Straight Dope Message Board

Straight Dope Message Board (https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/index.php)
-   Politics & Elections (https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/forumdisplay.php?f=34)
-   -   North Korea suspending missile testing and closing nuclear site; Trump the statesman? (https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=853430)

HurricaneDitka 05-06-2018 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chisquirrel (Post 20944318)
This is entire thread was STARTED based on someone claiming exactly that. Who could that person possibly be, and could he possibly be invited back to the thread to share why he felt Kim Jong Un was being utterly truthful when he claimed North Korea was ending their nuclear ambitions?

Could you provide a quote where that person said Kim "was being utterly truthful" or is this a false accusation?

Chisquirrel 05-07-2018 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka (Post 20944522)
Could you provide a quote where that person said Kim "was being utterly truthful" or is this a false accusation?

You sure don't seem to be claiming otherwise in your OP. Did I miss some part where you claimed Kim Jong Un has been known to lie before or renege on deals?

Quote:

Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka (Post 20915248)
source

I'm rather pleasantly surprised with the progress Trump has made on the North Korean front. This appears, at least to me, to be the most significant progress towards denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula that has made in the last couple of decades. Am I missing something here, or is this good news?


HurricaneDitka 05-07-2018 01:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chisquirrel (Post 20944649)
You sure don't seem to be claiming otherwise in your OP. Did I miss some part where you claimed Kim Jong Un has been known to lie before or renege on deals?

Just so we're perfectly clear, "you don't seem to be claiming otherwise" does not, in any way, shape, or form constitute a claim by me that Kim "was being utterly truthful".

Chisquirrel 05-07-2018 01:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka (Post 20944669)
Just so we're perfectly clear, "you don't seem to be claiming otherwise" does not, in any way, shape, or form constitute a claim by me that Kim "was being utterly truthful".

Then why use his statement in an attempt to claim Trump is wonderful? Either he was a liar when you used his statement, or he wasn't a liar, and Trump is a chump who's getting played yet again.

HurricaneDitka 05-08-2018 10:53 PM

More good news (even if still not complete):

Pompeo to return from North Korea with 3 US captives: South Korea

Quote:

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will return from North Korea with three U.S. citizens currently imprisoned in the country, according to a South Korean official.

Gyrate 05-09-2018 04:59 AM

Good for them - if they come home I will be pleased.

What's the over-under on Trump continuing to claim they were all imprisoned during the Obama administration?

Ravenman 05-09-2018 05:49 AM

Yes, that is a diplomatic breakthrough.

A shame that if Trump and Bolton had their way, the State Department would be so throughly evicerated that in a few years time, such victories would be much more difficult.

HurricaneDitka 05-09-2018 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ravenman (Post 20949120)
Yes, that is a diplomatic breakthrough.

A shame that if Trump and Bolton had their way, the State Department would be so throughly evicerated that in a few years time, such victories would be much more difficult.

My understanding is that Obama had a fully-staffed State Department and did not achieve a breakthrough like this, but President Trump has an understaffed one and did. Perhaps President Trump's method is better. At the very least, it seems to be working for him (and the prisoners being released).

elucidator 05-09-2018 08:59 AM

You know he lied about that, right? About how the prisoners were Obama's fault, but two of them weren't even prisoners yet while Obama was Prez? You do know about that, yes? That's part of your "understanding"?

Gyrate 05-09-2018 09:54 AM

I realize that some people may be preoccupied with the ongoing war with Eurasia Eastasia but it's not as if there weren't any prisoners released from North Korea during the Obama administration.

I mean, even Dennis Rodman managed to get one released. What's his State Department like?

manson1972 05-09-2018 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka (Post 20949374)
My understanding is that Obama had a fully-staffed State Department and did not achieve a breakthrough like this, but President Trump has an understaffed one and did. Perhaps President Trump's method is better. At the very least, it seems to be working for him (and the prisoners being released).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gyrate (Post 20949532)
I realize that some people may be preoccupied with the ongoing war with Eurasia Eastasia but it's not as if there weren't any prisoners released from North Korea during the Obama administration.

I mean, even Dennis Rodman managed to get one released. What's his State Department like?

So, now your understanding has changed, right?

Buck Godot 05-09-2018 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gyrate (Post 20949532)
I realize that some people may be preoccupied with the ongoing war with Eurasia Eastasia but it's not as if there weren't any prisoners released from North Korea during the Obama administration.

I mean, even Dennis Rodman managed to get one released. What's his State Department like?

Their releases weren't reported on FOX News so they don't count.

Ravenman 05-09-2018 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka (Post 20949374)
My understanding is that Obama had a fully-staffed State Department and did not achieve a breakthrough like this, but President Trump has an understaffed one and did. Perhaps President Trump's method is better. At the very least, it seems to be working for him (and the prisoners being released).

Iíve said it a half dozen times already, but the parable of the fly on the axle of the chariot commenting on what a dust he raises should be the recurring theme for most of Trumpís so-called accomplishments.

I believe the maturity of North Koreaís nuclear and missile program is the major reason they are coming to the table. For years, people have been saying that Kim will not negotiate until he has a certain amount of confidence in his nuclear deterrent. If we had a different President - say, Clinton, Jill Stein, Rand Paul, Obama, Oliver North - I think we would see North Korea coming to the table around about this time.

Maybe the sanctions brought them to the table a little earlier, it is possible. But Iím also not sure we have full visibility of how much better the developments would have been if we hadnít gone 15 months searching for a Trump toady to serve as ambassador to South Korea.

running coach 05-09-2018 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka (Post 20949374)
My understanding is that Obama had a fully-staffed State Department and did not achieve a breakthrough like this, but President Trump has an understaffed one and did. Perhaps President Trump's method is better. At the very least, it seems to be working for him (and the prisoners being released).

As mentioned by elucidator
New York Times.
Quote:

South Korea welcomed the release of the prisoners ó two of whom were arrested during Mr. Trumpís presidency ó calling it ďvery positive for a successful North Korean-United States summit,Ē said Yoon Young-chan, a spokesman for President Moon Jae-in.
Did you blame Trump for their capture?

HurricaneDitka 05-09-2018 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by manson1972 (Post 20949593)
So, now your understanding has changed, right?

Yes, it appears that an administration can achieve "such victories" with or without a fully-staffed State Department.

Ravenman 05-09-2018 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka (Post 20949824)
Yes, it appears that an administration can achieve "such victories" with or without a fully-staffed State Department.

Secretary of Defense James Mattis has repeatedly said, "If you don't fully fund the State Department, then I need to buy more ammunition." Do you maintain he is wrong?

I would note that Trump seems to agree with him, in that he proposes to cut diplomacy and buy more weapons.

manson1972 05-09-2018 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka (Post 20949824)
Yes, it appears that an administration can achieve "such victories" with or without a fully-staffed State Department.

And is it now your understanding that Obama DID, in fact, achieve "such victories"?

HurricaneDitka 05-09-2018 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by running coach (Post 20949685)
... Did you blame Trump for their capture?

No. So far as I know, he had not much of anything to do with their arrests / "capture"

HurricaneDitka 05-09-2018 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ravenman (Post 20949833)
Secretary of Defense James Mattis has repeatedly said, "If you don't fully fund the State Department, then I need to buy more ammunition." Do you maintain he is wrong?

I would note that Trump seems to agree with him, in that he proposes to cut diplomacy and buy more weapons.

So far as I know Mattis only said it once (not "repeatedly") and went on to say "The more that we put into the State Department's diplomacy, hopefully the less we have to put into a military budget ...". I'd agree with him that "hopefully" additional diplomacy will lessen the need for military action. That appears to be the case we have unfolding before us on the Korean Peninsula, regardless of the State Department's staffing / funding levels.

HurricaneDitka 05-09-2018 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by manson1972 (Post 20949848)
And is it now your understanding that Obama DID, in fact, achieve "such victories"?

Yes, at least on the prisoner-release front: there were several released during Obama's administration too.

Ravenman 05-09-2018 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka (Post 20949883)
So far as I know Mattis only said it once (not "repeatedly") and went on to say "The more that we put into the State Department's diplomacy, hopefully the less we have to put into a military budget ...". I'd agree with him that "hopefully" additional diplomacy will lessen the need for military action. That appears to be the case we have unfolding before us on the Korean Peninsula, regardless of the State Department's staffing / funding levels.

He's said multiple times that he stands by the quote as I repeated it. I'm not aware of him offering the caveats that you do.

So, absent the caveat, sounds like you might disagree with Mattis?

elucidator 05-09-2018 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elucidator (Post 20949401)
You know he lied about that, right? About how the prisoners were Obama's fault, but two of them weren't even prisoners yet while Obama was Prez? You do know about that, yes? That's part of your "understanding"?

So, no, then?

HurricaneDitka 05-09-2018 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ravenman (Post 20949937)
He's said multiple times that he stands by the quote as I repeated it.

When / where?


Quote:

Originally Posted by Ravenman (Post 20949937)
... I'm not aware of him offering the caveats that you do.

So, absent the caveat, sounds like you might disagree with Mattis?

Here is video of the original (and only one that I'm aware of) exchange. Your restatement of his quote left off the word "ultimately" as well as the "hopefully" bit. That's fine, people trim quotes and I don't think you were doing anything dishonest by doing so here (I consider it a distinct possibility you were not even aware of the broader context). I don't think I "disagree" with Mattis so much as, in the broader context of his answer, I believe Mattis was trying to lay out a broader aspiration, and show some support for the State Department, than trying to define some ironclad rule, and I can certainly appreciate the broader aspiration that diplomacy should reduce the incidence of war.

Trump has taken a different, more direct and hands-on approach to diplomacy (in some ways sidelining the career diplomats / political appointees that normally staff the State Department) than his predecessors. I'm not as convinced as you seem to be that such an approach is necessarily bad. In this case with North Korea at least, it seems to be bearing some fruit.

ETA: "Hopefully" this comes across as something like "I agree with the broader point that I believe Mattis was making about the importance of diplomacy, while perhaps taking issue with that particular snippet of an answer that you quoted earlier."

Bijou Drains 05-10-2018 10:24 AM

Dotard and Little Rocket man meet June 12th in Singapore

carnivorousplant 05-10-2018 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bijou Drains (Post 20951758)
Dotard and Little Rocket man meet June 12th in Singapore

I wonder if they will end up jumping up and down while they cream at each other. It would be rough on the translators.

Bijou Drains 05-10-2018 10:44 AM

it will go down as the really bad hair summit.

carnivorousplant 05-10-2018 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bijou Drains (Post 20951810)
it will go down as the really bad hair summit.

Outstanding, Sir!

kenobi 65 05-10-2018 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by carnivorousplant (Post 20951771)
I wonder if they will end up jumping up and down while they cream at each other. It would be rough on the translators.

I suspect you meant to type "scream," not "cream," as that'd be a very different sort of summit.

Bijou Drains 05-10-2018 12:23 PM

Kim will say "before we get down to business, how do you bang so many hot babes?"

Tatterdemalion 05-10-2018 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by carnivorousplant (Post 20951771)
I wonder if they will end up jumping up and down while they cream at each other. It would be rough on the translators.

cream or scream?

Either way it would be rough on the onlookers

carnivorousplant 05-10-2018 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tatterdemalion (Post 20952139)
cream or scream?

Either way it would be rough on the onlookers

Scream, I beg your pardon, and I will pay for the eye bleach.

ElvisL1ves 05-10-2018 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tatterdemalion (Post 20952139)
cream or scream?

Either way it would be rough on the onlookers

In their faces either way.

kenobi 65 05-10-2018 03:02 PM

The three former captives are now back in the U.S., and kudos to the people who made that happen.

And, yes, in this case, Trump's approach to diplomacy might have worked. However, as others have noted, it's not clear to me how much of the release (and the upcoming summit) are the result of Trump and Pompeo's approach, or that Kim Jong-Un's bargaining leverage has changed.

That said, as a general rule, unpredictability and insults (two hallmarks of Trump's approach to, well, everything) generally are not seen as positives when it comes to attempting to be a successfully diplomatic country. My fear is that Trump will look at any progress in the North Korea situation, and say, "See? My approach works!", and thus double down on pursuing the U.S.'s new role as World Asshole.

k9bfriender 05-10-2018 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kenobi 65 (Post 20952480)
The three former captives are now back in the U.S., and kudos to the people who made that happen.

And, yes, in this case, Trump's approach to diplomacy might have worked. However, as others have noted, it's not clear to me how much of the release (and the upcoming summit) are the result of Trump and Pompeo's approach, or that Kim Jong-Un's bargaining leverage has changed.

That said, as a general rule, unpredictability and insults (two hallmarks of Trump's approach to, well, everything) generally are not seen as positives when it comes to attempting to be a successfully diplomatic country. My fear is that Trump will look at any progress in the North Korea situation, and say, "See? My approach works!", and thus double down on pursuing the U.S.'s new role as World Asshole.

I play poker occasionally, and I'm certainly not going to say I am great, but I hold my own.

Sometimes, I encounter someone who makes the dumbest play ever. I've got them dead to rights, and they've got one card in the deck to save them.

That card comes up, they win the pot, and the say "Yeah, that's how you play poker!" and preen on themselves and think that they did a good job.

The are usually felted within an hour.

elucidator 05-10-2018 04:19 PM

"Never try to bluff somebody who's stupid."
- Doyle Brunson (attrib.)

asahi 05-10-2018 11:05 PM

Another interesting article from 38North's blog...if you can follow the metaphorical prose.

https://www.38north.org/2018/05/jdethomas050918/

The author seems to suggest that this is a ploy and that Kim is scoring a major PR coup in both South Korea and China by presenting himself as a reasonable, rational, shrewd leader. The writer believes that if Trump disagrees over the meaning of denuclearization and throws a tantrum, South Korea will blame the US for diplomacy's failure and that China will have less of an appetite for returning to strict sanctions. I'm not sure I entirely agree but it's an interesting analysis.

What I do think - if I can give the Donald just a little bit of credit - is that he has brought a new dimension to the (virtually non-existent) relationship between North Korea and the US. By that I meant that Kim Jong Un already knew what he was going to get if Hillary Clinton had been elected, which is the same thing that the Kims got with Obama and the other Clinton (and the Bush administration, too): crippling sanctions, lectures on democracy, more lectures on human rights, platitudes about freedom, and insistence on non-proliferation...and implicit threats of regime change.

Trump, by contrast, has promised to be make America a more insular country and it has made clear his desire to negotiate bilaterally. And that last part is key because while it might drive the State Department intellectuals bat-shit insane with frustration at what the president apparently 'doesn't know', it presents opportunities for fringe regimes like the Kims. I'm reluctant to call this Trump's "genius" but it is, quite possibly, an example of how Trump's instincts might at least provide opportunities where they did not exist with those who played by the standard post-WWII playbook. At the same time, before MAGA maniacs rep my post, it's also highly likely that Trumpian policy presents new kinds of threats as well.

Horatius 05-10-2018 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kenobi 65 (Post 20952013)
I suspect you meant to type "scream," not "cream," as that'd be a very different sort of summit.



But really, neither one is actually outside the realm of possibility.

elucidator 05-11-2018 12:45 AM

Could also be that the NK, having lost its test site and desperately short of actual cash....and!...having already demonstrated it possesses an actual threat....is more confident in its bargaining position. Why gamble on further tests that may fail? If you say you're gonna resume your program, you have to test something sooner or later.

Trouble being, of course, that both of the main players here are certifiable. Trump might tell him to go home and get his shoe shine box.....

asahi 05-11-2018 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elucidator (Post 20953377)
Could also be that the NK, having lost its test site and desperately short of actual cash....and!...having already demonstrated it possesses an actual threat....is more confident in its bargaining position. Why gamble on further tests that may fail? If you say you're gonna resume your program, you have to test something sooner or later.

Trouble being, of course, that both of the main players here are certifiable. Trump might tell him to go home and get his shoe shine box.....

Well he brushed 'dandruff' off of Macron's shoulder, so what's he gonna do with Kim - give him a titty twister? A wedgie? A Buddha belly rub?

"Little Rocket man's great - he's gonna be perfect. Just needs to drop a few pounds (as he rubs his belly)."

carnivorousplant 05-11-2018 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asahi (Post 20953644)
Well he brushed 'dandruff' off of Macron's shoulder, so what's he gonna do with Kim - give him a titty twister? A wedgie? A Buddha belly rub?

"Little Rocket man's great - he's gonna be perfect. Just needs to drop a few pounds (as he rubs his belly)."

A wedgie.

ElvisL1ves 05-11-2018 10:01 AM

Think Kim knows the handshake game?

kenobi 65 05-11-2018 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves (Post 20953995)
Think Kim knows the handshake game?

Five bucks says Kim licks his hand before shaking Trump's. :D

BobLibDem 05-11-2018 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka (Post 20949868)
No. So far as I know, he had not much of anything to do with their arrests / "capture"

I thought he liked assets who don't get captured.

NK releases are nothing new, every time Kim does so it's because he got something of value for his hostages.

Although Donald is acting like he is single-handedly going to bring about world peace, don't hold your breath. We may get a tiny step in the right direction. If it sets up a conference with the Koreas, Russia, China, Japan, and the US for final resolution, that's about all we can hope for realistically. If Donald doesn't drop to his knees on greeting Kim, he'll exceed my expectations.

carnivorousplant 05-11-2018 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobLibDem (Post 20954134)
I thought he liked assets who don't get captured.

By golly, you are correct.

Johnny Ace 05-11-2018 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobLibDem (Post 20954134)
I thought he liked assets who don't get captured.

Unless he can get political mileage out of them.

carnivorousplant 05-11-2018 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Ace (Post 20955386)
Unless he can get political mileage out of them.

Man, that is cold.
And true.

Ellecram 05-13-2018 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves (Post 20953995)
Think Kim knows the handshake game?

I see the meeting going down something like this.

Weapon of Choice
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQ7z57qrZU8

Budget Player Cadet 05-14-2018 09:13 AM

Counterpoint: https://www.vox.com/2018/5/14/173438...orea-diplomacy
Trump, perhaps wisely and likely under the influence of South Korea’s new progressive leader Moon Jae-in, has decided to reverse longstanding US policy and make this concession to Pyongyang. They plan to meet in Singapore on June 12. It’s not a crazy thing to try, and it’s certainly a good deal less crazy than Trump’s previous policy of berating the North Koreans with inflammatory tweets. Republicans would, of course, normally slam a Democratic president who decided to do this. But there are worse sins than hypocrisy in this world, and the Nixon-to-China dynamic could be beneficial here.

Except rather than defend the president’s dovish new direction, Republicans — including the White House itself — are spinning the meeting as a concession by the North Koreans.

“Trump’s Tough on North Korea Approach Is Working,” according to a press release from the RNC, and this kind of spin has gotten picked up everywhere from Fox News to local television stations.

When a notorious liar does something dramatic and new and starts immediately lying about what it is that he’s doing, a sensible reaction is to become alarmed and suspicious — not to suddenly become credulous and naive.


RTFirefly 05-14-2018 10:31 AM

Pompeo: Our goal is to make sure the U.S. is safe from NK nukes. Seoul and Tokyo are on their own.

Budget Player Cadet 05-14-2018 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RTFirefly (Post 20958841)
Pompeo: Our goal is to make sure the U.S. is safe from NK nukes. Seoul and Tokyo are on their own.

The bolded is not something Pompeo actually said. It's implied, and while I can certainly believe it, it seems pretty uncharitable, and it should at least be made clear that he didn't actually say that.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:44 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.