The Trump Presidency

First topic message reminder :

Assault rifle.

That is not self-defence.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

MSU.....Do you agree with Trump that the media and journalists are the enemy of the American people ??

Yes 34%
No  59%

Rather strong statement. Luckily living in Africa, I know how leaders who say things like this generally end up

kingraf wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

MSU.....Do you agree with Trump that the media and journalists are the enemy of the American people ??

Yes 34%
No  59%

Rather strong statement. Luckily living in Africa, I know how leaders who say things like this generally end up  

They end up playing action netball?

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

LionsV2 wrote:Democratically elected President, seems people only like democracy when it goes there way.

Nixon got more votes than JFK............Gore got more votes than Bush............

Over here UKIP got 13% in 2015 and the Libs got 8%ish which saw 8 LIberals and one Ukiper elected....I don't know if other systems are better though....PR could lead to gridlock.

If Clinton could do the Election again I think she would sack whoever told her to campaign in places like Texas (That were not needed) and instead visit the rust belt more often....I'm afraid like Theresa May found out you can't take anything for granted....

They did..

I really wish you were over there rather than over here. Your sort of American we can do without thanks

Gwlad wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

LionsV2 wrote:Democratically elected President, seems people only like democracy when it goes there way.

Nixon got more votes than JFK............Gore got more votes than Bush............

Over here UKIP got 13% in 2015 and the Libs got 8%ish which saw 8 LIberals and one Ukiper elected....I don't know if other systems are better though....PR could lead to gridlock.

If Clinton could do the Election again I think she would sack whoever told her to campaign in places like Texas (That were not needed) and instead visit the rust belt more often....I'm afraid like Theresa May found out you can't take anything for granted....

They did..

I really wish you were over there rather than over here. Your sort of American we can do without thanks

What a daft post.

Any more personal stuff is going to result in a ban.

When what should be happening is banning Trump advocates

Gwlad wrote:When what should be happening is banning Trump advocates

If you can't say anything sensible, I suggest you don't say anything at all. Like them or loathe them, those advocates have just as much right as you to post their thoughts on Trump.

Gwlad wrote:When what should be happening is banning Trump advocates

Could always try engaging in debate instead of flinging personal insults.

'Flinging personal insults' is a bit over the top but then its what one expects from thin skinned Trumpites.

Appeasing the bully is one approach I suppose, worked well in 1939 right. I wonder if we will use it to bring us back from the brink of assured nuclear destruction that Trump has lead us to after a matter of months wallowing in power without one single characteristic to qualify him for the office other than his ability to use rabble rousing rhetoric.

Comparing Hitler to a Republican President that couldn't get his Healthcare plan put through by a Republican Congress is a bit of a stretch.

But stretching can be good especially before exercise.

You obviously dont know your history.

Trump, like Adolf, identified a hate group and victimized them. In fact trump is working on two, Mexicans and Muslims.

Trump, like Adolf, was not qualified for high office in any way.

Trump, like Adolf, raised the passions of the disenfranchised sector of German society that felt their nation had become de powered in the world. Hitler post Versailles and Trump post Obama...Make America Great Again.

Trump, like Adolf. Sees himself as victim - paranoids often do.

Trump, like Adolf, relied on rhetoric and rabble rousing to inspire hate in order to control society.

Trump, like Adolf, came to power in most dubious circumstances.

Trump, like Adolf removed those around him and surrounded himself with sycophants.

Trump, like Adolf , has a hair problem.

Trump, like Adolf will no doubt be turned upon eventually. I just hope it isn't too late for the rest of us who see him as the incarnate of all that is wrong and evil in the world.

How's that for personal remarks.

Gwlad, I have to ask a genuine question here. These 'Trumpites' you refer to: are they actually Trumpites, as in avid supporters of Trump who defend his conduct or politics? Or are they simply those who won't join the mob and cave in to the lazy Hitler analogies? Can't say I've seen too many, if any, who really deserve to be called Trumpites...But then again, I've not read the lion's share of messages on this thread yet.

That said, Trump's position on North Korea is a joke. North Korea poses zero threat to the USA - for Christ's sake, the USA has fifteen military bases just across the border in South Korea. The USA have spent the summer, as ever, flexing their muscles in Ulchi Freedom Guardian right in North Korea's face, yet North Korea are the aggressors for wanting to build up their nuclear arsenal as a response to this?

No, I'm no fan of nuclear weapons. But sadly, North Korea's desire to improve its nuclear capabilities are a rational reaction to the situation they find themselves in geopolitically. I'd mind a bit less if the USA had at least tried diplomacy before the threats of annihilation, but they haven't. Instead, we've had the usual old sanctions, which means the ones paying for this ridiculous battle of egos will be those who have had nothing to do with it - the everyday men, women and children in North Korea.

I don't care for North Korea as a state either, of course. But America should at least pay it the compliment of keeping out of its business when there's no need for them to be involved in it, and respecting their sovereignty until the United Nations and International Community can prove that it has forfeited that sovereignty.

You must be joking. There is nothing rational about North Korea's regime. Why would th U.S keep out of North Koreas business, when their business is developing nuclear warheads capable of striking the U.S mainland.

North Korea would not be under santions if they had abandoned their obsession with developing nuclear weapons in an effort to keep a failed crackpot dictatorship in power.

Trump is simply playing into North Korean hands with his pissing contest politics. Kim J Un is the epitome of despotic dictator, and in order to continue to prove just how big his balls are amongst his people and become a player in the region, he has to play with the big boys, keep pushing his regional enemies and their allies as he is. Only an idiot would give him what he wants.
Trump's problem is, being so thin skinned personally and in terms of his understanding of international relations and diplomacy, he is just ignorant enough to be serious about his militant rhetoric. He takes KJU seriously when in fact KJU had no place at the top table before because the balance of power was held in check by men and women who knew what was required to keep him in his box. Trump ain't so bright in that regard and his ball swinging could cost us all dear.
Trump can't keep it in his pants though and because he doesn't know how it works out there in the real world and has has promised Linus J Redneck III that he will Make America Great Again, he might just might Make America Cry.

In this analogy KJU is playing Hitler and Trump is fronting up as Churchill plus Patton plus Macarthur (all his idols and at least 2 of them were psychopaths) but I reckon he will blink first and when push comes to shove, show himself up as more of a Chamberlain.

catchweight wrote:You must be joking. There is nothing rational about North Korea's regime. Why would th U.S keep out of North Koreas business, when their business is developing nuclear warheads capable of striking the U.S mainland.

North Korea would not be under santions if they had abandoned their obsession with developing nuclear weapons in an effort to keep a failed crackpot dictatorship in power.

This is the problem. We have the only country ever to use nuclear weapons in war time, the country which accounts for a quarter of global military spending, the country which has a military presence in almost every other country on Earth, the country which has stockpiled and tested more nuclear weapons than all others combined, pontificating and lecturing the rest of the world on the issue. It smacks of American Exceptionalism.

The nine acknowledged nuclear-capable countries could all conceivably strike the mainland of a rival. That's just stating the obvious. Would that be a legitimate pretext for the Arab states to band together again and launch war against Israel with no attempt at diplomacy beforehand?

North Korea is a country of about twenty-five million. It's struggled to keep its own people fed. It has the world's military superpower on its doorstep 24/7, the same superpower which contributed to a war which killed twenty percent of its population and with a long history of instigating wars against smaller nations on flimsy pretexts. I don't like the North Korean regime, but what they are doing is something that America have spent decades practicing and encouraging themselves. The USA has created a system in which the likes of North Korea are bound to seek such assurance.

No the problem is not the U.S. The problem is North Korea. A crackpot dictatorship. Unstable, unpredictable and hell bent on acquiring a nuclear arsenal at the cost of economic and political ruin. There is no diplomancy, because North Korea wont engage in any. They have decided to pursue this policy whatever the cost and play high stakes brinkmanship. Every other legitimate country (even DPRK only "ally") have acknowledged this.

If you think the U.S have not tried diplomacy or measured responses to North Korea you are mistaken. They have offered everything from removing sanctions to economic support in return for North Korea abandoning its nuclear weapons programme. This is decades worth of failed diplomacy. They have pleaded with China to apply the kind of pressure neccesary. It hasnt worked. Their response of santions has been measured and unanimously agreed on by all other major nations. Even their biggest rivals. Nobody wants North Korea having nuclear weapons and destablising the rest of the world.

The North Korea crisis cannot be blamed on Trump. Hes just the guy that happened to be in the hot seat as North Korea come close to realising their long range nuclear weapons programme. Which is unacceptble to the U.S and the rest of the world. And rightfully so. The DPKR regime should not be legitimised in any shape or form.

There is no palatable resolution to this problem. Only a series of bad options. But the DPRK regime has got to go. China and the US need comprimise and work together to remove the regime as best they can and come to a comprimise on the future of the peninsula (preferebaly massive de-militarisation by the US in return for a moderate pro China non nuclear North Korea).

I'm with Chris on this, it's ridiculous that the only country to use nuclear weapons in anger are the ones trying to act like the world police yet again; that isn't condoning North Korea but America are the root of almost all evil now.

Boneheaded anti Americanism at its finest. Realistially the U.S are our strongest and most important ally.

There ain't no time to wonder why, whoopee, we're all gonna die

So what if they're our strongest ally, it's not going to make me condone their sheer idiocy over the years which have spawned numerous global threats.

Trump's nothing like Hitler.
















There's no way Trump could write a book.



(It's not mine)

China are North Korea's biggest trade partner and as usual are putting monetary concerns ahead of everything else.

United Nations Security Council imposed sanctions on North Korea and told China to do more..

Last I heard the United Nations encompassed more than the USA.

End of the day do we want this kid playing with WMDS ??

I don't.

Some people clearly do want North Korea having hydrogen bombs in order to keep the dastardely root of all evil Americans in check.

We should have joined the Nazis or the Soviets when we had the chance.

Such a childish point of view to have, condemning the US isn't the same as being pro North Korea, if you don't think they're a contributing factor then god help us all.

You have claimed America are the root of almost evil - do yourself a favour.

What happened to your Hammersmith Harrier account?

Gwlad wrote:You obviously dont know your history.

Trump, like Adolf, identified a hate group and victimized them. In fact trump is working on two, Mexicans and Muslims.

Trump, like Adolf, was not qualified for high office in any way.

Trump, like Adolf, raised the passions of the disenfranchised sector of German society that felt their nation had become de powered in the world. Hitler post Versailles and Trump post Obama...Make America Great Again.

Trump, like Adolf. Sees himself as victim - paranoids often do.

Trump, like Adolf, relied on rhetoric and rabble rousing to inspire hate in order to control society.

Trump, like Adolf, came to power in most dubious circumstances.

Trump, like Adolf removed those around him and surrounded himself with sycophants.

Trump, like Adolf , has a hair problem.

Trump, like Adolf will no doubt be turned upon eventually. I just hope it isn't too late for the rest of us who see him as the incarnate of all that is wrong and evil in the world.

How's that for personal remarks.

On the unlikely assumption you're being serious....

30% of Hispanics voted for Trump which was more than voted for Romney in 2012.....

Trump was in New York when the Twin Towers were attacked..............It has probably given him a warped view of Islam and its practitioners but I can understand to an extent why he is has a warped view as do other New Yorkers that witnessed the devastation...Not that I agree with it............9/11 brought terrorism home to the United States...............Brought ignorance too borne out of being scared.

Hitler was an idealogue..............Trump has U-turned on all his policies at least twice for political convenience...

Hitler was a soldier....Trump dodged the draft.

All politicians use rhetoric to energise the base................and they all give false hope to the disenchanted.....Sorry to break it to you.

Hitler was perhaps too suited to leadership........Huge motivator of men......... Head strong and created a Germany which had zero inflation...Mass Employment.......A thriving economy.. That is alongside his huge road and Hospital building programs...Turned Germany into a super power........I bet other leaders wish they were similarly not cut out for leadership.

Though I have nothing but disdain and loathing for Hitler...........Be churlish not to mention he was a transforming figure that brought Germany out of an impoverished period (WW1 had finished a decade before).

Like with Nixon all you hear about is the dark side...............Nixon was one of the best Presidents of the 20th century.....His war on Cancer and Environmental work alone put him up there.....(Both nasty scum bags but both were more than the popular representation)

This is the last time I return one of your posts..............So learn from it..

LionsV2 wrote:I'm with Chris on this, it's ridiculous that the only country to use nuclear weapons in anger are the ones trying to act like the world police yet again; that isn't condoning North Korea but America are the root of almost all evil now.

Forgetting the context of when they were used (which you conveniently seem to have done), has it crossed your mind that their use might be one of the reasons for trying to prevent nations like DPRK from acquiring them?

In response to catchweight,

I'm not legitimising the North Korean regime. I'm saying that I don't think the regime is a genuine threat to the USA and that, in this instance, there is no reason why the USA needs to be ratting its sabre so aggressively. It's not unreasonable to agree that North Korea is a crackpot dictatorship but, at the same time, feel that this doesn't necessitate annihilating it militarily.

Are you against the proliferation of nuclear weapons, or just against their proliferation in countries which aren't America or her allies? Genuine question. I fail to see how America can accuse North Korea of destabilising the world by virtue of expanding its nuclear arsenal when America has been the chief exponent of the nuclear deterrence theory for decades. According to Reagan, Kenneth Waltz etc., nuclear deterrence is the only reason the Cold War never mutated in to World War III.

For the record, I'm against nuclear proliferation. But let me clarify what I mean by North Korea acting 'rationally.' To us in the West, there's nothing rational about North Korea, you're right. But from their own standpoint, the North Korean regime is acting perfectly rationally in attempting to ensure its survival. It's a country which has spent the first part of the last century under the rule of an aggressive neighbour, and the second part boxed in by US military might (fifteen American bases in South Korea) with Seoul and Washington having spent the last forty-odd years conducting military excercises on its doorstep. In the middle of that was the Korean War.

Of course, it's easier just to simply say that, without rhyme or reason, 'evil' dictators just happen and we need to teach them a lesson. But that's a cop out. You can't ignore the historical factors which have helped create the North Korea we're dealing with today.

This isn't about automatically taking an anti-American stance for the sake of it. America isn't always in the wrong - I just think they are this time. You say diplomacy has been tried, but it looks like tokenism to me. Rex Tillerson had a perfectly good opportunity to meet with his North Korean counterpart Ri-yong Ho at ASEAN last month and declined. Lavrov met with Ri, so why not Tillerson?

I'm just yet to see any action from North Korea which requires the kind of retaliation that Trump has been hinting at. I don't agree with North Korea - but I also don't think they have any desires to prosecute a military clash with the USA if they can avoid one.

The last post reminds me of the Lyndon Johnson saying.

"You let a R*pist in your garden...Next day he will be on your porch..The day after that he will be in your bed assaulting your Wife.

You can't let mad men have dangerous weapons because other people have them......

USA's posturing is more an attempt to get China to be more proactive...

Nothing more.

88Chris05 wrote:In response to catchweight,

I'm not legitimising the North Korean regime. I'm saying that I don't think the regime is a genuine threat to the USA and that, in this instance, there is no reason why the USA needs to be ratting its sabre so aggressively. It's not unreasonable to agree that North Korea is a crackpot dictatorship but, at the same time, feel that this doesn't necessitate annihilating it militarily.

Are you against the proliferation of nuclear weapons, or just against their proliferation in countries which aren't America or her allies? Genuine question. I fail to see how America can accuse North Korea of destabilising the world by virtue of expanding its nuclear arsenal when America has been the chief exponent of the nuclear deterrence theory for decades. According to Reagan, Kenneth Waltz etc., nuclear deterrence is the only reason the Cold War never mutated in to World War III.

For the record, I'm against nuclear proliferation. But let me clarify what I mean by North Korea acting 'rationally.' To us in the West, there's nothing rational about North Korea, you're right. But from their own standpoint, the North Korean regime is acting perfectly rationally in attempting to ensure its survival. It's a country which has spent the first part of the last century under the rule of an aggressive neighbour, and the second part boxed in by US military might (fifteen American bases in South Korea) with Seoul and Washington having spent the last forty-odd years conducting military excercises on its doorstep. In the middle of that was the Korean War.

Of course, it's easier just to simply say that, without rhyme or reason, 'evil' dictators just happen and we need to teach them a lesson. But that's a cop out. You can't ignore the historical factors which have helped create the North Korea we're dealing with today.

This isn't about automatically taking an anti-American stance for the sake of it. America isn't always in the wrong - I just think they are this time. You say diplomacy has been tried, but it looks like tokenism to me. Rex Tillerson had a perfectly good opportunity to meet with his North Korean counterpart Ri-yong Ho at ASEAN last month and declined. Lavrov met with Ri, so why not Tillerson?

I'm just yet to see any action from North Korea which requires the kind of retaliation that Trump has been hinting at. I don't agree with North Korea - but I also don't think they have any desires to prosecute a military clash with the USA if they can avoid one.

You may not think North Korea pose any threat to the U.S - thats your take. This is an openly anti US regime that has poured everything into developing a nuclear weapons arsenal capable of striking the U.S. For decades they didnt pose a genuine threat of doing this. Although they maintained the capacity to wreak devastation on U.S allied countries. Now its becoming clear that its only a matter of time before North Korea acquire the ability to develop nuclear weapons capable of hitting the U.S. If this isnt posing a genuine threat to the U.S or cause of the highest alarm given the nature of the DPRK regime, then Im not sure what is. In the circumatances I actually the US has shown as much restraint as possible in the face of a hostile nation openly testing nuclear weapons with the open intention of developing them to strike the US heartland. I wouldnt like to bet what Russia would do if put to the same test.

The argument that well the US has nukes why shouldnt everyone else is incredibly weak when it comes to a regime like North Korea. I dont really care that the US has nukes. They are an allied country that shares the same more or less the same ideology, cutlure language etc as us. I care that tin pot dictorships of unstable regimes which enslave their own people acquire nukes. It shouldnt be allowed to happen. Almost every credible country is on the same page on this. No sane person wants a rogue state like North Korea having nukes.

Lets not talk of rational from a North Korean perspective because I think we can agree its not a rational country at all. Its a paranoid, unstable dictatorship that believes stockpiling nukes is the only way to keep its regime in power (at the expense of an actual working economy and anything resembling civil or human rights for its population). It is about an irrational country as there is on the map. I dont care about North Korea or their dictatorship. If they want to live in their brainwashed state with a junk economy thats their call. I just dont want them having nuclear weapons that can threaten genuine countries. The rest of the world, not just the US have offered North Korea a path back into the international fold by abondoning their Nuclear weapons programme and they have opted not to follow it. They arent leaving the US with any real diplomatic options while they pursue a policy of acquiring Nuclear weapons to threaten the US with. As Putin recently said, they would rather eat grass (some probably have little alternative) than abandon their nuclear programme. It leaves the US with the options of accepting North Korea developing weapons capable of hitting them or not and the the US rightly dont want this to happen. Does anyone seriously think that a fully nuclear North Korea is just going to turn around then and act normally. There is a huge danger the regime could collapse economically and if it does anything is possible. It has already shown it is willing to risk everything and play international brinkmanship at the highest level. The regime cant be trusted.

Military action is literally the last resort for the US. They have tried everything else and operated within an international and UN operated framework alongside all other major nations.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:China are North Korea's biggest trade partner and as usual are putting monetary concerns ahead of everything else.

United Nations Security Council imposed sanctions on North Korea and told China to do more..

Last I heard the United Nations encompassed more than the USA.

End of the day do we want this kid playing with WMDS ??

I don't.

Funniest Most Naive quote of 2017

America is screwing all of us...now CNN (likely fake) are debating Just War in North Korea in the context of what it says in the Bible ffs, discerning old from New Testament scripture as a basis for 'going in'

Meanwhile Hillary is going to become a preacher. Too funny you couldn't write this stuff but in truth we should all pray hard right now....the Islamists have done their job too...in order to beat them and RPK, the USA is now going to start pitching itself in terms of the religious war (the fire and brimstone one that ISIS want) USA Can't win a conventional war for toffee - in fact haven't since WW2 because they don't understand that what they call insurgents - ISIS aside- are not soldiers, but civilians trying to free their country from occupation. So now they are doing God's work to get their WIN.

#Brandwar

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Gwlad wrote:You obviously dont know your history.

Trump, like Adolf, identified a hate group and victimized them. In fact trump is working on two, Mexicans and Muslims.

Trump, like Adolf, was not qualified for high office in any way.

Trump, like Adolf, raised the passions of the disenfranchised sector of German society that felt their nation had become de powered in the world. Hitler post Versailles and Trump post Obama...Make America Great Again.

Trump, like Adolf. Sees himself as victim - paranoids often do.

Trump, like Adolf, relied on rhetoric and rabble rousing to inspire hate in order to control society.

Trump, like Adolf, came to power in most dubious circumstances.

Trump, like Adolf removed those around him and surrounded himself with sycophants.

Trump, like Adolf , has a hair problem.

Trump, like Adolf will no doubt be turned upon eventually. I just hope it isn't too late for the rest of us who see him as the incarnate of all that is wrong and evil in the world.

How's that for personal remarks.

On the unlikely assumption you're being serious....

30% of Hispanics voted for Trump which was more than voted for Romney in 2012.....

Trump was in New York when the Twin Towers were attacked..............It has probably given him a warped view of Islam and its practitioners but I can understand to an extent why he is has a warped view as do other New Yorkers that witnessed the devastation...Not that I agree with it............9/11 brought terrorism home to the United States...............Brought ignorance too borne out of being scared.

Hitler was an idealogue..............Trump has U-turned on all his policies at least twice for political convenience...

Hitler was a soldier....Trump dodged the draft.

All politicians use rhetoric to energise the base................and they all give false hope to the disenchanted.....Sorry to break it to you.

Hitler was perhaps too suited to leadership........Huge motivator of men......... Head strong and created a Germany which had zero inflation...Mass Employment.......A thriving economy.. That is alongside his huge road and Hospital building programs...Turned Germany into a super power........I bet other leaders wish they were similarly not cut out for leadership.

Though I have nothing but disdain and loathing for Hitler...........Be churlish not to mention he was a transforming figure that brought Germany out of an impoverished period (WW1 had finished a decade before).

Like with Nixon all you hear about is the dark side...............Nixon was one of the best Presidents of the 20th century.....His war on Cancer and Environmental work alone put him up there.....(Both nasty scum bags but both were more than the popular representation)

This is the last time I return one of your posts..............So learn from it..

Thats evident from the preceding paragraph...really, you ought to check in with yourself so I'm glad you've pulled up your drawbridge.

This is the last time I reply to yours as you clearly espouse admiration for bigoted liars and mass murderers, so learn from it

If anyone is in any doubt just how dangerous the situation is with PRK then watch Under the Sun.

catchweight wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:In response to catchweight,

I'm not legitimising the North Korean regime. I'm saying that I don't think the regime is a genuine threat to the USA and that, in this instance, there is no reason why the USA needs to be ratting its sabre so aggressively. It's not unreasonable to agree that North Korea is a crackpot dictatorship but, at the same time, feel that this doesn't necessitate annihilating it militarily.

Are you against the proliferation of nuclear weapons, or just against their proliferation in countries which aren't America or her allies? Genuine question. I fail to see how America can accuse North Korea of destabilising the world by virtue of expanding its nuclear arsenal when America has been the chief exponent of the nuclear deterrence theory for decades. According to Reagan, Kenneth Waltz etc., nuclear deterrence is the only reason the Cold War never mutated in to World War III.

For the record, I'm against nuclear proliferation. But let me clarify what I mean by North Korea acting 'rationally.' To us in the West, there's nothing rational about North Korea, you're right. But from their own standpoint, the North Korean regime is acting perfectly rationally in attempting to ensure its survival. It's a country which has spent the first part of the last century under the rule of an aggressive neighbour, and the second part boxed in by US military might (fifteen American bases in South Korea) with Seoul and Washington having spent the last forty-odd years conducting military excercises on its doorstep. In the middle of that was the Korean War.

Of course, it's easier just to simply say that, without rhyme or reason, 'evil' dictators just happen and we need to teach them a lesson. But that's a cop out. You can't ignore the historical factors which have helped create the North Korea we're dealing with today.

This isn't about automatically taking an anti-American stance for the sake of it. America isn't always in the wrong - I just think they are this time. You say diplomacy has been tried, but it looks like tokenism to me. Rex Tillerson had a perfectly good opportunity to meet with his North Korean counterpart Ri-yong Ho at ASEAN last month and declined. Lavrov met with Ri, so why not Tillerson?

I'm just yet to see any action from North Korea which requires the kind of retaliation that Trump has been hinting at. I don't agree with North Korea - but I also don't think they have any desires to prosecute a military clash with the USA if they can avoid one.

You may not think North Korea pose any threat to the U.S - thats your take. This is an openly anti US regime that has poured everything into developing a nuclear weapons arsenal capable of striking the U.S. For decades they didnt pose a genuine threat of doing this. Although they maintained the capacity to wreak devastation on U.S allied countries. Now its becoming clear that its only a matter of time before North Korea acquire the ability to develop nuclear weapons capable of hitting the U.S. If this isnt posing a genuine threat to the U.S or cause of the highest alarm given the nature of the DPRK regime, then Im not sure what is. In the circumatances I actually the US has shown as much restraint as possible in the face of a hostile nation openly testing nuclear weapons with the open intention of developing them to strike the US heartland. I wouldnt like to bet what Russia would do if put to the same test.

The argument that well the US has nukes why shouldnt everyone else is incredibly weak when it comes to a regime like North Korea. I dont really care that the US has nukes. They are an allied country that shares the same more or less the same ideology, cutlure language etc as us. I care that tin pot dictorships of unstable regimes which enslave their own people acquire nukes. It shouldnt be allowed to happen. Almost every credible country is on the same page on this. No sane person wants a rogue state like North Korea having nukes.

Lets not talk of rational from a North Korean perspective because I think we can agree its not a rational country at all. Its a paranoid, unstable dictatorship that believes stockpiling nukes is the only way to keep its regime in power (at the expense of an actual working economy and anything resembling civil or human rights for its population). It is about an irrational country as there is on the map. I dont care about North Korea or their dictatorship. If they want to live in their brainwashed state with a junk economy thats their call. I just dont want them having nuclear weapons that can threaten genuine countries. The rest of the world, not just the US have offered North Korea a path back into the international fold by abondoning their Nuclear weapons programme and they have opted not to follow it. They arent leaving the US with any real diplomatic options while they pursue a policy of acquiring Nuclear weapons to threaten the US with. As Putin recently said, they would rather eat grass (some probably have little alternative) than abandon their nuclear programme. It leaves the US with the options of accepting North Korea developing weapons capable of hitting them or not and the the US rightly dont want this to happen. Does anyone seriously think that a fully nuclear North Korea is just going to turn around then and act normally. There is a huge danger the regime could collapse economically and if it does anything is possible. It has already shown it is willing to risk everything and play international brinkmanship at the highest level. The regime cant be trusted.

Military action is literally the last resort for the US. They have tried everything else and operated within an international and UN operated framework alongside all other major nations.

I give you Saddam Hussain and Iraq....

In relation to what? Nuclear weapons? There is no ambiguity regarding North Korea and it nuclear weapon programme.

catchweight wrote:In relation to what? Nuclear weapons? There is no ambiguity regarding North Korea and it nuclear weapon programme.

Yes.

US: "Saddam, give up your supposed WMD etc and we'll be nice to you."
Saddam: "OK."
US: "Sucker! How's this for shock and awe?"

Given that, do you think the DPRK are going to do back down until after they have the leverage to say "Up yours Uncle Sam!"

Yeah Saddam - what a guy. Shame what happened to him.

Im not under any illusions of what the North Korean regimes mindset is on this. I simply think the rest of the world (especially the united States who are increasingly at risk) are completely right in not wanting a regime like North Korea possesing a fully capable nuclear arsenal and should do everything possible to prevent it. North Korea possessing nuclear warheads capable of striking the US would be a disaster for them so no surprise the rhetoric and pressure has been ramped up (as you would expect from any country faced with a similar situation).

There seems to this kind of mindset applied where its a far worse situation when Big Bully Uncle Sam starts threatning unfriendly despot dictatorships from stockpiling nuclear warheads than it is for these regimes to be acquiring nuclear, chemical, biological weaponary etc and that The United States having a nuclear arsenal is "not fair" if Iraq or North Korea cant. Really a little perspective is needed. A stable, democratic country possessing a nuclear arsenal is no way comparable to some dangerous and unstable dictatorship like North Korea.

Some quality debate on here...It's good.. Will add though that.

1. Pretty sure Iraq wouldn't have occurred had Gore not been robbed in 2000.

2. Any one that thinks Daddy's unfinished work and oil was not a huge contributer in the debacle is naive in the extreme...

3. The West armed Hussain so any concerns about arming Dictators only occurred at a convenient time...

4. Hussein wasn't a nutter like Kim....

I was a big believer in the Afghan war but Iraq was a joke.

Carry on though it is good stuff.

None of you have a clue, the whole modus vivendi of PRK is that the people will support the Most Respected Leader until the world's end. It is effectively a death cult and we are giving it exactly what it needs to fulfill its extreme socialist nirvana.

catchweight wrote:Yeah Saddam - what a guy. Shame what happened to him.

Im not under any illusions of what the North Korean regimes mindset is on this. I simply think the rest of the world (especially the united States who are increasingly at risk) are completely right in not wanting a regime like North Korea possesing a fully capable nuclear arsenal and should do everything possible to prevent it. North Korea possessing nuclear warheads capable of striking the US would be a disaster for them so no surprise the rhetoric and pressure has been ramped up (as you would expect from any country faced with a similar situation).

There seems to this kind of mindset applied where its a far worse situation when Big Bully Uncle Sam starts threatning unfriendly despot dictatorships from stockpiling nuclear warheads than it is for these regimes to be acquiring nuclear, chemical, biological weaponary etc and that The United States having a nuclear arsenal is "not fair" if Iraq or North Korea cant. Really a little perspective is needed. A stable, democratic country possessing a nuclear arsenal is no way comparable to some dangerous and unstable dictatorship like North Korea.

While a jolly read this in and of itself exemplifies just how the west don't understand RPK mentality. Only trump's militaristic rhetoric has lead us to this point because RPK lives in a 1950s time warp. This is not some Middle eastern dictator - they pale by comparison because they are part of the 21st century - KJU is just the figurehead of an entire nation poised to repel the American horde that left in the 50s, it's their life's work if only the USA will play their part and give them what they need to complete the Act. War with the USA will confirm everything their society is built on and preparing for, it will be a glorious end.

Gwlad, you should learn to let it go. You'll live longer.

catchweight wrote:Yeah Saddam - what a guy. Shame what happened to him.

Im not under any illusions of what the North Korean regimes mindset is on this. I simply think the rest of the world (especially the united States who are increasingly at risk) are completely right in not wanting a regime like North Korea possesing a fully capable nuclear arsenal and should do everything possible to prevent it. North Korea possessing nuclear warheads capable of striking the US would be a disaster for them so no surprise the rhetoric and pressure has been ramped up (as you would expect from any country faced with a similar situation).

There seems to this kind of mindset applied where its a far worse situation when Big Bully Uncle Sam starts threatning unfriendly despot dictatorships from stockpiling nuclear warheads than it is for these regimes to be acquiring nuclear, chemical, biological weaponary etc and that The United States having a nuclear arsenal is "not fair" if Iraq or North Korea cant. Really a little perspective is needed. A stable, democratic country possessing a nuclear arsenal is no way comparable to some dangerous and unstable dictatorship like North Korea.

Point well and truly missed I guess.

I generally agree with your latter points; I doubt anyone really thinks the NK regime should be in possession of that kind of ardnance. I'm suggesting the Saddam bit might be informing NK's position re. accelerated WMD acquisition.

May's ratings went up over the late summer because she has had a lower profile ..

Be the same with Trump if he realises less is more.

Play more golf and let the economy do the talking.

navyblueshorts wrote:

catchweight wrote:Yeah Saddam - what a guy. Shame what happened to him.

Im not under any illusions of what the North Korean regimes mindset is on this. I simply think the rest of the world (especially the united States who are increasingly at risk) are completely right in not wanting a regime like North Korea possesing a fully capable nuclear arsenal and should do everything possible to prevent it. North Korea possessing nuclear warheads capable of striking the US would be a disaster for them so no surprise the rhetoric and pressure has been ramped up (as you would expect from any country faced with a similar situation).

There seems to this kind of mindset applied where its a far worse situation when Big Bully Uncle Sam starts threatning unfriendly despot dictatorships from stockpiling nuclear warheads than it is for these regimes to be acquiring nuclear, chemical, biological weaponary etc and that The United States having a nuclear arsenal is "not fair" if Iraq or North Korea cant. Really a little perspective is needed. A stable, democratic country possessing a nuclear arsenal is no way comparable to some dangerous and unstable dictatorship like North Korea.

Point well and truly missed I guess.

I generally agree with your latter points; I doubt anyone really thinks the NK regime should be in possession of that kind of ardnance. I'm suggesting the Saddam bit might be informing NK's position re. accelerated WMD acquisition.

Im not missing your point although I dont neccessarily agree with it. Are you suggesting that the international effort to have Iraq abandon nuclear weapons programme was just a pretext for an invasion? I dont think so but there was ambiguity over the extent of Iraqs weapons programme in comparison to North Korea who are actively teting in defiance of UN conventions.

On the point of whether North Korea would look at examples like Hussein as valdating the need to build a nuclear arsenal to prevent the same thing happening. I am not disagreeing. My point is should anyone really care if those regimes are toppled? It far better that these kind of regimes never possess these kind of weapons.

catchweight wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

catchweight wrote:Yeah Saddam - what a guy. Shame what happened to him.

Im not under any illusions of what the North Korean regimes mindset is on this. I simply think the rest of the world (especially the united States who are increasingly at risk) are completely right in not wanting a regime like North Korea possesing a fully capable nuclear arsenal and should do everything possible to prevent it. North Korea possessing nuclear warheads capable of striking the US would be a disaster for them so no surprise the rhetoric and pressure has been ramped up (as you would expect from any country faced with a similar situation).

There seems to this kind of mindset applied where its a far worse situation when Big Bully Uncle Sam starts threatning unfriendly despot dictatorships from stockpiling nuclear warheads than it is for these regimes to be acquiring nuclear, chemical, biological weaponary etc and that The United States having a nuclear arsenal is "not fair" if Iraq or North Korea cant. Really a little perspective is needed. A stable, democratic country possessing a nuclear arsenal is no way comparable to some dangerous and unstable dictatorship like North Korea.

Point well and truly missed I guess.

I generally agree with your latter points; I doubt anyone really thinks the NK regime should be in possession of that kind of ardnance. I'm suggesting the Saddam bit might be informing NK's position re. accelerated WMD acquisition.

Im not missing your point although I dont neccessarily agree with it. Are you suggesting that the international effort to have Iraq abandon nuclear weapons programme was just a pretext for an invasion? I dont think so but there was ambiguity over the extent of Iraqs weapons programme in comparison to North Korea who are actively teting in defiance of UN conventions.

On the point of whether North Korea would look at examples like Hussein as valdating the need to build a nuclear arsenal to prevent the same thing happening. I am not disagreeing. My point is should anyone really care if those regimes are toppled? It far better that these kind of regimes never possess these kind of weapons.

No, what I'm suggesting is that Kim will look at what happened to Hussein, after Hussein had done essentially what was asked of him and had no WMD, and think to himself "That's neither happening to me, nor am I going to blithely stop trying to acquire a functional nuclear arsenal on the basis that if I do so, I get treated nicely by 'The West'. I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them.".

He's a nutjob, but I understand perfectly if he's thinking in any way close to that.

I certainly don't care if the DPRK is 'toppled', but I don't think anyone has the cojones for the type of military conflict necessary and it's hard to see the sanctions having any effect.

Well thats not a point I would argue against. But i am not concerned with validating North Koreas mindset. There is already a generally agreed concensus interntionally that they are pursuing this policy as its they feel its the ony way to keep their crazy regime in place (even though its economic suicide which could turn into full oblivion in the worst case scenario). Does saying well Kim Jong-un doesnt want to go the way of Saddam Hussein change whether the word should want him to stop amassing nuclear weapons?

De-nuclearising, working with other coutries internationally and spending the resources they have on its economy rather than nuclear bombs would of course be a better policy to pursue for everyone involved. Unlike Hussein, North Korea has a superpower in China as a neighbour who would not tolerate a US invasion (not that the US would want to invade North Korea in any event).

The sanctions in place are assisting in crippling North Korea economically but not having the desired effect in terms of stopping their Nuclear programme. Only China can really pull the plug on them but while they are content to prop them up, they seem unable now to exert the neccessary influence to convince them to abandon the nuclear programme and there while there is international concensus insofar as everyone want the nuclear programme stopped, there is no concensus on how to achieve it.

if any sort of armed conflict occurs with RPK cult then nuclear conflict is inevitable unless KJU is toppled/assassinated. They have a huge standing army but only about 2 or 3 weeks of supplies. Once defeated on the battlefield IMO they would use their nuclear weapons as they will have nothing to lose.

The only reason Kim is building a nuclear program is he wants to take over South Korea which was one of his Father's dreams and he thinks a Nuclear deterrent will contain Western interference....

China won't allow him to have South Korea so it is futile.

I don't believe Kim will go Nuclear for one minute because it will result in North Korea's destruction. Whereas Kim may have a death wish there will be too many Politicians and Army Generals who don't.

My advice is to relax and to calm down.

While I appreciate you think you have a really good understanding of KJU for whatever reason, you also support Trump so I don't think your advice is worth much.