"Denuclearization"

George KGeorge K Super ModeratorPosts: 8,942 Senior Member

It's pretty clear that we and North Korea do not mean the same thing when using this term, and to me it's even clearer that Kim will never give up his nukes and ICBMs in exchange for promises of whatever.

The simplest explanation is one I heard on the radio today by someone whose name I've forgotten. "Kim went to to movies and saw a biopic double feature; "Saddam Hussein" followed by "Muammar Gaddafi". In between was a short feature called "Ukraine Surrenders its Nukes in Exchange for Guarantees of Territorial integrity."

Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.

Replies

  • MikeAMikeA Senior Member Posts: 2,911 Senior Member

    Many of us felt this same sediment about the Iranians and that deal. Ending the war, retrieving hostages, cooling tensions on the DMZ, is a **** good start though.

  • BushartBushart Senior Member Posts: 1,793 Senior Member

    @George K said:
    It's pretty clear that we and North Korea do not mean the same thing when using this term, and to me it's even clearer that Kim will never give up his nukes and ICBMs in exchange for promises of whatever.

    The simplest explanation is one I heard on the radio today by someone whose name I've forgotten. "Kim went to to movies and saw a biopic double feature; "Saddam Hussein" followed by "Muammar Gaddafi". In between was a short feature called "Ukraine Surrenders its Nukes in Exchange for Guarantees of Territorial integrity."

    I'm sitting close to the camp that says Kim is buying time by playing nice---and hoping to lift some sanctions along the way

  • creekyguycreekyguy Posts: 159 Senior Member

    Maybe China and Kim are wondering if The Donald can be had. As long as China is a key part of a deal maybe Donald will hold off on tarriffs. If so, the negotiations will go on forever (at least till Nov.). Either way, I don't see a downside for China or Kim until the NK nuke site is up and running again. Then we will see.

  • magallowaymagalloway Senior Member Posts: 900 Senior Member

    @MikeA said:
    Many of us felt this same sediment about the Iranians and that deal. Ending the war, retrieving hostages, cooling tensions on the DMZ, is a **** good start though.

    SEDIMENT?

    Your Friendly Grammar Person

  • MikeAMikeA Senior Member Posts: 2,911 Senior Member

    @magalloway said:

    @MikeA said:
    Many of us felt this same sediment about the Iranians and that deal. Ending the war, retrieving hostages, cooling tensions on the DMZ, is a **** good start though.

    SEDIMENT?

    Your Friendly Grammar Person

    lol

  • Shawn C.Shawn C. Senior Member Posts: 5,724 Senior Member

    @magalloway said:

    @MikeA said:
    Many of us felt this same sediment about the Iranians and that deal. Ending the war, retrieving hostages, cooling tensions on the DMZ, is a **** good start though.

    SEDIMENT?

    Your Friendly Grammar Person

    Yeah, sediment. That sand in your crotch feeling you get every time you think about Trump's foreign policy decisions. ;)

  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,862 Senior Member

    @George K said:
    It's pretty clear that we and North Korea do not mean the same thing when using this term, and to me it's even clearer that Kim will never give up his nukes and ICBMs in exchange for promises of whatever.

    The simplest explanation is one I heard on the radio today by someone whose name I've forgotten. "Kim went to to movies and saw a biopic double feature; "Saddam Hussein" followed by "Muammar Gaddafi". In between was a short feature called "Ukraine Surrenders its Nukes in Exchange for Guarantees of Territorial integrity."

    It has been suggested for some time that guarantees of territorial integrity was the reason for the nukes in the first place. I mean when it comes to nukes, there is no way that NK could possibly be an honest threat to us in that arena.

    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • Shawn C.Shawn C. Senior Member Posts: 5,724 Senior Member

    Well, at any rate I'm sure Trump won't say anything disastrously stupid at the summit. So, we got that goin' for us.

  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,862 Senior Member

    I am actually hopeful that this is the one thing he gets right.

    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • Shawn C.Shawn C. Senior Member Posts: 5,724 Senior Member

    @fishingcomic said:
    I am actually hopeful that this is the one thing he gets right.

    I would feel better about it if we were sending Dennis Rodman again.

  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 8,942 Senior Member

    @fishingcomic said:

    It has been suggested for some time that guarantees of territorial integrity was the reason for the nukes in the first place. I mean when it comes to nukes, there is no way that NK could possibly be an honest threat to us in that arena.

    It's true that we could completely destroy every significant city and military target in North Korea, but at the cost of sending radiation clouds into China and South Korea and having the North nuke the South, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and perhaps other U,S, allies, as well as the United States. Even if they could only lay waste to two or three of our cities that is not a trade off I'd be willing to make. Like it or not, they have the bombs and the ICBMs that can reach our east coast. Perhaps we could shoot them down over the Pacific, but perhaps not.

    Kim has snookered Trump.

    Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.
  • creekyguycreekyguy Posts: 159 Senior Member
    edited May 11 #13

    Each guy gets what he wants. Kim bypasses the south in negotiations, and gets to lessen US support for the south and make the south feel more insecure, while getting favorable trade and support deals. Meanwhile, the crowd shouts "Nobel, Nobel" at the Trump rallies. As if they know what a Nobel is. (they probably think its pronounced "no bull")
    I read an article a few years ago that emphasized that the North still considers the South to be "theirs" by right, and the Seoul government is a puppet. It said they were unlikely to give up that quest.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file