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

a reply to: daskakik

I think reunification is getting a little ahead of ourselves. I think an end to the war is something North and South Korea can and should do ahead of the talks with Trump.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Meniscus

It isn't just hard, it is impossible to ignore Trump's meetings and Pompeo's trip but it is also impossible to ignore the other times in the past 2 decades or so that SK and NK have put reunification on the table so it should also be impossible to say the credit goes to Trump.

Your making my point for me. It failed in the past multiple times. If it works this time shouldn't he get some of the credit? Looks like it maybe closer than it has in the last 20yrs.

a reply to: randyvs

I guess you missed the wiki link to the korean reunification history.

a reply to: Meniscus

"Some of the credit" is not really what the OP was talking about.

Such a concession is about as likely as a diehard Packers fan admitting the Bears played well.

Its just not how its done.

The refs will be blamed, maybe injuries, conditions, perhaps some historical excuses.. but, no.. your typical "anti-trumper" will never admit anything of the sort on any topic.

Luckily, despite being so dedicated and vocal (which messes with perception of numbers), many are willing to give credit where credit just might be due.

In this case though, I think outright celebration might be a bit preemptive. There is a long way to go even if the very possibility of some sort of reconciliation is promising.

I think it all might come down to how its "sold" to NK. Bringing NK into the fold of the rest of the so-called modern world makes the leadership (Un) lose some aspects that have been quite important. As a trade off, however, he could make a helluva name for himself in his countries soon-to-be history.

That's a pretty big selling point along with facets like the benefits of no longer being at odds with the rest of the world. That would result in everything from stress reduction to technological benefits that would only increase over time, as trust is established.

Sure, ya give up faux-godhood, but that's a small price to pay for FLACs and 4k

Well, apesement didnt work for Bush, giving money didnt work for Obama.. it seems Trump said long before he was President the only way to move forward on Korea was strength and a determination to end the nonsense.


Guess what, Trump got in power and immediately put his military assets over North Korea and told him to play nice and join the community or else..

x months later, here we are, Kim shaking hands, smiling and talking about a bright future

- same ol same ol from the a$$hats... Blame Trump when bad things happen, ignore Trump when good things happen.

Ignore them, its just another notch to add to Trumps growing list of achievements.

Gotta give Trump some credit on getting China to impose banking sanctions on North Korea. Its not really in China's best interest to have sane peaceful North Korea. Neither is a Nuclear war on their border. China has used North Korea as a bargaining chip for years. If any country wanted North Korea to stop doing something they had to make a deal with China. China would act all like thats impossible no way but if you could do something for us then we will try talk some sense into them.

Trump's increasingly incendiary rhetoric and North Koreas missile tests brought some people to the table.

originally posted by: Serdgiam
Such a concession is about as likely as a diehard Packers fan admitting the Bears played well.

Its just not how its done.

The refs will be blamed, maybe injuries, conditions, perhaps some historical excuses.. but, no.. your typical "anti-trumper" will never admit anything of the sort on any topic.

Luckily, despite being so dedicated and vocal (which messes with perception of numbers), many are willing to give credit where credit just might be due.

In this case though, I think outright celebration might be a bit preemptive. There is a long way to go even if the very possibility of some sort of reconciliation is promising.

I think it all might come down to how its "sold" to NK. Bringing NK into the fold of the rest of the so-called modern world makes the leadership (Un) lose some aspects that have been quite important. As a trade off, however, he could make a helluva name for himself in his countries soon-to-be history.

That's a pretty big selling point along with facets like the benefits of no longer being at odds with the rest of the world. That would result in everything from stress reduction to technological benefits that would only increase over time, as trust is established.

Sure, ya give up faux-godhood, but that's a small price to pay for FLACs and 4k

Kim Jong Un could just declare victory and say see I crushed our enemies and they surrendered. I don't think he would have to give up much. He would gain alot more and would'nt really lose face. They could spin it.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Meniscus

"Some of the credit" is not really what the OP was talking about.

I don't think any one leader can take full responsibility. Although it seems Trump got the ball rolling and so far its working.

a reply to: Meniscus

I agree but I think maybe the leaders of SK and NK probably have more to do with it than Trump.

Also, the nuclear test site collapsing might have more to do with it than Trump.

Basically, unless you are set to automatically give Trump credit for everything that happens, you might actually take the time to look deeper into it.

And last but not least, it might not happen this time either.

a reply to: daskakik

To be fair, if things go sideways, Trump will get ALL the blame.

a reply to: DBCowboy

So the next thread could be "Will The Pro-Trump Crowd Concede That Trump Was Responsible For Korea's Remaining Split?

I guess I'd be in there saying that Trump really didn't have much to do with it and be told that my opinion as a non-american isn't as valuable as an americans by Randy's evil twin.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: DBCowboy

So the next thread could be "Will The Pro-Trump Crowd Concede That Trump Was Responsible For Korea's Remaining Split?

I guess I'd be in there saying that Trump really didn't have much to do with it and be told that my opinion as a non-american isn't as valuable as an americans by Randy's evil twin.

heh

I'd be there saying, "He owns it. He wanted the Big Chair, he gets that and everything that comes with it."

a reply to: daskakik

There may be some confusion betwixt the
word validity as a member. And the value
I personally place on the opinion of a non
american.

However whatever, you said you were
suspicious of the american gov. Unless
you peak thru the blinds and hear paranoid
voices when the water is running. It means
nothing. A gov. Is only corrupt if it's politicians
are corrupt. Not complicated.

Your suspicions would be reflected in your
opinion as it adjusted to the election of a
non politician. Instead I think It safe to say
you never have given the man we elected a
chance. Not to win, not to do well, not to
last a full term and not to be re elected.
I say your claim to suspicion is an excuse
and you really just hate trump. Which makes
your opinion completely worthless.



I believe if you were truly suspicipuos it
would be easy to recognize. By more than
just negative non american rhetoric against
an american Pres.

a reply to: randyvs

What does any of that have to do with the history of korean reunification?

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: randyvs

What does any of that have to do with the history of korean reunification?

It has to do with Trump perfectly on topic
despite your attempt to dictate.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

You do realize that the mountain that the guy tested all the nukes under recently collapsed, and it's likely going to leak radiation. Right after that happened he "agrees" to stop testing nukes. Did Trump knock the mountain down?

a reply to: randyvs

It seemed to be more about me and what you think I think about Trump than Trump.

It definitely didn't have anything to do with the post you were replying to.

As for an adjustment to the election of a non-politician, well, where is it written that non-politicians are automatically immune to corruption?

Saying that I am suspicious isn't an excuse, I don't hate Trump and I fail to see how me giving him a chance or not makes any difference to what actually happens.

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
Well, apesement didnt work for Bush, giving money didnt work for Obama.. it seems Trump said long before he was President the only way to move forward on Korea was strength and a determination to end the nonsense.


Guess what, Trump got in power and immediately put his military assets over North Korea and told him to play nice and join the community or else..

x months later, here we are, Kim shaking hands, smiling and talking about a bright future

- same ol same ol from the a$$hats... Blame Trump when bad things happen, ignore Trump when good things happen.

Ignore them, its just another notch to add to Trumps growing list of achievements.

I guess its revisionist history to paint Trump's actions as something drastically new?

Only thing Trump has done different is speak off the cuff and use twitter. Hell even Trump's strategy isnt anything new and just a replay of the Nixon Madman theory using modern outlets. The US has always had assets around and over NK. We have been doing exercises on their boarders for ages. Presidents have always talked about using action if needed.

As to the question of will Trump get credit? Yes he likely will if things go well in these talks. Much like Nixon and China sometimes the bad do good.

a reply to: daskakik

As for an adjustment to the election of a non-politician, well, where is it written that non-politicians are automatically immune to corruption?

Why do you pretend that to be the point?