Korea

Fri, Apr 27, 2018 11:26 AM

Holy crap! Maybe I'm reading too much into this but it looks like there will be an end to the Korean war and there is a possibility the North and South will be reunited. (?!?)

I can't even imagine howthey could be reunited. Does the South give up democracy? I can't see that happening. Does Kim Jong Un give up being dictator for life? I don't see that happening either! 

Ad

  • Fri, Apr 27, 2018 11:32 AM

    We have been down this road before, three times this century, 2000, 2007, and now. Each time the North screwed up and cheated. These are great signs, but it is all in the terms and verification. Verification for all of this is key. 

    The North has to give up its nukes, rejoin the Nuclear Nonproliferation treaty, sign up for intrusive IAEA inspections, and allow intrusive inspections on its missile and conventional weapons. If they balk or do not agree to any of that, deals are off. 

    I could see where the North and South sign a peace treaty, tensions go down some, the DMZ starts to go away, but things are still tense for years. I could not see the North moving to democracy or even unifying with the South any time soon. 

     

    Fri, Apr 27, 2018 2:44 PM
    posted by ptown_trojans_1

    I could not see the North moving to democracy or even unifying with the South any time soon. 

    Kim stepping aside is pure fantasy.  He'd probably be thrown in jail.

    Only way this is a remote possibility is a successful coup to overthrow Kim.  But usually when that happens the leader of the coup just ends up making himself dictator.

    Fri, Apr 27, 2018 3:06 PM

    I thought this was interesting:

    @ollie said on our podcast a few months ago that he thought Trump's strategy toward North Korea could be quite effective, because he's unpredictable enough to form a credible deterrent. I was skeptical at the time but it's a pretty reasonable theory.

    More

    One can certainly debate how much credit Trump *deserves* for Korea and how effective the steps coming out of the summit will be. It's almost certainly correct, however, that another president (not just Obama) would be *getting* a lot more credit for it from the news media.

    https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/989893239045083137

    Fri, Apr 27, 2018 3:08 PM

    Can't wait for Trump's Nobel Peace prize.

    Fri, Apr 27, 2018 3:14 PM
    posted by iclfan2

    Can't wait for Trump's Nobel Peace prize.

    I'd guess he's already given himself a fake one.

    Fri, Apr 27, 2018 3:34 PM
    posted by CenterBHSFan

    I thought this was interesting:

    https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/989893239045083137

    Yeah ,the Nixon madmen theory. I mean sure, it could work. The jury is still out though, Proof is in the agreements and verification. 

    posted by gut

    Kim stepping aside is pure fantasy.  He'd probably be thrown in jail.

    Only way this is a remote possibility is a successful coup to overthrow Kim.  But usually when that happens the leader of the coup just ends up making himself dictator.

     

    Yeah, and a coup rarely works in recent history: Libya, and Egypt the two big examples. 

    posted by iclfan2

    Can't wait for Trump's Nobel Peace prize.

    If he gets it, also give it to China, South Korea, and Japan. They are doing more of the heavy lifting now it appears. 
     

     

    Fri, Apr 27, 2018 3:46 PM
    posted by ptown_trojans_1

    If he gets it, also give it to China, South Korea, and Japan. They are doing more of the heavy lifting now it appears
     

     

    Why "now", though? What is the catalyst that is being used that was not being used by Obama, both Bush's, Clinton, Reagan and so on?

    Why would China, SK and Japan all be doing more NOW as opposed to yonder years? Wait & See? Trust, but verify? Red Lines? or...

    F U ROCKETMAN!!

    Look Ptown, neither of us exactly has a crush on Trump. But I will go where you will not. The catalyst is Trump. Deflecting in the manner that you are is not a good thing. Just admit when he does something good or decent and get it over quickly and chase it with a beer. It's the only way to enjoy rotgut booze.

    Fri, Apr 27, 2018 4:03 PM
    posted by CenterBHSFan

    Why "now", though? What is the catalyst that is being used that was not being used by Obama, both Bush's, Clinton, Reagan and so on?

    Why would China, SK and Japan all be doing more NOW as opposed to yonder years? Wait & See? Trust, but verify? Red Lines? or...

    F U ROCKETMAN!!

    Look Ptown, neither of us exactly has a crush on Trump. But I will go where you will not. The catalyst is Trump. Deflecting in the manner that you are is not a good thing. Just admit when he does something good or decent and get it over quickly and chase it with a beer. It's the only way to enjoy rotgut booze.

    Well, those other Presidents also reached this point. Clinton had the Agreed Framework in 1994 that worked for a while. Clinton had one final push in 2000 that almost worked until the clock ran out. He was about to make a visit to North Korea, but sent Madeline Albright instead as he focused on Mideast peace (the doomed 2000 Camp David Meeting). Bush had 2007 and the Feb 14 agreement that lasted for about a month. Bush also had the Six Party talks, which went really well for a while. Obama had the 2012 Leap Day Deal. 

    I've give Trump credit for making it this far, but it has been the regional players that have taken the ball to its current location. Kudos to him for the different approach, seriously. We are in a better place now than six months ago or a year ago.

    But, I'll give him full credit if he can do what all the others have been unable to....a credible and verified nuclear free North Korea that returns to the NPT and get full IAEA inspections. He does that, he gets the prize along with the regional actors. 

    If I sound skeptical, it is because I am....we have been burned before...

    Fri, Apr 27, 2018 4:17 PM
    posted by CenterBHSFan

    Why "now", though?

    It's mainly China.  While past administrations talked about China's currency manipulation, Trump was willing to do something about it.  And then he hit them with tariffs.

    Trump knew that would cause short-term pain, and he was honest about it.  He did it anyway.  Those other Presidents were too damn concerned about their weekly poll numbers.  Hell, we could probably count on one hand major decisions Obama made without polling it first.

    Fri, Apr 27, 2018 10:18 PM

    This whole thing is about 90% Trump.  To downplay it just shows one of 2 things.....1 you arent smart or 2.  You are blind.

    Sat, Apr 28, 2018 12:14 AM
    posted by Spock

    This whole thing is about 90% Trump.  To downplay it just shows one of 2 things.....1 you arent smart or 2.  You are blind.

    Sat, Apr 28, 2018 9:52 PM

    Hard to not give trump alot of credit here to be honest.  

    Sat, Apr 28, 2018 10:57 PM
    posted by thavoice

    Hard to not give trump alot of credit here to be honest.  

    Trump didn't hatch this plan.  And the way American politics works, bad actors can just wait elections out.  I've been saying for a while that career staffers are the ones truly driving foreign policy, and rightfully so.

    The debate is if this really would have been done differently if it was Bush, Clinton or Obama.  Although, we have to acknowledge the actions and talk against China have been discussed since Clinton, but no one else ever did anything.  Trump has taken action and has been pretty credible to take further actions.  I do tend to think China could have been leveraged before NK ever went nuclear, but those other Presidents weren't willing to take the blame on the resulting pain.

    If this whole thing does work, history is going to have to re-think some of its opinions and ask some tough questions.  The guy who was going to burn down the world de-nukes NK?   The moron who doesn't know anything about foreign policy de-nukes NK simply by taking "Option A" that career staffers have been recommending for 20 years?  We'll never know if there were "better" options without the economic pain so long as there was time left on the clock.

    I'm sure an argument could be made that turning the screws on China and Japan was justifiably down near the bottom of the list of options.  And it's even plausible we did nothing all these years on the trade and currency front SPECIFICALLY to have that option available to us if other choices failed.  Which is all a long way of saying Trump may just be the guy who happened to be in office when that option got the greenlight.

    Sun, Apr 29, 2018 6:43 PM
    posted by gut

    Trump didn't hatch this plan.  And the way American politics works, bad actors can just wait elections out.  I've been saying for a while that career staffers are the ones truly driving foreign policy, and rightfully so.

    The debate is if this really would have been done differently if it was Bush, Clinton or Obama.  Although, we have to acknowledge the actions and talk against China have been discussed since Clinton, but no one else ever did anything.  Trump has taken action and has been pretty credible to take further actions.  I do tend to think China could have been leveraged before NK ever went nuclear, but those other Presidents weren't willing to take the blame on the resulting pain.

    If this whole thing does work, history is going to have to re-think some of its opinions and ask some tough questions.  The guy who was going to burn down the world de-nukes NK?   The moron who doesn't know anything about foreign policy de-nukes NK simply by taking "Option A" that career staffers have been recommending for 20 years?  We'll never know if there were "better" options without the economic pain so long as there was time left on the clock.

    I'm sure an argument could be made that turning the screws on China and Japan was justifiably down near the bottom of the list of options.  And it's even plausible we did nothing all these years on the trade and currency front SPECIFICALLY to have that option available to us if other choices failed.  Which is all a long way of saying Trump may just be the guy who happened to be in office when that option got the greenlight.

    I largely agree with this view, but will add a few things. I think once Trump threw open the option that he will meet with Kim, suddenly, the career foreign policy team members, aka the blob, went into action. That also sent signs to Japan, South Korea, and China, that diplomacy is really an option. This is where I will give Trump credit. He changed the narrative. Instead of fire and fury, he went to, ok, let's meet. That sent a signal to others and the career foreign policy community to act. They then took the ball and landed where we are now. 

    I will add, there is one wild card, Bolton. Bolton hates any agreement with the North and does not trust them at all. Bolton said today he wants a Libya style deal, which makes no sense. Libya didn't have any nukes when they agreed to give up their small nuclear program. North Korea can also see how that deal worked out...Ghadifi died a horrible death....I doubt Kim wants that similar deal. 

    That all said, we have been here before and been burned. Now, is the hard part. 

    Sun, Apr 29, 2018 7:07 PM

    Both previous posts lay credit to Trump for numerous things that he said and did in the peninsula that created an environment where everyone knew where the US stood.

    Trump is not a politician.  They know that.

    Mon, Apr 30, 2018 6:54 AM
    posted by Spock

    This whole thing is about 90% Trump.  To downplay it just shows one of 2 things.....1 you arent smart or 2.  You are blind.

    So, does that mean you're giving President Xi of China only 10%?   

    A few more questions - Would you say NK developed its nuclear capabilities considerably after Trump took office?   Would Trump have tried his "high pressure" tactics, if NK had not developed its nuclear capabilities?  Also, do you think NK is paying attention to Trump and how he deals with Iran and if he "ditches" the nuclear deal?

     

     

    Mon, Apr 30, 2018 9:43 AM
    posted by Spock

    This whole thing is about 90% Trump.  To downplay it just shows one of 2 things.....1 you arent smart or 2.  You are blind.

    Well, if the site's moronic Trump nuthugger says so, IT HAS TO BE TRUE!!!!!

    Mon, Apr 30, 2018 9:44 AM

    I am cautiously optimistic about this as well, but in the meantime it is hilarious to see people try their hardest not to give Trump any credit.  Especially after the SK president gave him most of the credit and declared he deserves a Nobel Peace Prize.  Although celebrating is a bit premature, sometimes you just gotta give a man/woman his/her due.  Even a broken clock is right twice a day.  

    Mon, Apr 30, 2018 10:34 AM
    posted by like_that

    I am cautiously optimistic about this as well, but in the meantime it is hilarious to see people try their hardest not to give Trump any credit.  Especially after the SK president gave him most of the credit and declared he deserves a Nobel Peace Prize.  Although celebrating is a bit premature, sometimes you just gotta give a man/woman his/her due.  Even a broken clock is right twice a day.  

    Considering that most everyone on the left and some on the right agreed with and praised Obama receiving the NPP, even though nothing at that time had happened yet, I have to agree with your premise. At least something has happened at this point in time. But since Trump is not exactly mainstream anywhere he's just not going to get one. He's just not. I think Trump supporters just better face this fact and get over it, right or wrong.

    And quite frankly, Trump shouldn't be "seeking" a NPP.

    Mon, Apr 30, 2018 10:49 AM
    posted by CenterBHSFan

    Considering that most everyone on the left and some on the right agreed with and praised Obama receiving the NPP, even though nothing at that time had happened yet, I have to agree with your premise. At least something has happened at this point in time. But since Trump is not exactly mainstream anywhere he's just not going to get one. He's just not. I think Trump supporters just better face this fact and get over it, right or wrong.

    And quite frankly, Trump shouldn't be "seeking" a NPP.

    I don't care if he gets one or not, I was making the point that SK president is giving Trump a lot of credit and a lot of people refuse to give him any.  The spin zones have been interesting.

    Ad