Ben Shapiro explains how bad Trump’s NK deal really is.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: face23785

That's cute. Where did I say it was a done deal? I'll wait.

Sure. Here is the quote:

So far we got 3 hostages back, a halt to their nuclear tests (you can take that one away if you want since they destroyed their nuclear site, but it would be a simple matter to build another one), a halt to their missile tests and a pledge to denuclearize and allow inspections. All in exchange for giving Kim a little attention and suspending exercises that we can live without for a while to see if he's serious. If not, we just restart them.

Since I didn't say that, I'll make it easy on you, what did I say that made you think it's a done deal? Be specific.

See above. You just told us what "we got". Right?

The hostages are back and they're not going anywhere. That's kinda permanent. The other things are obviously pledges to anyone with a shred of reading comprehension. Notice I said "halt to testing", not "end to testing". "Pledge to denuclearize", not denuclearization, and a pledge to allow inspections. You're not this dumb. Up your game. You're late to the party and didn't read carefully enough. Every thread I've posted in on this topic today I've stressed that this is just the beginning and no one should get ahead of themselves.

a reply to: face23785

The hostages are back and they're not going anywhere. That's kinda permanent. The other things are obviously pledges to anyone with a shred of reading comprehension. Notice I said "halt to testing", not "end to testing". "Pledge to denuclearize", not denuclearization, and a pledge to allow inspections. You're not this dumb. Up your game. You're late to the party and didn't read carefully enough. Every thread I've posted in on this topic today I've stressed that this is just the beginning and no one should get ahead of themselves.

Is all that in writing? Do you have a copy?

If not, you are speaking in absolutes of something you have no clue about, except what has been reported.

originally posted by: DexterRiley
a reply to: face23785

I believe an accredited note taker is generally a standard fixture in any negotiation of this magnitude. I don't think that translators taking notes meets the same level of veracity. As far as what technology was used to record the event, I have no information.

Trump's unilateral actions without consulting allies in the region is a bit more disconcerting.

You all may want to review the source article that I linked. It provides a lot more information about how Trump's concession of no more war games, and a desire to remove troops from SK could adversely affect US power projection in the Asian region.

-dex

You're missing the point. The implication is that the only people who know what was said are Kim and Trump and they're "not trustworthy". That's simply not true, that's a fiction made up by the media. It was even debunked on CNN. The translator for Trump was a career State Department official, not one of Trump's lackeys. The implication that something shady went on and we'll never know is just some really nasty tasting crow being eaten by people who can't come to grips that this went better than they expected. That doesn't mean the problem is solved though.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: face23785

The hostages are back and they're not going anywhere. That's kinda permanent. The other things are obviously pledges to anyone with a shred of reading comprehension. Notice I said "halt to testing", not "end to testing". "Pledge to denuclearize", not denuclearization, and a pledge to allow inspections. You're not this dumb. Up your game. You're late to the party and didn't read carefully enough. Every thread I've posted in on this topic today I've stressed that this is just the beginning and no one should get ahead of themselves.

Is all that in writing? Do you have a copy?

If not, you are speaking in absolutes of something you have no clue about, except what has been reported.

It's been announced what they pledged to do and neither the President nor Kim has issued any corrections. Both the President and Kim spoke live in front of each other with translators to the media, hearing what each other said, and didn't object. I don't always trust the veracity of the media, but there's no reason to doubt that what's been reported, the pledge to denuclearize and allow inspections and the pledge to suspend our joint exercises with SK is accurate.

In a metaphysical sense, sure we don't really know anything. You may not be as smart as I thought you were. You look pretty stupid playing this game right now because you didn't read up enough before replying to me, but I could be wrong. If he does produce a document that you can read yourself for all you know it can be fake. Unless you were in the room you'll never know for sure, and even then you might have been hallucinating. What's your point?

ETA: I hope the rest of your night goes better. Enjoy your waffling.

a reply to: face23785

It's been announced what they pledged to do and neither the President nor Kim has issued any corrections. Both the President and Kim spoke live in front of each other with translators to the media, hearing what each other said, and didn't object. I don't always trust the veracity of the media, but there's no reason to doubt that what's been reported, the pledge to denuclearize and allow inspections and the pledge to suspend our joint exercises with SK is accurate.

Sure. As long as we can agree that you were speaking absolutes, regardless of your source, that's fine. The argument of your use of the words "halt" and "end" is hilarious.

In a metaphysical sense, sure we don't really know anything. You may not be as smart as I thought you were. You look pretty stupid playing this game right now because you didn't read up enough before replying to me, but I could be wrong. If he does produce a document that you can read yourself for all you know it can be fake. Unless you were in the room you'll never know for sure, and even then you might have been hallucinating. What's your point?

Sure. All that is meaningless garbage.

You were speaking in absolutes and have now fully backtracked.

My point is made and I do not care about your pathetic ad homs.

I wonder if West coast NK will have Carl’s Jr. and East Coast NK will have Hardee’s

Seems logical. Probably in the plan somewhere.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

50,000 US soldiers died to keep South Korea an independent democratic state and trump is about to hand it over with a smile. Then trump just swooned over Kim who is general consensus the worst dictator on the planet..

South Korea is still a independent state and fully support these talks.

If by some strange miracle North Korea denuclearizes this will be a very expensive success..

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
If NK does not denuclearize, then trump just gave away the farm FOR FREE..

Diplomacy has to start somewhere.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
Hell trump even just said he wanted to remove all US troops from the region which would weaken American interests substantially.

No that is not what he said. He said he would like to but the USA is a long way from doing that.

a reply to: introvert

See above. You just told us what "we got". Right?

was it not you who was complaining about splitting hairs about what you say and using it against you later on ? Practice what you like to preach please . We don't know what was signed but we do know they met . Its a start to a possible something . It could have been a agreement on the dinner menu for the next meeting at the White House .

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Cause peace is bad 'mkay.

originally posted by: EmmanuelGoldstein
I wonder if West coast NK will have Carl’s Jr. and East Coast NK will have Hardee’s

Seems logical. Probably in the plan somewhere.

Why not? Capitalism at its best!

And the North Korean people having access to American fast food franchises might do more to promote peace than anything that two politicians can do.


-dex

a reply to: the2ofusr1

was it not you who was complaining about splitting hairs about what you say and using it against you later on ?

No. If I remember correctly, that was a matter of people taking what I said completely out of context.

It's dishonest.

Practice what you like to preach please .

Did I take what the other member said out of context?

We don't know what was signed but we do know they met . Its a start to a possible something . It could have been a agreement on the dinner menu for the next meeting at the White House .

True. I will wait to see what happens. Until then, best not to speak in absolutes. Would you agree?

a reply to: introvert

True. I will wait to see what happens. Until then, best not to speak in absolutes. Would you agree?

Even if a deal is struck and signed does not mean the Trump or a future POTUS cant cancel it . So as far as absolutes go its still death and taxes that rule .

a reply to: Admitted

Exactly it's soo much better for the world when he is menacing and testing missiles over other country's.

There were 2 options for dealing with Kim, total destruction of him and his regime or have talks with him to de-esculate, if your not sure the latter was the better option.

No need to trust Kim we will discover his intentions if nefarious and snuff them out.

a reply to: introvert

If you 2 are discussing what I saw, then you did make a comment that could have easily been seen as a piggyback of the poster you responded to vs a stand alone statement, and that poster did just question the source to dismiss the information and then bounce.

Did you know 3 million civilians died in that war and the west committed war crimes, machine gunning civilians? Thy also basically bombed to oblivion all of North Korea. Not what you think.

That doesn't excuse the North Korean human rights violations.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Can you enumerate the detaild of the agreement so we can discuss the facts?

Im a shapiro fan too.....but hes not always correct. I also am not decided on the deal amd what i think of it.

Shapiro is also wrong on Israel. Big apologist

originally posted by: seeker1963
a reply to: JoshuaCox


Wow! You mean the Ben Shapiro who has been banned from speaking at colleges because he is considered to be a Nazi????

Guess since he is bashing Trump now he is a good Nazi???

He's not a nazi lol. That's absurd. He's a fairly moderate right wing JEW, not nazi. The only thing I've ever seen him say that is extreme is virulently pro Israel, anti Palestinian. Hardly a good nazi. He gets flack for calling out sjws and identity politics.

Wahhhhhhh

If you think he's the worst dictator then obviously you're not paying attention. Look up Democratic Republic of Congo for an example. Or Venezuela.

originally posted by: TheLead
a reply to: introvert

If you 2 are discussing what I saw, then you did make a comment that could have easily been seen as a piggyback of the poster you responded to vs a stand alone statement, and that poster did just question the source to dismiss the information and then bounce.

Ok. I am not responsible for what other members say. I am responsible for my own words and I did not do as accused.