Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 thekingofkings wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 thekingofkings wrote:
All the asylum seekers who are coming north should have to apply in Mexico for asylum, they choose the US for economic reasons. My solution is all the Central American asylum seekers keep Mexico and we take ALL the Mexicans into the US and make them citizens. Cut all immigration from Europe, Australia, or Canada. And the New Mexicans can build a country of their own.

So, when do you leave mr immigrant? Sorry, family of immigrants. But that doesn't matter to you when they are Mexican, so I assume you are packing your bags.

Or you are a gross hypocrite, I dunno.

you are correct, you do not know or my post went wayyy over your head.

To the contrary, you have demonstrated little understanding of how the world works beyond a narrow view that you've allowed to be given to you. In hindsight I phrased things mockingly when I shouldn't have, but I severely doubt you would have listened regardless. Ultimately that stance will be to your detriment more than any other, and I have little sympathy for self-inflicted harms.

because anyone taking seriously something what obviously not even remotely such is barely worth responding to. you wanted to be offended and snap back, didnt matter that it was obviously ridiculous on purpose.

 thekingofkings wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 thekingofkings wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 thekingofkings wrote:
All the asylum seekers who are coming north should have to apply in Mexico for asylum, they choose the US for economic reasons. My solution is all the Central American asylum seekers keep Mexico and we take ALL the Mexicans into the US and make them citizens. Cut all immigration from Europe, Australia, or Canada. And the New Mexicans can build a country of their own.

So, when do you leave mr immigrant? Sorry, family of immigrants. But that doesn't matter to you when they are Mexican, so I assume you are packing your bags.

Or you are a gross hypocrite, I dunno.

you are correct, you do not know or my post went wayyy over your head.

To the contrary, you have demonstrated little understanding of how the world works beyond a narrow view that you've allowed to be given to you. In hindsight I phrased things mockingly when I shouldn't have, but I severely doubt you would have listened regardless. Ultimately that stance will be to your detriment more than any other, and I have little sympathy for self-inflicted harms.

because anyone taking seriously something what obviously not even remotely such is barely worth responding to. you wanted to be offended and snap back, didnt matter that it was obviously ridiculous on purpose.

Well that was coherent.

easier to just ignore you than explain, you obviously just want to argue and fight.

Cute.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
But we already have a New Mexico...

Obviously we'll rename New Mexico to Old Mexico and Mexico to New New Mexico because it's the 21st century people get with the times

I laughed at this more than I should have.

Well well. With Trump not denying about us giving crimea to russia wonder if that's not what he'll declare in meeting with Putin

 Xenomancers wrote:
The point is we can't possibly take that on. If we are going to help them - we have to help them another way.

Well, trade agreements like NAFTA (which Trump calls "bad") have actually helped some of these people a bit. When there's access to safe work for real money many people stay, and some of those who left for the US have even gone back! But ofc, if Trump thinks both options - immigration and trade deals - are bad for the US, what is left to "help" anyone with? Private charity donations?

To the surprise of none, North Korea continues to enrich uranium for weapons. Surely the agreement entered into with the best deal maker in the world will stop this......?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/30/north-korea-still-secretly-enriching-uranium-say-us-officials

Canada continues to match and target it's tariffs to hit Trump supporters, alongside the EU and the rest of the civilised and uncivilised world

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44660960

And finally proving he has a sense of humour, he willing partakes in a prank call, either that or his assistants are bumbling fools and he himself is a credulous cretin, you pick....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44666242

Of course there has been no agreement for nk to stop it to begin with with nothing promised in return.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 feeder wrote:

Are you aware that this automatic detention policy has been applied to families that attempted to enter the country by legal asylum means? Not all families effected by this new Trump admin policy are border-jumpers.

You know I keep telling them that, but all we hear us 'But, Illegals!'

*sigh*

I've had this nagging feeling all day that I should get on the first plane to anywhere as something has just gone sideways spectacularly and minimum safe distance is, about, say, Europe. It's just a nagging feeling, and it might be nothing, but I think it's something. The last time I had this feeling it was the kickoff of the Syrian civil war, so that should give you an idea of how bad whatever this is, is.

the amount I identify with this statement is scary...just need a couple more years to finish my degree...

So, NK deal supporters, any comment on the news? Or shall we look forward to another dead cat?

Well there hasn't been deal that nk would have broken. Why would they stop action before even agreeing or even knowing what they would get in return?

Spetulhu wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
The point is we can't possibly take that on. If we are going to help them - we have to help them another way.

Well, trade agreements like NAFTA (which Trump calls "bad") have actually helped some of these people a bit. When there's access to safe work for real money many people stay, and some of those who left for the US have even gone back! But ofc, if Trump thinks both options - immigration and trade deals - are bad for the US, what is left to "help" anyone with? Private charity donations?

Mainly NAFTA wrecks agricultural production within the targeted countries. It's part of why people seek better luck in the US.

tneva82 wrote:
Well there hasn't been deal that nk would have broken. Why would they stop action before even agreeing or even knowing what they would get in return?

It says a lot actually. Like how much NK is actually willing to compromise. You're not going to invest a lot of money into something at the 11th hour if you're going to give it up at midnight. It signals a level of bad faith.

 Ouze wrote:
The best people.

You know what I find hysterical about this?

Trump was polite and cordial to Fake Bob Menendez and didn’t budge an inch from his positions. If anything that audio makes Trump look like a reasonable person. O.o

I fully expected him to be like his usual brash "campaigner-in-chief" jackwagon....

But, then again... one doesn't become a billionaire by burning down every bridge in existence.

...and yes, his staff need to do a much better job in vetting calls like this.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Da Boss wrote:
So, NK deal supporters, any comment on the news? Or shall we look forward to another dead cat?

I'm confused... we had a nuke deal already?

...I thought it was just an agreement for continued negotiation. If nothing else, if true, NK can be confronted on this.

You don#t producing about only thing that keeps you alive just for fun without even any promises to be broken in return. Especially when you are dealing with somebody who breaks deals just for fun.

 whembly wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
So, NK deal supporters, any comment on the news? Or shall we look forward to another dead cat?

I'm confused... we had a nuke deal already?

...I thought it was just an agreement for continued negotiation. If nothing else, if true, NK can be confronted on this.

Agreed. I thought the meeting largely went over improving relationships, but with little progress in terms of denuclearization. I recall a public display a few weeks ago of dismantling a nuclear weapon construction site, but that could have easily been for show.

 SkavenLord wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
So, NK deal supporters, any comment on the news? Or shall we look forward to another dead cat?

I'm confused... we had a nuke deal already?

...I thought it was just an agreement for continued negotiation. If nothing else, if true, NK can be confronted on this.

Agreed. I thought the meeting largely went over improving relationships, but with little progress in terms of denuclearization. I recall a public display a few weeks ago of dismantling a nuclear weapon construction site, but that could have easily been for show.

Don't forget, the President of the United States of America did officially proclaim to the world that North Korea was no longer a nuclear threat.

 SkavenLord wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
So, NK deal supporters, any comment on the news? Or shall we look forward to another dead cat?

I'm confused... we had a nuke deal already?

...I thought it was just an agreement for continued negotiation. If nothing else, if true, NK can be confronted on this.

Agreed. I thought the meeting largely went over improving relationships, but with little progress in terms of denuclearization. I recall a public display a few weeks ago of dismantling a nuclear weapon construction site, but that could have easily been for show.

That was the nuclear facility in the mountain that was collapsing, right?

So, the nuclear facility they could no longer use.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

Don't forget, the President of the United States of America did officially proclaim to the world that North Korea was no longer a nuclear threat.

And stated that joint exercises with South Korea would cease.

So Trump gave away the concession on military exercises with South Korea, and granted a high profile meeting with Kim, where he lavished praise upon him and played down his horrific human rights abuses, for absolutely nothing?

And you are okay with that?

Interesting.

 whembly wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
So, NK deal supporters, any comment on the news? Or shall we look forward to another dead cat?

I'm confused... we had a nuke deal already?

...I thought it was just an agreement for continued negotiation. If nothing else, if true, NK can be confronted on this.

Well strictly speaking and highlighting point 3 it was agreed that

1 The United States and the DPRK commit to establish new US-DPRK relations in accordance with the desire of the peoples of the two countries for peace and prosperity
2 The United States and the DPRK will join their efforts to build a lasting and stable peace regime on the Korean Peninsula
3 Reaffirming the April 27, 2018 Panmunjom Declaration, the DPRK commits to work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula
4 The United States and the DPRK commit to recovering POW/MIA remains, including the immediate repatriation of those already identified.

Trump also claimed that following the meeting

The president said he expected the denuclearization process to start “very, very quickly” and that progress will be verified by “having a lot of people in North Korea.”

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jun/12/donald-trump-says-kim-jong-un-pledged-complete-den/

Now I may not be Einstein but a working towards denuclearisation, that this process is to happen very quickly etc generally means a reduction in nuclear capability (unless they are hoping NK blows itself up in the process, hence denuclearising the state).

 Whirlwind wrote:

Trump also claimed that following the meeting

The president said he expected the denuclearization process to start “very, very quickly” and that progress will be verified by “having a lot of people in North Korea.”

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jun/12/donald-trump-says-kim-jong-un-pledged-complete-den/

Now I may not be Einstein but a working towards denuclearisation, that this process is to happen very quickly etc generally means a reduction in nuclear capability (unless they are hoping NK blows itself up in the process, hence denuclearising the state).

I think you're missing some key words they used, bold mine

the DPRK commits to work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula

They've committed towards working on denuclearization. Which means nothing. So long as they keep saying "we're committed towards denuclearization" or "we're working on denuclearization", they don't have to actually do anything besides talk about it. They haven't laid out a time schedule, plan, goals, or anything of any substance.

 Wolfblade wrote:


I think you're missing some key words they used, bold mine

the DPRK commits to work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula

They've committed towards working on denuclearization. Which means nothing. So long as they keep saying "we're committed towards denuclearization" or "we're working on denuclearization", they don't have to actually do anything besides talk about it. They haven't laid out a time schedule, plan, goals, or anything of any substance.

Except that completely ignores the second part of the point which was to say that Trump stated that this would occur very quickly and that there would be plenty of people monitoring it. Taken together that is more than we agreed to continue talking about it. On the other hand this is Trump and the likely ability of him to listen past the second word is not very high and hence I would not be surprised is that what was agreed was the complete opposite.

Yeah... It's Trump, a liar who embellishes, overhypes, and exaggerates anything that can be construed as a "win", makes up "facts"/details up about said "win", and along with the fact that NK hasn't committed to any sort of solid action or plan that anyone can look it or hold them to, and it's a totally meaningless concession/agreement on NK's end in exchange for some solid concessions from the US. And we know this because we know the full text that NK and Trump signed, and again, it amounts to no actual commitment from NK.

I think POTUS is giving China a chance to denude their special needs child-country of the nuclear weapons, behind the scenes.

If that doesn't work... guess what, I'd bet Trump would signal that both Japan and South Korea (even Taiwan!) get nuclear weapons too...which has to be a non-starter for China. (frankly, I don't think Trump should ever follow through that threat either).

Keep in mind... that the sanctions are still in force.

 whembly wrote:
I'd bet Trump would signal that both Japan and South Korea (even Taiwan!) get nuclear weapons too...

That is a completely empty threat though. It's the equivalent of the teacher saying they will keep the entire class behind after school for as long as it takes for someone to own up to something. Everyone involved knows it won't happen, the teacher does not have that power.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 whembly wrote:
I'd bet Trump would signal that both Japan and South Korea (even Taiwan!) get nuclear weapons too...

That is a completely empty threat though. It's the equivalent of the teacher saying they will keep the entire class behind after school for as long as it takes for someone to own up to something. Everyone involved knows it won't happen, the teacher does not have that power.

Teachers aren't SUPPOSED to have that power. I've seen it done before though, at least to some extent. I really don't like the idea of nuclear proliferation in the Asian theatre, but are we really sure Trump wouldn't at least try it just for the chits and giggles?

I don't think a nuclear armed Japan would be a realistic possibility, domestically I cannot see any government proposing or advancing such a thing within Japan not immediately being destroyed. Being a non-nuclear nation is a deep part of Japanese political identity, and that feeling has been stronger in recent years than in previous ones, but has always been very high (~80%). It's just not going to fly without a major shift in Japanese culture.

 Vaktathi wrote:
I don't think a nuclear armed Japan would be a realistic possibility, domestically I cannot see any government proposing or advancing such a thing within Japan not immediately being destroyed. Being a non-nuclear nation is a deep part of Japanese political identity, and that feeling has been stronger in recent years than in previous ones, but has always been very high (~80%). It's just not going to fly without a major shift in Japanese culture.

That and there are those pesky LAWS to overcome, and say what you will about Abe, he's not interested in dictatorial power. Yet.

 Vaktathi wrote:
I don't think a nuclear armed Japan would be a realistic possibility, domestically I cannot see any government proposing or advancing such a thing within Japan not immediately being destroyed. Being a non-nuclear nation is a deep part of Japanese political identity, and that feeling has been stronger in recent years than in previous ones, but has always been very high (~80%). It's just not going to fly without a major shift in Japanese culture.

Would give new meaning to the name "Empire of the Rising Sun"