Jump to content

Summit Predictions


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

You're asking this while ignoring completely what happened yesterday. What happened yesterday has never happened before. No US leader has ever had one on one talks, directly with the DPRK. No DPRK leader has ever signed a joint deal like this before. It's completely uncharted and historic water. 

 

Yes, it's not a finish line (publicly), but it's also not nothing. It's an international deal, brought together by working with numerous allies and adversaries (China, Russia, Japan, South Korea, et al). It took finesse, talent, and negotiating to get all those parties to agree to support this deal in the first place - let alone what it took to get Kim to the table. 

1

agree with the one on one talks...but we have seen bilateral agreement with North Korea to denuke several times....and I am not being facetious, maybe I am missing something in the agreement..but there is no certifications, no timetables etc correct? 

 

Great first step..now make it better and dont piss on my leg and tell me its raining..get in this deal the terms you claimed were missing in the Iran deal( which I agreed with Trump BTW) ...go get em tiger..I am pulling for you and all of the US and the world to take care of this threat.  BTW..all still has ZERO to do with Obama. Just getting them to live by the deals listed below and I would be ecstatic.

 

https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

huh??? Wow, maybe I am missing something. So you say Obama is weak, Trump is strong...therefore Trump makes a great deal ...and yet cannot point to one deal Trump has done on the international stage....and that is somehow proof of exacrtly what????

 

- Release of American hostages from noko, gratis

- Saudi Arms Deal

- Exit from Iran nuclear deal fiasco

 

There's three.

 

And yes, Obama was HELLACIOUSLY weak on foreign policy. Drew down in Iraq too soon, drew a nonexistent red line in Syria. Bungled Libya. Failed against ISIS.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

I've spent decades negotiating deals. While none of them have been international peace or trade deals the basics of negotiating are the same. People laughed at Trump for saying it was about attitude. Let me tell you, it is about attitude. It's also about positioning and preparation. We don't know what has transpired or what will transpire but I do know that Trump will not accept a bad deal.

you THINK Trump will not accept a bad deal..and that makes sense. I am more of an empirical evidence guy..i need to see it to believe it. And yes, I expect it to come in stages and over time..i believe for the 1000th time today was a good start 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

agree with the one on one talks...but we have seen bilateral agreement with North Korea to denuke several times....and I am not being facetious, maybe I am missing something in the agreement..but there is no certifications, no timetables etc correct? 

 

Great first step..now make it better and dont piss on my leg and tell me its raining..get in this deal the terms you claimed were missing in the Iran deal( which I agreed with Trump BTW) ...go get em tiger..I am pulling for you and all of the US and the world to take care of this threat.  BTW..all still has ZERO to do with Obama. Just getting them to live by the deals listed below and I would be ecstatic.

 

https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron

Yes, this is a first step. You act as if everything should be set in stone by now. As long as Trump doesn't accept a bad deal then we all should be fine with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

to be seen no? Has Trump negotiated anything yet? And a deal to secure financing on a property or structure a bankruptcy is not the same as negotiating a trade agreement or any other kind of agreement on a national level. This agreement so far is a starting point, we have been there before with this country..now let's see him follow on with open verifications, including military sights..an agreement that does not end after ten years etc..in other words includes all the things he said were not included in the Iran deal. 

 

We sure as hell ain't there yet

I suspect both these clowns are just going to negotiate forever. They barked at each other and that didn't work, so they are acting like friends. Kim got the international spotlight, a seat at the table and for the US to stand down on military preparedness, Trump got his favorite thing, a photo op. People celebrating this are just star struck by seeing Trump looking like he is doing something. Same reason people paid money to attend Trump University. They are just getting sold gilded poop. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

- Release of American hostages from noko, gratis

- Saudi Arms Deal

- Exit from Iran nuclear deal fiasco

 

There's three.

 

And yes, Obama was HELLACIOUSLY weak on foreign policy. Drew down in Iraq too soon, drew a nonexistent red line in Syria. Bungled Libya. Failed against ISIS.

 

 

Again, what in the world does a deal with North Korea have ANYTHING to do with Obama? Man, yall need to let it go...or can Trump not be judged on Trump  are you that scared of his record?

 

Cmon, you are going to count the release of 3 hostages as an international, long-lasting treaty brokered by Trump? I think it was a goodwill gesture by NK to ensure the summit, as i think the elimination of the military exercises is a good will gesture to keep the talk moving forward.Let's not forget these were American citizens that were by all accounts being held in brutal conditions...they should have never been held.

 

I will agree the Saudi deal fits into what I was  I was asking..but that again is a nation-state buying arms from the US. Not exactly a delicate negotiation going on there.

And Just pulling out a treaty/deal is not evidence of any kind of negotiation skill..getting a new/better agreement in place is

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, plenzmd1 said:

Again, what in the world does a deal with North Korea have ANYTHING to do with Obama? Man, yall need to let it go...or can Trump not be judged on Trump  are you that scared of his record?

 

Cmon, you are going to count the release of 3 hostages as an international, long-lasting treaty brokered by Trump? I think it was a goodwill gesture by NK to ensure the summit, as i think the elimination of the military exercises is a good will gesture to keep the talk moving forward.Let's not forget these were American citizens that were by all accounts being held in brutal conditions...they should have never been held.

 

I will agree the Saudi deal fits into what I was  I was asking..but that again is a nation-state buying arms from the US. Not exactly a delicate negotiation going on there.

And Just pulling out a treaty/deal is not evidence of any kind of negotiation skill..getting a new/better agreement in place is

 

I don't think it's so much linking President Obama to North Korea, as it is to drawing a distinction between he and the current President, and contrasting their work in regards to foreign policy.

 

I'm much further along than you are related to what I'm seeing in DPRK (and elsewhere), though I can appreciate your position, and don't find it to be unreasonable.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, plenzmd1 said:

to be seen no? Has Trump negotiated anything yet? And a deal to secure financing on a property or structure a bankruptcy is not the same as negotiating a trade agreement or any other kind of agreement on a national level. This agreement so far is a starting point, we have been there before with this country..now let's see him follow on with open verifications, including military sights..an agreement that does not end after ten years etc..in other words includes all the things he said were not included in the Iran deal. 

 

We sure as hell ain't there yet

Starting point yes, and that’s important. But we’ve actually been a helluva lot farther with N Korea in the past only to see them resort to their usual crap. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

You're asking this while ignoring completely what happened yesterday. What happened yesterday has never happened before. No US leader has ever had one on one talks, directly with the DPRK. No DPRK leader has ever signed a joint deal like this before. It's completely uncharted and historic water. 

 

Yes, it's not a finish line (publicly), but it's also not nothing. It's an international deal, brought together by working with numerous allies and adversaries (China, Russia, Japan, South Korea, et al). It took finesse, talent, and negotiating to get all those parties to agree to support this deal in the first place - let alone what it took to get Kim to the table. 

 Easy Cult of Personality Member...This "deal" had no other counties participating....just T and Kim....the US/NK has had talks for decades...but our "leaders" have resisted the one on one - because as soon as it got down to details and insurances....it all fell apart....so why meet

 

What's different is T went one on one to start - hoping that the details and insurances are to follow......different yes - a success - far from it - there is no "deal" yet....its a one piece sheet of paper saying they want to make a deal....I wouldn't even call it a MOU....

 

Do you think a TREATY that will be approved by congress is going to come out of this?

 

Finesse?...talent?....wipe your chin?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

Again, what in the world does a deal with North Korea have ANYTHING to do with Obama? Man, yall need to let it go...or can Trump not be judged on Trump  are you that scared of his record?

 

Cmon, you are going to count the release of 3 hostages as an international, long-lasting treaty brokered by Trump? I think it was a goodwill gesture by NK to ensure the summit, as i think the elimination of the military exercises is a good will gesture to keep the talk moving forward.Let's not forget these were American citizens that were by all accounts being held in brutal conditions...they should have never been held.

 

I will agree the Saudi deal fits into what I was  I was asking..but that again is a nation-state buying arms from the US. Not exactly a delicate negotiation going on there.

And Just pulling out a treaty/deal is not evidence of any kind of negotiation skill..getting a new/better agreement in place is

 

You said this:

 

Quote

huh??? Wow, maybe I am missing something. So you say Obama is weak, Trump is strong...therefore Trump makes a great deal ...and yet cannot point to one deal Trump has done on the international stage....and that is somehow proof of exacrtly what????

 

I responded to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, baskin said:

 Easy Cult of Personality Member...This "deal" had no other counties participating....just T and Kim....

 

This is demonstrably untrue. This meeting does not happen without Russia, China, and Japan being on board. Just like the meeting does not happen without the sanctions imposed and enforced by multiple nations. 

 

Try again. 

25 minutes ago, K-9 said:

Starting point yes, and that’s important. But we’ve actually been a helluva lot farther with N Korea in the past only to see them resort to their usual crap. 

 

We have never been farther, K-9. There's never been this level of talks for months and months. Kim and Trump have been in direct communication working towards this deal since at least March. 

 

The truth is the deal is much more robust and further along than is publicly known. Watch how fast the next steps happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, plenzmd1 said:

and that would be great if he is able to get that deal...it sure as hell is not what we have now..right now we have a "yep, thats our plan" from North Korea...which they have said in 3 different agreements since 1992. If there is some promise, timeframe, verification plan I am missing, please point them out to me so i am better informed.

 

 

18 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

That's what these summits are.  Shake hands, shoot the ****, pretend you negotiated something that your underlings spent months negotiating earlier.

 

The Camp David accords involved 14 months of behind-the-scenes negotiating before Sadat and Begin met.  You think this meeting's the start of talks?  Most this'll be is an agreement on a framework for future negotiations and another summit about a year from now.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

This is demonstrably untrue. This meeting does not happen without Russia, China, and Japan being on board. Just like the meeting does not happen without the sanctions imposed and enforced by multiple nations. 

 

Try again. 

 

We have never been farther, K-9. There's never been this level of talks for months and months. Kim and Trump have been in direct communication working towards this deal since at least March. 

 

The truth is the deal is much more robust and further along than is publicly known. Watch how fast the next steps happen. 

Until we know the details, I’ll stick with my opinion as previous multi lateral talks in 90s and 2000s had concrete, substantive, tangible, and transparent methodology for both denuclearization and verification by the IAEA, including military installations. 

 

At present, this is nothing more than an agreement to have an agreement which isn’t nothing. And from a symbolic POV, having our president himself at the table set an important precedent. 

 

But we need to know the details before I can salute anything.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, K-9 said:

Until we know the details, I’ll stick with my opinion as previous multi lateral talks in 90s and 2000s had concrete, substantive, tangible, and transparent methodology for both denuclearization and verification by the IAEA, including military installations. 

 

At present, this is nothing more than an agreement to have an agreement which isn’t nothing. And from a symbolic POV, having our president himself at the table set an important precedent. 

 

But we need to know the details before I can salute anything.

 

Completely rational. As is Plenz's statements. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, joesixpack said:

 

- Release of American hostages from noko, gratis

- Saudi Arms Deal

- Exit from Iran nuclear deal fiasco

 

There's three.

 

And yes, Obama was HELLACIOUSLY weak on foreign policy. Drew down in Iraq too soon, drew a nonexistent red line in Syria. Bungled Libya. Failed against ISIS.

 

 

 

To be fair and somewhat ironic, the premature Iraq draw down was a leftover policy from the Bush Administration.  So not only can Obama blame the results of a premature Iraq withdrawal on Bush he also got to claim he ended the Iraq War by continuing Bush's policy

 

The rest of your post is accurate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

I suspect both these clowns are just going to negotiate forever. They barked at each other and that didn't work, so they are acting like friends. Kim got the international spotlight, a seat at the table and for the US to stand down on military preparedness, Trump got his favorite thing, a photo op. People celebrating this are just star struck by seeing Trump looking like he is doing something. Same reason people paid money to attend Trump University. They are just getting sold gilded poop. 

This statement is exactly why people who are emotionally charged about a situation or circumstance, can't keep their perspective grounded in reality.  

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Brueggs said:

This statement is exactly why people who are emotionally charged about a situation or circumstance, can't keep their perspective grounded in reality.  

You seem to be new here. As a favor to certain long time members, please don't quote the idiot you just quoted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Brueggs said:

This statement is exactly why people who are emotionally charged about a situation or circumstance, can't keep their perspective grounded in reality.  

 

Tibs has been educated in 3 seconds on 1,000 topics by way of CNN headlines

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, njbuff said:

 

Obama was by far the worst President this country has ever seen. Because he is black and the first black President, he gets a free pass.

 

The left and the MSM (who were comatose during the Obama years) can’t stand the fact that Trump is taking a dump on Obama’s “so-called” legacy.

Hahahahaha...let your inner racist out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...