NORTH KOREA'S NUCLEAR THREAT ISN'T REALLY TRUMP'S FAULT

cancel2 2022

Canceled
Here is a thoughtful and well considered article in Newsweek, certainly makes a change from the bullshit posted on here in the main.

President Donald Trump's chosen words and terse manner as he delivered his threatening message Tuesday to North Korea and its leader Kim Jong Un has led to significant backlash, as many worry that the president's rhetoric brings the U.S. closer to war on the Korean Peninsula.*

But Trump, who throughout his public and now political life has been well known to*go off-script, most certainly was not the first U.S. president to use such hyperbolic language or threats toward*the North or its leader at the time.

Indeed, Trump inherited the global threat that is North Korea not only from his immediate predecessor, Barack Obama, but also from Presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton. And the truth is the country’s last three commanders in chief have all used various forms of diplomacy, strong language and even direct communication with North Korean leaders only to end up making little to no progress.*

see how they all end up at the same place and maybe that will happen with these guys too,” Thomas H. Lee, professor of International Law at Fordham University and a former Naval intelligence officer, told*Newsweek.

Trump’s deployment of words such as “fire and fury” and “power” obviously appear ominous and were largely backed up by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defense Secretary James Mattis. The former said Americans should be able to sleep well at night while the latter insisted that the U.S. could thwart any enemy.

Lee said that because of Trump’s “somewhat unhinged, off the cuff rhetoric,” North Korea, China and Russia actually believe a military strike on the North is possible, which in turn led the two other superpowers to agree to the most recent United Nations' sanctions against Kim Jong Un’s regime. That’s a kind of power or leverage Obama’s administration didn’t necessarily possess or effectively convey.

And yet both Obama and Bush had choice words for Kim and his father, Kim Jong Il, within the last 15 years. Obama at first took a “conciliatory” route, according to Lee, with the North but ultimately returned to sanctions and tough talk.

In April 2014, Obama stated, while visiting South Korea, that the U.S. “will not hesitate to use our military might” when it came to defending allies. This came around the time the North, which just a few years prior had transitioned from Kim Jong Il to*Kim Jong Un, was on the verge of a fourth nuclear test,*The Guardian*reported.

Much like the Trump administration and the United Nations Security Council recently did, one of Obama’s last acts to curtail the North from testing and firing off rockets was the same strategy that other leaders have followed: sanctions. In November, the U.N. council unanimously passed economic sanctions on the North’s coal exports. The same council passed more and new sanctions Saturday, also unanimously.

But as*Foreign Policy*indicated, Obama’s last measure did not “inspire much optimism that Kim Jong Un will submit to multiple U.N. demands to destroy the regime’s existing nuclear weapons and scrap its program to build more.” All told, the North would conduct four underground nuclear tests while Obama was in office. He stuck to diplomacy.

Obama did, however, order the Pentagon to increase cyber attacks on the North in an effort to thwart their tests about three years ago,*The New York Times*reported in March, and he did warn Trump that the North would “likely be the most urgent problem he would confront.”

The approaches taken by Obama and now Trump do appear to be a mix of attempts made by Bush, though the 43rd president did try another more personal one. At first, Bush bundled the North into his “axis of evil,” along with Iraq and Iran, during his 2002 State of the Union address, which Lee pointed out actually surprised the North Koreans.

Later that year, the North kicked out International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors, and in January 2003 announced it was pulling out of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, which the North had agreed to in December 1985. The Bush administration, as well as Japan, South Korea, China and Russia, eventually got the North to agree to and start holding six-party talks in August 2003 that eventually led to an agreement to cease nuclear testing in 2007. In exchange, the North would receive 950,000 metric tons of fuel oil or economic aid worth the same.

And as Bush was preparing to leave the White House,*he even wrote a personal letter*to then-leader Kim Jong Il, hoping that the deal would stay in place. Still, in 2009, the North launched a rocket and the agreement fell apart.

Like Bush, Clinton too came close to halting the North’s nuclear programs in 1994. In October of that year, about three months after Kim Sung Il died and Kim Jong Il had yet to formally take power, Clinton managed to strike a deal that would give the North oil and*promised financing worth $4 billion—with the South, Japan, Russia, Germany and the U.S. each chipping in—to build light-water nuclear reactors that would be constructed in a way to make difficult converting waste into bomb materials.

But, just weeks later, Republicans historically overtook the Congress in the 1994 elections and would not fork over the appropriations to make Clinton’s deal happen, incensing the North.

Later, Clinton*even toyed with the idea*of being the first sitting president to travel to North Korea after Bush had been elected, Lee said.

“He ultimately decided not to because he thought North Korea being one of the big foreign policy problems, he didn’t want to handcuff the new incoming president into a particular course of action,” Lee said. “Making a major step like that with North Korea was something for the new president.”

http://www.newsweek.com/north-korea-bush-clinton-obama-trump-649522
 
Here is a thoughtful and well considered article in Newsweek, certainly makes a change from the bullshit posted on here in the main.

President Donald Trump's chosen words and terse manner as he delivered his threatening message Tuesday to North Korea and its leader Kim Jong Un has led to significant backlash, as many worry that the president's rhetoric brings the U.S. closer to war on the Korean Peninsula.*

But Trump, who throughout his public and now political life has been well known to*go off-script, most certainly was not the first U.S. president to use such hyperbolic language or threats toward*the North or its leader at the time.

Indeed, Trump inherited the global threat that is North Korea not only from his immediate predecessor, Barack Obama, but also from Presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton. And the truth is the country’s last three commanders in chief have all used various forms of diplomacy, strong language and even direct communication with North Korean leaders only to end up making little to no progress.*

see how they all end up at the same place and maybe that will happen with these guys too,” Thomas H. Lee, professor of International Law at Fordham University and a former Naval intelligence officer, told*Newsweek.

Trump’s deployment of words such as “fire and fury” and “power” obviously appear ominous and were largely backed up by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defense Secretary James Mattis. The former said Americans should be able to sleep well at night while the latter insisted that the U.S. could thwart any enemy.

Lee said that because of Trump’s “somewhat unhinged, off the cuff rhetoric,” North Korea, China and Russia actually believe a military strike on the North is possible, which in turn led the two other superpowers to agree to the most recent United Nations' sanctions against Kim Jong Un’s regime. That’s a kind of power or leverage Obama’s administration didn’t necessarily possess or effectively convey.

And yet both Obama and Bush had choice words for Kim and his father, Kim Jong Il, within the last 15 years. Obama at first took a “conciliatory” route, according to Lee, with the North but ultimately returned to sanctions and tough talk.

In April 2014, Obama stated, while visiting South Korea, that the U.S. “will not hesitate to use our military might” when it came to defending allies. This came around the time the North, which just a few years prior had transitioned from Kim Jong Il to*Kim Jong Un, was on the verge of a fourth nuclear test,*The Guardian*reported.

Much like the Trump administration and the United Nations Security Council recently did, one of Obama’s last acts to curtail the North from testing and firing off rockets was the same strategy that other leaders have followed: sanctions. In November, the U.N. council unanimously passed economic sanctions on the North’s coal exports. The same council passed more and new sanctions Saturday, also unanimously.

But as*Foreign Policy*indicated, Obama’s last measure did not “inspire much optimism that Kim Jong Un will submit to multiple U.N. demands to destroy the regime’s existing nuclear weapons and scrap its program to build more.” All told, the North would conduct four underground nuclear tests while Obama was in office. He stuck to diplomacy.

Obama did, however, order the Pentagon to increase cyber attacks on the North in an effort to thwart their tests about three years ago,*The New York Times*reported in March, and he did warn Trump that the North would “likely be the most urgent problem he would confront.”

The approaches taken by Obama and now Trump do appear to be a mix of attempts made by Bush, though the 43rd president did try another more personal one. At first, Bush bundled the North into his “axis of evil,” along with Iraq and Iran, during his 2002 State of the Union address, which Lee pointed out actually surprised the North Koreans.

Later that year, the North kicked out International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors, and in January 2003 announced it was pulling out of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, which the North had agreed to in December 1985. The Bush administration, as well as Japan, South Korea, China and Russia, eventually got the North to agree to and start holding six-party talks in August 2003 that eventually led to an agreement to cease nuclear testing in 2007. In exchange, the North would receive 950,000 metric tons of fuel oil or economic aid worth the same.

And as Bush was preparing to leave the White House,*he even wrote a personal letter*to then-leader Kim Jong Il, hoping that the deal would stay in place. Still, in 2009, the North launched a rocket and the agreement fell apart.

Like Bush, Clinton too came close to halting the North’s nuclear programs in 1994. In October of that year, about three months after Kim Sung Il died and Kim Jong Il had yet to formally take power, Clinton managed to strike a deal that would give the North oil and*promised financing worth $4 billion—with the South, Japan, Russia, Germany and the U.S. each chipping in—to build light-water nuclear reactors that would be constructed in a way to make difficult converting waste into bomb materials.

But, just weeks later, Republicans historically overtook the Congress in the 1994 elections and would not fork over the appropriations to make Clinton’s deal happen, incensing the North.

Later, Clinton*even toyed with the idea*of being the first sitting president to travel to North Korea after Bush had been elected, Lee said.

“He ultimately decided not to because he thought North Korea being one of the big foreign policy problems, he didn’t want to handcuff the new incoming president into a particular course of action,” Lee said. “Making a major step like that with North Korea was something for the new president.”

http://www.newsweek.com/north-korea-bush-clinton-obama-trump-649522

LIES
LIES I TELL YOU

IT'S GOT TO BE TRUMP'S FAULT OR ELSE ALL THE SUPPOSITION BY THE LEFT WILL BE SHOWN TO BE FALSE

YOU TAKE THAT BACK, RIGHT NOW.
 
trmptrdsevrwhr.png
 
Funny how Jarod is nowhere to be seen!
From the article:

Trump’s deployment of words such as “fire and fury” and “power” obviously appear ominous and were largely backed up by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defense Secretary James Mattis. The former said Americans should be able to sleep well at night while the latter insisted that the U.S. could thwart any enemy.

Lee said that because of Trump’s “somewhat unhinged, off the cuff rhetoric,” North Korea, China and Russia actually believe a military strike on the North is possible, which in turn led the two other superpowers to agree to the most recent United Nations' sanctions against Kim Jong Un’s regime. That’s a kind of power or leverage Obama’s administration didn’t necessarily possess or effectively convey.
 
But as*Foreign Policy*indicated, Obama’s last measure did not “inspire much optimism that Kim Jong Un will submit to multiple U.N. demands to destroy the regime’s existing nuclear weapons and scrap its program to build more.” All told, the North would conduct four underground nuclear tests while Obama was in office. He stuck to diplomacy.
Obama talked softly and carried a weak stick
 
Rump said he was going to do something about it?

He did.

He goaded the little maniac until he was more pissed off than he's ever been.

Trump has probably virtually guaranteed that the little goofball will attempt to explode an H-Bomb over the Pacific.
 
He did.

He goaded the little maniac until he was more pissed off than he's ever been.

Trump has probably virtually guaranteed that the little goofball will attempt to explode an H-Bomb over the Pacific.

No the little maniac just threatens, his entire goal was to get the West to acknowledge him, Rump did that bigly. Kim is getting what he wants and it helps him consolidate power internally.
 
He did, he scared the bejasus out of the Chinese and Russians who then agreed to the most swingeing sanctions ever. So can you shut the fuck up now?

The sanctions were watered down to the point to be meaningless, and the President's threats aren't producing this sudden reality with North Korea that "a military strike is possible," they always believed that, that is the reason they felt they had to a develop nuclear capability and what the leadership sells to keep itself in power. Besides, at this point, the threats are empty threats proven by the fact that N. Kores quickly responds to each threat with something equally inane

But the reality is it is now this President's reality, the history isn't a choice, he has to develop his own strategy, and to date he has been floundering
 
The sanctions were watered down to the point to be meaningless, and the President's threats aren't producing this sudden reality with North Korea that "a military strike is possible," they always believed that, that is the reason they felt they had to a develop nuclear capability and what the leadership sells to keep itself in power. Besides, at this point, the threats are empty threats proven by the fact that N. Kores quickly responds to each threat with something equally inane

But the reality is it is now this President's reality, the history isn't a choice, he has to develop his own strategy, and to date he has been floundering
Ok smartarse, what would you do?
 
Ok smartarse, what would you do?

I wasn't elected President, nor did I promise Americans that I would deal with North Korea

Personally, it seems as if the only solution is to accept North Korea as a nuclear nation, they are never going to abandon their nuclear ambitions, never, and any military option will result in the deaths of millions of people in South Korea, Japan, and possibly other nations of South Asia. Not a good ending, but seemingly the only end result
 
I wasn't elected President, nor did I promise Americans that I would deal with North Korea

Personally, it seems as if the only solution is to accept North Korea as a nuclear nation, they are never going to abandon their nuclear ambitions, never, and any military option will result in the deaths of millions of people in South Korea, Japan, and possibly other nations of South Asia. Not a good ending, but seemingly the only end result
You Americans make me laugh, you all want quick overnight solutions to problems. Despite at least three previous presidents trying and failing to stop North Korea from gaining nuclear weapons. So will you be happy if NK sells its nuclear secrets and technology to countries like Iran? What about IS or the Taliban?
 
Last edited:
You Americans make me laugh, you all want quick overnight solutions to problems. Despite at least three previous presidents trying and failing to stop North Korea from gaining nuclear weapons. So will you be happy if NK sells its nuclear secrets and technology to countries like Iran? What about IS or the Taliban?
What's your country doing about it, Tom? Why are you here knocking our countries efforts when it appears yours is just as ineffective. Is it our job to keep all of you safe from NK's nuclear capacities?
 
What's your country doing about it, Tom? Why are you here knocking our countries efforts when it appears yours is just as ineffective. Is it our job to keep all of you safe from NK's nuclear capacities?

We voted for extreme sanctions on North Korea at the UN Security Council for a start. Anyway why are you getting shitty with me, Newsweek is a US publication last time I checked? You are the one that continually knocks everything Trump does and in the process demonstrates a deep seated visceral hatred.
 
Last edited:
I wasn't elected President, nor did I promise Americans that I would deal with North Korea

Personally, it seems as if the only solution is to accept North Korea as a nuclear nation, they are never going to abandon their nuclear ambitions, never, and any military option will result in the deaths of millions of people in South Korea, Japan, and possibly other nations of South Asia. Not a good ending, but seemingly the only end result

:translation:
I really have no solutions and I just want to bitch and moan; because it gets me the attention, that I so desperately NEED.
:/translation:
 
I wasn't elected President, nor did I promise Americans that I would deal with North Korea

Personally, it seems as if the only solution is to accept North Korea as a nuclear nation, they are never going to abandon their nuclear ambitions, never, and any military option will result in the deaths of millions of people in South Korea, Japan, and possibly other nations of South Asia. Not a good ending, but seemingly the only end result
the sanctions are NOT "watered down" they are biting..
pleas e don't give us the Susan Rice school of diplomacy that we "need to accept a nuclear NK"

how does that work when he's constantly improving his technology,and constantly threatening to attack the US?
It doesn't
 
You Americans make me laugh, you all want quick overnight solutions to problems. Despite at least three previous presidents trying and failing to stop North Korea from gaining nuclear weapons. So will you be happy if NK sells its nuclear secrets and technology to countries like Iran? What about IS or the Taliban?
I gotta feeling Iran is giving their ballistic missile technology already to NK

But please. 1 nuclear horror show at a time!

al-Qaeda with nukes..*shudder*
 
Back
Top