Spring 2018 North Korea/US meeting

[Rerun]

Honestly, my vision is going so I struggle through articles which go on and on and don't get to the point. 

WT you said "assume"  You know what that means. 

Words like "allegedly" and "assumed" were criticized when in my article.  How about "anonymously reported"  or "secret insider".  In other words.  You hear what you want to hear.

Mike Pompeo should bring back the truth.  If it is true what S. Korea reported then Trump will shut the door to them and never look back. 

[Michael Murphy]

Mike Pompeo let NK with the NK announcement of the outrageous demands the US made, Pompeo however called the results promising.

[willowtreewren]

If it is true what S. Korea reported then Trump will shut the door to them and never look back.

If you believe this, you are more gullible than I thought.

[willowtreewren]

Voltaire said: "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."

I think that is quite evident in our current climate. Look at the increase in truly atrocious behavior and the frequent lament of "Fake News."

Rerun, I absolutely DID use the word "assume," because from your many posts that parrot lines offered by less than reputable news sources I made the assumption that you limit yourself to that narrow diet of mis-information.

I gave you sources that could help you broaden your outlook, but they are too long and "don't get to the point." In other words, you aren't going to read them. I'm truly sorry that you have difficulty with your eyes, and I understand that becoming well-informed is often hard work. But I assure you, the effort is well worth it.

I would love for you to prove my assumptions wrong, but so far, nothing you have said gives me any indication that I am mistaken. In my world view, one of the highest honors is to be proven wrong. It indicates that others are paying attention and is a golden path for learning something new. So, please, prove me wrong.

If you go through the effort of reading the articles and then tell me you disagree and why, I would be truly delighted.

[Michael Murphy]

How about a before and after pictures showing new construction in missle (misleading spell checker changed to) plant and plutonium plant.

[Simon Dog]

Simple solution - Trump should tell NK and China that the US will position a huge number of nukes in South Korea, with each targeted at a SK city.  If China does not like US nukes at its doorstep, it can reign in fatboy.

[Bill Peckham]

Simple solution - Trump should tell NK and China that the US will position a huge number of nukes in South Korea, with each targeted at a SK city.  If China does not like US nukes at its doorstep, it can reign in fatboy.

This sort of solution stops making sense once you leave the bar and begin to sober up.

[Simon Dog]

This sort of solution stops making sense once you leave the bar and begin to sober up.

Why?   We can't get China to play ball on this one because NK nukes weaken the US.   Give them something to gain and they might play ball.

[Bill Peckham]

Simple solution - Trump should tell NK and China that the US will position a huge number of nukes in South Korea, with each targeted at a SK city. ...
...Why?...

Given you meant NK not SK there isn't a tactical or strategic difference between 1 nuke and 100; between having them launch from a ship/plane or land.


The trump administration has to face the fact that they paid ransom - everything NK received: status, cancelled military exercises, free trip to Singapore, was in return for hostages. And now we can expect more people to be taken hostage and since there are no consequences more people dead like Warmbier.  All this theater has only weakened the US position RE sanctions which has left the us in a worse position then we were in 2016. Our options (as you have pointed out previously) are disastrous military options or  do nothing and call it a success, Nobel Prizes for everyone! I'm guessing this administration will pick option 2 and then distract us all with some new, incredibly weird situation we never even considered possible before now, and as we blink at our monitors trying to process the news of some other touchstone of civil decency melting away we all will forget all about North Korea.

[Jean]

WTW, it is evident that you read news thoroughly on a daily basis. Would you be so kind as to list the ones you read daily so that the rest of us can also get this information.

Thank You

[Simon Dog]

Given you meant NK not SK there isn't a tactical or strategic difference between 1 nuke and 100; between having them launch from a ship/plane or land.

You're right, it was a word-o.

Countries get bent out of shape with nukes in their back yard, even though the US can ICBM anyone, anywhere, anytime.  Just look at how upset Kennedy got with the missiles in Cuba.

[Rerun]

Simon Dog    

[Bill Peckham]

Given you meant NK not SK there isn't a tactical or strategic difference between 1 nuke and 100; between having them launch from a ship/plane or land.

You're right, it was a word-o.

Countries get bent out of shape with nukes in their back yard, even though the US can ICBM anyone, anywhere, anytime.  Just look at how upset Kennedy got with the missiles in Cuba.

Cuba? So China is the US, SK is Cuba and we're the Soviet Union in this scenario and china is supposed to see SK short range nuke capable missiles as a lightning strike threat ... nah. It would be pointless bluster which probably means that it is Trump's preferred option.

[Simon Dog]

Cuba? So China is the US, SK is Cuba and we're the Soviet Union in this scenario and china is supposed to see SK short range nuke capable missiles as a lightning strike threat ... nah. It would be pointless bluster which probably means that it is Trump's preferred option.

That sums it up nicely.

[willowtreewren]

WTW, it is evident that you read news thoroughly on a daily basis. Would you be so kind as to list the ones you read daily so that the rest of us can also get this information.

Thank You

Not a problem, Jean.

This is not an exhaustive list, but here goes:
New York Times (leans slightly left)
Reuters (considered highly reliable and unbiased)
Business Insider
Wall Street Journal (leans right)
The Economist
NPR (Leans slightly left)
BBC

To a more limited extent:
Fox (for balance and to see what others are watching - leans far right and considered unreliable)
CNN (considered less reliable and leans somewhat left))
Reason (skews far right)

I rarely watch network TV, but the three major networks are considered fairly reliable. I just prefer to read the news.

[Jean]

Thanks WTW

[Simon Dog]

SK is not stupid.   Giving up nukes puts them in a position of subservience to the US and is not going to happen without a war.

In the long run, the US has two choices - accept NK as a member of the nuke club that is not going to disarm, and respect them as such, or war.   There are no other options.