a difference between giving praise and raising questions. Many on the right seem to think that any questions asked negates the praise.

[Deleted User]

StringerBell wrote: »

Probably best to keep your words in your own mouth rather than try put them in someone else's?

I was paraphrasing and asking for confirmation, not putting words in your mouth.

Very clearly nothing has been done

signed by two guys whos word means the sum total of zero

Peregrinus

Deleted User wrote: »

Thank you very much for giving a perfect example of what I was talking about.

Your criticisms now mean nothing as you can't give him even the tiniest victory.

He hasn't had the tiniest victory yet.

I'll be honest. I'm very sceptical of his ability to secure any kind of victory; I am unimpressed with him either as a negotiator or a leader. I'll be delighted to be proved wrong but, really, nothing has happened yet to prove me wrong, or even to suggest that I'm wrong.

And, to be even more honest, when people rush to congratulate him for achieving basically nothing so far, that does tend to give the impression that they are impressed by his achievement of nothing so far and that they, too, expected an even worse outcome.

martingriff

I must admit I am not a fan on The Donald and I still have a bet he will not finish his term but he has started something hopefully. I must admit with the 2 big ego's meeting I was not expecting anything and this document you can be sure was negotiated well before the conference. All we have now is just a piece of paper but if actions happen who knows but we are a long way from that at the moment. It is strange he will go talk to South Korea and give what seems good concessions but he then pulls out of the Iran agreement (not done by him). Now if only he could play nice with the other countries

[Deleted User]

Peregrinus wrote: »

He hasn't had the tiniest victory yet.

Thermonuclear tests and somehow Moon and Trump have navigated their way through two successful summits.

Has Moon had any tiny victories so far? Edit: No point saying yes and listing them off, a simple "yes" will suffice.

Leroy42

AbG, what exactly do you think Trump has achieved?

From my reading of the situation, Kim got the weapons they had worked years to get, then had the collapse, and then said he wanted to talk.

According to a NK commentator on the radio this morning, there was a 2012 NK TV program with this exact outcome. NK develops nukes, shows them off, and then next day they met with the US.

It was always the case that NK was developing nukes to give them to power to drive the agenda. NK know they will never win a war, but they also know that simply the threat was enough.

I have said previously, and again this morning, that I am happy that the event took place. I am happy that the US can see that talking is a better option that the failed position of demands before any talks. It didn't work with Iran or Cuba. But Obama was torn apart by many in the GOP for thawing relations with Cuba without securing anything concrete in return.

But I am struggling to see why you are claiming such credit for Trump

[Deleted User]

Leroy42 wrote: »

AbG, what exactly do you think Trump has achieved?

From my reading of the situation, Kim got the weapons they had worked years to get, then had the collapse, and then said he wanted to talk.

According to a NK commentator on the radio this morning, there was a 2012 NK TV program with this exact outcome. NK develops nukes, shows them off, and then next day they met with the US.

It was always the case that NK was developing nukes to give them to power to drive the agenda. NK know they will never win a war, but they also know that simply the threat was enough.

I have said previously, and again this morning, that I am happy that the event took place. I am happy that the US can see that talking is a better option that the failed position of demands before any talks. It didn't work with Iran of Cuba. But Obama was torn apart by many in the GOP for thawing relations with Cuba without securing anything concrete in return.

But I am struggling to see why you are claiming such credit for Trump

Such credit? My point here is saying he has done nothing is frankly ridiculous.

My posts so far today are hardly screaming "Oh my God give him a Nobel":

Thermonuclear tests and somehow Moon and Trump have navigated their way through two successful summits.

Your criticisms now mean nothing as you can't give him even the tiniest victory

The best thing the Democrats and CNN could do today would be to congratulate Trump on his achievement.

Amazing that people expect denuclearisation to happen in a morning's talks

Even in this one, I state that any president would have done what Trump has done.

Peregrinus, if NK had tested a thermonuclear bomb at the start of Obama's or Bush's presidency, they'd have almost certainly met NK just like Trump did. Likewise, Hillary would probably meet if she were president. The days of kicking this issue down the road ended with that blast.

Nody

Here some views from experts on the deal; remember Trump is the master of the deal so US should clearly come out better...

Robert E Kelly is professor for International Relationships at Pusan National University
https://twitter.com/Robert_E_Kelly/status/1006454074777198598

James Action - Senior policy advisor on nuclear policy
https://twitter.com/james_acton32/status/1006438604200083457

Senior Lecturer in International Relations, Victoria University of Wellington. Research Fellow, Centre for Strategic Studies.
https://twitter.com/WonkVJ/status/1006440566085672961

I could go on but everyone appears to be in the same agreement; NK got what it wanted and US got nothing except Trump gets a chance to pull back troops and claim he saves money doing it.

RIGOLO

Meanwhile the Trump administration continues its remarkable work on many fronts.
Whilst the world is rightly engrossed in the wonderful outcome of the summit , theres still great work being done on other fronts.
The US treasury department under the guidance of Steve Mnuchin (you may know him from such hit movies as Avatar, Black Swan , and a few duds also) has imposed new sanctions on a number of Russian individuals and companies .
It appears Trumps administration has settled down after fractious and a leak laden start, they are now moving forward on a real agenda with real tangible results.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/11/us-hits-russian-firms-with-sanctions.html
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-russia-sanctions/u-s-puts-more-sanctions-on-russians-over-hacking-idUSKBN1J71T5
Its another nail in the coffin of the Russia - Mueller probe , Trumps impeachment seems even further off now.
Im surprised the Trump detractors havent called for Trumps impeachement following the Kim Jung singapore summit. For 18 months they have called for his impeachment weekly on flimsy premise for each action its a wonder theres not an outcry now.