Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 9,170
- Points
- 1,160
Happy that steps are being taken in the right direction, but I don't trust the fat little puke or his regime. They will start to weasel if Trump is unelected.
North Korea (Superthread)
- Thread starter Scoobie Newbie
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Why is it that Donald Trump wants an agreement with North Korea but wants to tear up the one with Iran?
Kim would be mad to give up his weapons. He might concede his long range ballistic missile program but nothing more. He's not going to end up on the end of a rope like Saddam or with a bayonet up his rear end like Ghadaffi.
Kim would be mad to give up his weapons. He might concede his long range ballistic missile program but nothing more. He's not going to end up on the end of a rope like Saddam or with a bayonet up his rear end like Ghadaffi.
- Reaction score
- 290
- Points
- 980
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/south-korean-president-trump-deserves-nobel-peace-prize/
South Korean President: Trump Deserves Nobel Peace Prize
By Jack Crowe April 30, 2018 12:28 PM
South Korean president Moon Jae-in said Monday that President Trump deserves a Nobel Peace Prize for his role in spurring negotiations between North and South Korea after a decades-long stand off.
“President Trump should win the Nobel Peace Prize. What we need is only peace,” Moon told a meeting of senior secretaries in response to the suggestion that he deserved the award, according to a South Korean official who briefed the media.
Moon has praised Trump’s efforts to open dialogue between the North and the South, saying in January that the American president “deserves big credit for bringing about the inter-Korean talks. It could be a resulting work of the U.S.-led sanctions and pressure.”
South Korean President: Trump Deserves Nobel Peace Prize
By Jack Crowe April 30, 2018 12:28 PM
South Korean president Moon Jae-in said Monday that President Trump deserves a Nobel Peace Prize for his role in spurring negotiations between North and South Korea after a decades-long stand off.
“President Trump should win the Nobel Peace Prize. What we need is only peace,” Moon told a meeting of senior secretaries in response to the suggestion that he deserved the award, according to a South Korean official who briefed the media.
Moon has praised Trump’s efforts to open dialogue between the North and the South, saying in January that the American president “deserves big credit for bringing about the inter-Korean talks. It could be a resulting work of the U.S.-led sanctions and pressure.”
J
jollyjacktar
Guest
The butterfly effect if that came to pass would be epic.
QV
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,477
- Points
- 1,010
Pencil Tech said:
Well... It appears as though North Korea may want peace and to join the free world... meanwhile Iran has been secretly advancing its nuclear weapons program (according to recent news). Radical islamists with a nuke would be exponentially worse then anything the world has faces thus far, in my opinion.
I agree, Kim has absolutely zero motivation go completely dismantle his nuclear weapons programs under the current climate. None.
Every single world leader that gives up it's WMD programs ends up on the receiving end of Uncle Sam's propaganda & subsequent overkill military action in due time, and Kim knows this.
Where I THINK the difference is, is that China isn't going to let US forces be stationed any further north than they already are. China doesn't want the US military on it's border, nor does it want 15 million refugees flooding across either.
So because Kim is next door to China, and China isn't going to let the US military lurch right up to it's borders, I think Kim has an advantage that other world leaders didn't have. China is in a position to put it's foot down far faster & with more resolve than Russia could 10 - 15 years ago.
Every single world leader that gives up it's WMD programs ends up on the receiving end of Uncle Sam's propaganda & subsequent overkill military action in due time, and Kim knows this.
Where I THINK the difference is, is that China isn't going to let US forces be stationed any further north than they already are. China doesn't want the US military on it's border, nor does it want 15 million refugees flooding across either.
So because Kim is next door to China, and China isn't going to let the US military lurch right up to it's borders, I think Kim has an advantage that other world leaders didn't have. China is in a position to put it's foot down far faster & with more resolve than Russia could 10 - 15 years ago.
- Reaction score
- 2,379
- Points
- 940
Do you have a credible source?QV said:
I've seen two key stories:
1) Netanyahu accusing Iran of trying to obscure nuclear weapons files in 2015 and moving them to a secret location in Tehran last year. The most telling line (beyond "Tonight, I'm here to tell you one thing: Iran lied -- big time," which could have been written by the US President) is "Iran planned at the highest level to continue work related to nuclear weapons under different guises and using the same personnel." LINK
"Iran planned..." Maintaining a potential ability to re-start a program is not the same as currently conducting operations. Most of Netanyahu's speech was a rehash of what Iran did between 1999-2003, providing absolutely no evidence that Iran was in violation of the agreement or hiding nuclear weapons production.
2) The White House published a statement saying that "Iran has a robust, clandestine nuclear weapons program that it has tried and failed to hide from the world and from its own people." They've already back-pedaled, saying 'oopsie, it was a typo; we meant Iran had a robust nuclear weapons program.' LINK
Notwithstanding the US Intelligence community assessment that Iran has indeed suspended its nuclear program, Trump is saying that Netanyahu's announcement shows he was "100% right" in criticizing the 2015 pact (naturally).
Do I trust Iran? No.
Have I seen any credible evidence that they are contravening the 2015 Nuclear Agreement? Also no.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 9,170
- Points
- 1,160
Pencil Tech said:
Because the Iranian deal sucks and is worthless?
- Reaction score
- 4,792
- Points
- 1,060
I'm glad they're talking. I'm glad KJU made the overtures. I'm glad Trump was given the credit he deserves, by South Korea. I'm glad China invited KJU to lunch, although I don't think KJU got to say much. I'm going to wait now and see how the talks start and see what happens. There appear to be a ton of 'what ifs' and a huge amount of people not even willing to see where this goes before they start their doom and gloom scenarios. The fact that both North and South have agreed to end the war is a fantastic and huge step in the right direction. I'm going to try and be an optimist about the whole thing, until, and if, it starts unravelling.
Now for Iran. Never trusted them, likely never will. According to the Israelis, who claim irrefutable proof in thousands of pages of intel, that Iran is disregarding and violating the Obama brokered agreement. Merkle and Macron have both come to try convince Trump to stay on board with the deal. They get a look at the Israeli intelligence this week when the EU gets briefed by Israel. Once the evidence, or lack of, is there, we'll see what happens. I would hope everyone agrees with Israel and puts their foot down on Iran. With a stated goal to wipe Israel off the map, I think it's time for Iran to get dragged out of the middle ages. Kicking and screaming if need be, but a world consensus on appropriate action should make them stand up and take notice. We've learned, that with terrorist muslim states, they can't be bought (they'll just steal the money and won't change anything), the can't be trusted because they still, religiously believe the can lie to infidels, even in state meetings. There is not one redeeming value to that country.
Now for Iran. Never trusted them, likely never will. According to the Israelis, who claim irrefutable proof in thousands of pages of intel, that Iran is disregarding and violating the Obama brokered agreement. Merkle and Macron have both come to try convince Trump to stay on board with the deal. They get a look at the Israeli intelligence this week when the EU gets briefed by Israel. Once the evidence, or lack of, is there, we'll see what happens. I would hope everyone agrees with Israel and puts their foot down on Iran. With a stated goal to wipe Israel off the map, I think it's time for Iran to get dragged out of the middle ages. Kicking and screaming if need be, but a world consensus on appropriate action should make them stand up and take notice. We've learned, that with terrorist muslim states, they can't be bought (they'll just steal the money and won't change anything), the can't be trusted because they still, religiously believe the can lie to infidels, even in state meetings. There is not one redeeming value to that country.
I don't think people should lump Iran with NK. These aren't cookie cutter scenarios. Each is unique and has their own issues to deal with. so it should be no surprise that Trump is taking a different approach.
As for trusting NK, I don't. At all. But today's situation with NK seems better than yesterday's so there is that.
Trump's policy and strategy with NK is one I happen to agree with and have agreed with from the onset. It's likely one of the only things I agree with him on (ok maybe there are a few more but they are few) but he does deserve a good chunk of credit.
As for trusting NK, I don't. At all. But today's situation with NK seems better than yesterday's so there is that.
Trump's policy and strategy with NK is one I happen to agree with and have agreed with from the onset. It's likely one of the only things I agree with him on (ok maybe there are a few more but they are few) but he does deserve a good chunk of credit.
- Reaction score
- 290
- Points
- 980
I am very cautiously optimistic regarding North Korea.
I was posted back from Germany in the summer of 1989. While some cracks had begun to appear in the Soviet Union and its grip on its vassal states, I don't think that any of us there believed that any real change would occur, especially through non-violent means, in our lifetimes. I was too busy organizing my move back to pay much attention.
Just a few months later - November - I was watching, via my television, "Mauerspechte" ("Wall Woodpeckers" - students and others) sitting atop die Mauer and smacking it with sledgehammers, and not being shot or arrested or opposed in any manner.
In December, on a trip back to Lahr, I drove a rented Audi to Berlin (up to 240 km/hr on the former West German autobahn and still being passed at times, and a bare crawl on the former East German side due to road condition and reconstruction) and saw the recent changes, and things that had yet to change, for myself.
It is attractive, and (perhaps too) easy to imagine the same thing happening in Korea - one people, divided by two differing political ideologies for too long, reuniting.
Iran is a much different situation:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/04/iran-poses-serious-threat-to-middle-east-peace-stability/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202018-04-30&utm_term=NR5PM%20Actives
Why Push Back on Iran?
By Kenneth M. Pollack
April 30, 2018 6:30 AM
For starters, the Islamic Republic poses a serious, intransigent threat to the stability and future direction of the Middle East.
Editor’s Note: The following piece originally appeared at AEIdeas, a public-policy blog published by the American Enterprise Institute. It is reprinted here with permission.
Because Iran treats us as an adversary
I do not advocate a more confrontational policy toward Iran lightly. I have no animus toward the Iranian people and would like nothing more than to see a peaceful relationship between our countries. Throughout my career, I have advocated engagement and even rapprochement whenever I believed that there was an Iranian leadership that might be interested in the same. While still in government, I hoped the Iranian presidency of Hashemi Rafsanjani would allow for a thaw and cheered President George H.W. Bush’s famous overture to Iran that “goodwill begets goodwill.” In the late 1990s, I was President Clinton’s director for Persian Gulf affairs at the NSC and ardently supported his bid at rapprochement with Iran’s reformist president, Mohamed Khatami. Similarly, when the Obama administration sought not only a nuclear deal with Iran but a full-fledged transformation of the relationship, I publicly and privately supported them as well. I was admittedly more skeptical of the prospects than they were at first, but I believed that the U.S. could get a good deal on the nuclear front and completely agreed with them that it was worth trying to see if such a deal could be the first step toward a wider reconciliation.
I was posted back from Germany in the summer of 1989. While some cracks had begun to appear in the Soviet Union and its grip on its vassal states, I don't think that any of us there believed that any real change would occur, especially through non-violent means, in our lifetimes. I was too busy organizing my move back to pay much attention.
Just a few months later - November - I was watching, via my television, "Mauerspechte" ("Wall Woodpeckers" - students and others) sitting atop die Mauer and smacking it with sledgehammers, and not being shot or arrested or opposed in any manner.
In December, on a trip back to Lahr, I drove a rented Audi to Berlin (up to 240 km/hr on the former West German autobahn and still being passed at times, and a bare crawl on the former East German side due to road condition and reconstruction) and saw the recent changes, and things that had yet to change, for myself.
It is attractive, and (perhaps too) easy to imagine the same thing happening in Korea - one people, divided by two differing political ideologies for too long, reuniting.
Iran is a much different situation:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/04/iran-poses-serious-threat-to-middle-east-peace-stability/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202018-04-30&utm_term=NR5PM%20Actives
Why Push Back on Iran?
By Kenneth M. Pollack
April 30, 2018 6:30 AM
For starters, the Islamic Republic poses a serious, intransigent threat to the stability and future direction of the Middle East.
Editor’s Note: The following piece originally appeared at AEIdeas, a public-policy blog published by the American Enterprise Institute. It is reprinted here with permission.
Because Iran treats us as an adversary
I do not advocate a more confrontational policy toward Iran lightly. I have no animus toward the Iranian people and would like nothing more than to see a peaceful relationship between our countries. Throughout my career, I have advocated engagement and even rapprochement whenever I believed that there was an Iranian leadership that might be interested in the same. While still in government, I hoped the Iranian presidency of Hashemi Rafsanjani would allow for a thaw and cheered President George H.W. Bush’s famous overture to Iran that “goodwill begets goodwill.” In the late 1990s, I was President Clinton’s director for Persian Gulf affairs at the NSC and ardently supported his bid at rapprochement with Iran’s reformist president, Mohamed Khatami. Similarly, when the Obama administration sought not only a nuclear deal with Iran but a full-fledged transformation of the relationship, I publicly and privately supported them as well. I was admittedly more skeptical of the prospects than they were at first, but I believed that the U.S. could get a good deal on the nuclear front and completely agreed with them that it was worth trying to see if such a deal could be the first step toward a wider reconciliation.
kkwd
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 127
- Points
- 730
According to early reports North Korea is releasing 3 US citizens. It is not a widespread story as of yet so check your favourite news source after for more info.
http://www.businessinsider.com/north-korea-releases-us-prisoners-2018-5
J
jollyjacktar
Guest
I can never remember. Is their surnames first, followed by the rest. So effectively they're all Mr. Kims?
J
jollyjacktar
Guest
Dimsum said:
Thanks. Kim must be the Smith of Korea then.
- Reaction score
- 33
- Points
- 560
Interesting if counterintuitive idea: The DPRK's interest in negotiations stems from the idea the United States will ensure the Kim Regime can stay in power? While the idea of the Kime regime remaining in power in its current form is pretty abhorrent, changing out some of the current political and control mechanisms of the Kim regime while laving Kim in power as "president for life" or something else might actually make sense:
https://www.lifezette.com/polizette/does-kim-see-trump-as-his-savior/
Full article at link
https://www.lifezette.com/polizette/does-kim-see-trump-as-his-savior/
Full article at link
- Reaction score
- 999
- Points
- 1,160
Heard on TV that NOK, as a negotiating point for nuc free country, may go for withdraw of all NOK and ROK troops from the armistice area, replaced by troops from other country's, incl China.
Will these foreign troops incl Nations who contributed to the UN Forces? Weren't the Chinese "Volunteers" during the Korean War? Canada's forces were also volunteers, so I can see there will be real interest by Trudeau to deploy an Inf Bn +.
Back to Korea
Will these foreign troops incl Nations who contributed to the UN Forces? Weren't the Chinese "Volunteers" during the Korean War? Canada's forces were also volunteers, so I can see there will be real interest by Trudeau to deploy an Inf Bn +.
Back to Korea
- Reaction score
- 63
- Points
- 530
UN Command is responsible for the Joint Security Area at PanMunJaum.The commander is an Army LTC with a ROK Army LTC as deputy and commands the ROK troops.Trump has changed his schedule probably for security reasons.But talks are said to be progressing.Whatever that means in reality.I suspect that Kim wants US forces out of Korea,currently US troops are rotated into Korea and the US would love to free those troops up for contingencies.The ROK Army is far stronger than years ago.The weakness of the ROKs is felt to be airpower. With US bases in Japan they could still assist the ROK if needed.
New schedule.
https://apnews.com/f4a5201ceceb44f896e2e497537ba116/US-says-NKorea-talks-moving-quickly,-Trump-to-leave-early
New schedule.
https://apnews.com/f4a5201ceceb44f896e2e497537ba116/US-says-NKorea-talks-moving-quickly,-Trump-to-leave-early
Similar threads
