Historic North Korea/South Korea Meeting - Trump Peace Prize?

There are democrats who are showing their lack of principles here. But it isn't ubiquitous. The entire right-wing would have thrown a collective sh1tf1t 4 years ago. Like mass demonstrations, impeachment threats, that level of crazy.

 

Yeah you can't just throw that out as a fact. There would definitely have been a few Republicans who would agree with Obama on this, just like there some agreeing with him on Cuba. The only reason why that's not happening now with Trump (or as widespread as you claim would happen if it was Obama) is because Republicans have the majority.

Which is another point...some Democrats were mad seeing the US/NK flag side by side because Kim is a dictator but said nothing when the US/Cuban flag was side by side. It was about time we moved forward with Cuba and I'm glad the same is happening in NK.

 

Yeah, like 3-4. Total.

 

actually ur half-azzed claim only underscores ur intellectually dishonesty.

today, overwhelming majority of both Rep and Dems are skeptical of Trump's concession to Kim

the same as, 6 yrs ago,
overwhelming majority of both Rep and Dems were not in agreement w Obama saying that he'd consider meeting w our enemies.​

 

It would be so funny if it weren't so serious...

 

The Week seems to have a solid summary of what's happened so far.
http://theweek.com/articles/778349/way-soon-draw-conclusions-from-trumpkim-summit
...

The run-up to the meeting should have informed observers about rational expectations. In most summits, heads of state do not meet until their teams have debated and bargained concrete proposals, with the leaders formalizing agreements that have already been all but made. The U.S.-Soviet Union summits on nuclear arms provide a good example of that process, although even those provided a surprise or two. The late 1986 summit between Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev in Reykjavik collapsed over the Strategic Defense Initiative, but enough was accomplished for Reagan to get the terms he wanted a few months later in the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty.

But the Trump-Kim meeting was not a summit in the classic sense. Instead of coming at the end of a long process, it came at the beginning of a sudden thaw as a means of testing whether there would be a process at all. No deal was cut, which was not surprising since no options for a deal had been seriously proposed or even spitballed. Instead, the two leaders signed an agreement that is only notable for its lack of concessions by either side.

The four points in the document only include one specific commitment to action: The Kim regime agreed to recover and return the remains of American POWs and MIAs from the Korean War. Otherwise, the document only commits both sides to continued talks to "build a lasting and stable peace regime on the Korean Peninsula," and identifies "complete denuclearization" as the key goal of those discussions. Trump added a concession in parallel by suspending joint military exercises with South Korea, but those can be restarted just as easily as they were stopped. That concession also parallels unilateral pledges made by Kim prior to the summit to suspend all nuclear and missile testing, and perhaps provides a sweetener to keep Kim committed to the process.


Notably, the agreement and the parallel agreements do nothing to lift sanctions on Pyongyang, despite confusing claims from North Korean state media. That represents a change in the American approach from previous agreements with North Korea for denuclearization. In the past, the U.S. would offer sanctions relief and aid in the form of fuel and food during the negotiations. Trump insisted he would not follow that precedent and would maintain "maximum pressure" until a final agreement could be achieved. Since sanctions appear to be the driving force behind Kim's sudden willingness to talk, the U.S. hasn't given up anything of substance, even with the suspension of joint military exercises. But we haven't achieved anything of substance, either, at least not yet.

Rather than see this as a first step in a process with unknown outcomes, most people appeared to rush to various conclusions: One side hailed the meeting as a historic achievement that should guarantee Trump a place in history, while the other considered it a surrender by Trump and a betrayal of our allies. In truth, very little has changed. Both sides have had an opportunity to size each other up and prepare for the next steps of the process, assuming those next steps come at all.

We have plenty of time to pass judgment on this strategy depending on the eventual outcome. Let's not forget that the world hailed 1994's Agreed Framework, which was supposed to halt North Korea's power plant program, as a historic achievement at the time, only to discover that North Korea had been cheating all along and never planned to denuclearize. When attempts to tighten the inspection regime were made, it collapsed and led to the arms race that brought us to where we are today. Kim and his regime may still think they can get away with a similar ploy, which will make this week's summit just another missed opportunity in a nuclear standoff. On the other hand, the summit managed to at least change the rhetoric between the two nations, allowing an opportunity for progress if — and it's a big if — the Kim regime really does want to find a way out of the nuclear standoff it created with the U.S. and cannot hope to win.

But as tempting as it might seem, let's not jump to conclusions just yet. We haven't lost anything, but we also haven't yet solved the problem. Trump himself noted that, in six months, he may very well wind up with egg on his face if Kim backtracks or refuses to commit to verifiable denuclearization. Given the history of the Kim regime, it pays to be skeptical, but not close-minded. It certainly doesn't pay to declare victory just yet.​

 

He's so perfectly hypocritical, that it has to be done on purpose. It's like he's just ****ing with his supporters to show how zombie hive minded they are.

Obviously that isn't the case, but god damn...

 

Gee, I couldn't even imagine the gop reaction if this had been President Obama saluting a Cuban officer...

Trump seen in awkward exchange of salutes with North Korean general on state TV
https://abcnews.go.com/International/north-korean-state-tv-airs-1st-video-trump/story?id=55887852

 

As a progressive who votes Democratic let me clear. I congratulate President Trump for his break through meeting with the North Korean leader.

Sadly this could have been done by President Obama who generally speaking lacked the personal boldness to go against any sort of conventional thinking in all so many ways.

 

Ah yes, the "conventional thinking" of having an actual plan.

 

Actually on a smaller level is not only conventional, but practically common sense, to realize that you can say hello to someone and say essentially: "maybe we should get together and try to do ......"

I hate the sob Trump, too, but I reject the idea that we should just cater to the military industrial complex nutjobs and hawks of both parties and put up unneeded obstacles to peace around the world.

 

IDIOT

 

I’m with you, but the way trump has started this is a huge WTF???

 

What is this, and why is Israel leaking it?

Scoop: Classified Israeli report raises doubts over Trump-Kim summit

https://www.axios.com/israel-casts-...=social&utm_campaign=organic&utm_content=1100

 

Do nothing, then claim victory.

Accuse and label the people who call you out for it.

What a fine set of standards for the next generation.

 

How dare you ask questions!

 

Amazing