Will The Anti-Trump Crowd Concede That Trump Was Responsible For Korea's Potential Unification?

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

WHAT?!?!


No way you really believe that....


Remember the “fire and fury” bluff that Kim instantly called???


This is trump about to give Kim Trillions to NOT GET RID OF HIS NUCLEAR PROGRAM.

Lmao you're so jealous and bitter Trump will be in the history books, typical liberal lefty blinded by hate

originally posted by: Carcharadon

originally posted by: amazing
It seems to me that South Korea and North Korea have been working on this for the last couple of years...witness what they did at the last winter Olympics.. This isn't trump, this is North and South Korea working together without any outside interference or influence. And really only those two and make this work.

And yet the leader of S.Korea explicitly states that Trump played a big part in this. Who to believe? The leader of S.Korea or some anonymous dorks on a message board?

Pretty tough call there.

Watching the twisted logic play out is truly fascinating.

It's funny to read a bunch of Trump haters basically saying the leader of S.Korea knows less than they do about North/South relations and negotiations.

Never change guys. Never change.

Do some research. South Korea has been working on this on their own....for years. Whatever part we played is small.

I don't think you understand how countries work. They have their own governments and do things on their own. We don't own the world. Trump/Obama/Bush/Clinton don't control the world. Lot's of things happen in the world that we don't have any part of.

originally posted by: TritonTaranis

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: TerryMcGuire




This is trump about to give Kim Trillions to NOT GET RID OF HIS NUCLEAR PROGRAM.

Lmao you're so jealous and bitter Trump will be in the history books, typical liberal lefty blinded by hate

Every president is inthe history books, that’s how history books work.

a reply to: amazing

South Korea, and North Korea have, of course, been the major players. It's, after all, their countries.

To call the roll the US played, along with other UN members, small would be a mistake.

There's no way to know, of course, but what might have happened if the US/UN hadn't been there? I'm thinking bad things, such as an invasion from the North. They didn't because of the US presence.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: amazing

South Korea, and North Korea have, of course, been the major players. It's, after all, their countries.

To call the roll the US played, along with other UN members, small would be a mistake.

There's no way to know, of course, but what might have happened if the US/UN hadn't been there? I'm thinking bad things, such as an invasion from the North. They didn't because of the US presence.

I see what you're saying but we've had forces in South Korea for Decades and decades. Trump didn't put them there. Not hating on Trump, just saying that we need to look at what's really going on. Shouldn't we really be thanking Truman and Eisenhower? They put the troops there.

originally posted by: The GUT

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
So how is Trump even partially responsible?!?!

I dunno exactly how, but the South Korean President gave President Trump "Big credit" for the talks.
I'd say Moon Jae-In carries a little more weight than you without any doubt.

Is Moon Jae-In a member of the Unification Church?

a reply to: amazing

Trump is mentioned because he is the sitting President. That's the only reason. Had it been Obama, or Nixon, or whomever, that'd be the name mentioned.

I, in no way, think that Trump is deserving of some form of special thanks. Do I think his tactics were better than Obama's? Yes, I do. But that's as far as it goes.

Truth is, the general attitude towards North Korea by the United States hasn't really changed that drastically--some, yes, but in its essence it hasn't changed much at all in the past 60 plus years.

Think about this, this is coming to a head, possibly, after well over half a century of Cold War--this is the last remnants of the first Cold War--and it's coming to an end, maybe, in the same way the Cold War between the USSR/Warsaw Pact, and the Western Allies/NATO did. Economic implosion. I'm guessing, and that's all it is, that North Korea is coming to the table because they've no other choice in the matter... When people get hungry enough, cold enough, they're going to start getting angry. Angry people tend not to worship at the shrine of the Personality Cult.

In my not so humble opinion, using the word Trump is a stand in for United States and the other allies who've had South Korea's back.

It's possible, maybe even likely, that I'm wrong...but this is how I'm reading the whole situation. This is the late 1980's on a smaller scale.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: amazing

Trump is mentioned because he is the sitting President. That's the only reason. Had it been Obama, or Nixon, or whomever, that'd be the name mentioned.

I, in no way, think that Trump is deserving of some form of special thanks. Do I think his tactics were better than Obama's? Yes, I do. But that's as far as it goes.

Truth is, the general attitude towards North Korea by the United States hasn't really changed that drastically--some, yes, but in its essence it hasn't changed much at all in the past 60 plus years.

Think about this, this is coming to a head, possibly, after well over half a century of Cold War--this is the last remnants of the first Cold War--and it's coming to an end, maybe, in the same way the Cold War between the USSR/Warsaw Pact, and the Western Allies/NATO did. Economic implosion. I'm guessing, and that's all it is, that North Korea is coming to the table because they've no other choice in the matter... When people get hungry enough, cold enough, they're going to start getting angry. Angry people tend not to worship at the shrine of the Personality Cult.

In my not so humble opinion, using the word Trump is a stand in for United States and the other allies who've had South Korea's back.

It's possible, maybe even likely, that I'm wrong...but this is how I'm reading the whole situation. This is the late 1980's on a smaller scale.

I keep thinking it's a ploy by the north to start an invasion...get some spys and people on the inside some better intel, pictures, video, maps. I still think that entire family is crazy AF. Of course, I also think the South Koreans are aware of that and have thought out all the possible scenarios.

a reply to: amazing

Me, too. But at some point, we have to begin to trust, at least a little. Not blindly, though.

They give a little? We give a little. I'd like to see another reunification in my lifetime. East and West Germany have, and while it was/is rough at times, it's worked out well for the most part.

There is vast wealth sitting in North Korea's mountains, and South Korea has the heavy industry to pull it out of those mountains. This is something Germany didn't have. I'm willing to bet, and hopefully the Koreans will be, as well, that that will make any reunification much smoother.

But, as you say, there's that niggling little doubt that this is just another game on the part of Pyong-yang... If it is, reunification will die right there, as South Korea will never trust, if as little as they do now, the North, again.

I remain hopeful.

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: The GUT

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
So how is Trump even partially responsible?!?!

I dunno exactly how, but the South Korean President gave President Trump "Big credit" for the talks.
I'd say Moon Jae-In carries a little more weight than you without any doubt.

Is Moon Jae-In a member of the Unification Church?

That would certainly be of interest if so, but I have no info myself.

originally posted by: samuelsson
a reply to: CryHavoc

Because it happened so many times in the past without outside influence? SK president thanked Trump because he thought he made it possible.p

I know, right?

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: amazing

South Korea, and North Korea have, of course, been the major players. It's, after all, their countries.

To call the roll the US played, along with other UN members, small would be a mistake.

There's no way to know, of course, but what might have happened if the US/UN hadn't been there? I'm thinking bad things, such as an invasion from the North. They didn't because of the US presence.

I see what you're saying but we've had forces in South Korea for Decades and decades. Trump didn't put them there. Not hating on Trump, just saying that we need to look at what's really going on. Shouldn't we really be thanking Truman and Eisenhower? They put the troops there.

Really?

Truman was too much of a pussywimp to let MacArther blow out them commie bastards!

originally posted by: Whereismypassword
a reply to: UKTruth

We will see how popular trump is when he comes to England in July

I wonder if he will do a little curtesy to the queen like he did the king of Saudi Arabia

Trump? Nah. This is more his speed.