Jump to content

Trump to meet Kim - North Korea to step down Nuclear Programme?


Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, oowee said:

Sanctions made it more difficult for them to build whatever weapons they may or may not have. The sanctions would not have been put in place over the years it has taken to enact them if the countries leaders had a more stable approach to the world. Where is the evidence of a highly capable deterrent? If you give no credibility to the news how can you give credibility to the existance or otherwise of viable nuclear weapons?

If the news that says they have weapons is correct then the news that they have no fuel to fly them could well be true.

Boring news never made the headlines.

Stable approach to the world ? NK hasn't attacked anybody, the US and its puppet states on the other hand have been relentless in manufacturing wars and conflicts in which they are either directly involved or benefit from........................the only reason NK has built up such a heavy conventional arms arsenal and a few nukes is because millions of them were murdered by the US, it's all out there if you research it. 

The news can't of course be 100% fake, it's just 100% skewed and misrepresented. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, notsosureshot said:

 

You cannot talk diplomatically to someone who uses an anti-aircraft gun to execute a relative (amongst other things) unless they do something incredibly significant first, like, nuclear disarmament in the full view of the entire world.  Kim wont.

Sorry , I dont follow.
Is using a heavy weapon to execute someone inhumane ?
Does that make them unfit to negotiate with ? Especially when you are trying to avoid conflict where many innocents may die.

150 years ago we strapped people to the front of a cannon, guillotines, hanging by strangulation, firing squad, electrocution, need I go on ?
Were those methods 'humane' when it comes to killing someone 'legally' ?
Are they any less dead ?
Have you ever shot any vermin with a calibre that might have made a bit of a mess?
Do people not take you seriously because of it ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Sorry , I dont follow.
Is using a heavy weapon to execute someone inhumane ?
Does that make them unfit to negotiate with ? Especially when you are trying to avoid conflict where many innocents may die.

150 years ago we strapped people to the front of a cannon, guillotines, hanging by strangulation, firing squad, electrocution, need I go on ?
Were those methods 'humane' when it comes to killing someone 'legally' ?
Are they any less dead ?
Have you ever shot any vermin with a calibre that might have made a bit of a mess?
Do people not take you seriously because of it ?

 

Removed.  I think I'll bow out.

Edited by notsosureshot
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, notsosureshot said:

Signatories of the Geneva Convention think it inhumane in war, so I think against civilians in "peace time" they would think it is inhumane, yes. 'In war' ?They are not at war, so they can do what they like, expanding ammunition is not legal in war, but law enforcement,home defence  and hunters the world over use it perfectly legally.  In any case, I think thats far from his family lines' worst offense since as you say, dead is dead.   A despicable record on human rights A bit like Saudi ? resulting in the deaths of millions of their own people, sponsoring terrorism,  developing a nuclear programme in defiance of the UN You mean a bit like Israel ?, assassination of political opponents or in fact anyone they felt like,A bit like ..erm every other country ! completely ignoring the United Nations...A bit like the US ?hmm, theres a lot more and thats only whats public.

Avoiding conflict through appeasement didn't work too well in the 30's did it? Lets go to war then ?

Kim needs to start respecting international law. Not many countries 'respect international law' they use it as a stick to beat other countries, and justify their own 'international law transgressions.  To date, he has not done so yet has been given countless opportunities.  Until he makes a significant move in that direction, I don't think he should be given any concessions at all and should be absolutely hammered with sanctions.They been hammered with sanctions for years !

Anyway, I guess we'll see in due course how this plays out.  Personally I don't think conflict can be avoided in this particular case, it's just a matter of who the belligerents will be.

Im sorry but, who do you THINK the belligerents are in this case ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who thinks Kim Dung wotsit will give up nuclear weapons is deluded! This is justy a crafty play on his part to look like the peacemaker, and to appear to the ordinary South Korean people as a "unifier" of the 2 Koreas. His other intention is to get UN Sanctions lifted, as his people are starving whilst he spends all the money on weapons.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, pinfireman said:

Anyone who thinks Kim Dung wotsit will give up nuclear weapons is deluded! This is justy a crafty play on his part to look like the peacemaker, and to appear to the ordinary South Korean people as a "unifier" of the 2 Koreas. His other intention is to get UN Sanctions lifted, as his people are starving whilst he spends all the money on weapons.

So how do you think he will square that circle?

Link to post
Share on other sites

In getting sanctions lifted, he only has to appeal to the Third World countries, who dislike the West, whilst holding out the begging bowl for Western aid....and like the 2 Germany,s, the ordinary people of North and South will be keen to come together, and may well listen to "promises" made..............who knows? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pinfireman said:

In getting sanctions lifted, he only has to appeal to the Third World countries, who dislike the West, whilst holding out the begging bowl for Western aid....and like the 2 Germany,s, the ordinary people of North and South will be keen to come together, and may well listen to "promises" made..............who knows? 

Keen to come together? Really? 

Their civil war wasn’t seen as ‘America VS the North’ it was North VS South and there was some real hatred there. 

Germany never had a war against itself before they built the Berlin Wall. 

Would that all be so easily forgotten? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

Keen to come together? Really? 

Their civil war wasn’t seen as ‘America VS the North’ it was North VS South and there was some real hatred there. 

Germany never had a war against itself before they built the Berlin Wall. 

Would that all be so easily forgotten? 

Could you explain what you mean by this?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/03/2018 at 05:09, TIGHTCHOKE said:

Great news and as for all of those who regard Donald Trump as a madman, think again.

As Lloyd says, the the majority of Americans love what he is doing, surely a second term will follow.

We live in interesting times.

Yes they will meet and Don will say ..... Howdy Partner put it there  ( Aka. Dads Army ). :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sako751sg said:

Could you explain what you mean by this?

The Second World War which resulted in the split of East and West Berlin was an international war, but the people of West and East Berlin were never at war with one another before the wall went up. 

The people of North and South Korea were at war within their own country against one another, although supported by the US in the South and China in the North, there will still be Koreans from both sides who saw other Koreans from the other side fight against them, kill families, commit war crimes etc etc, this never happened in Berlin did it? 

So the reunification of Berlin was families and people who had been split up happily reuniting. 

If we ever saw the reunification of the Koreas, there will be villages and towns that fired on each other - will they be as happy as the Germans? I don’t know. But it’s not a good comparison in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

The Second World War which resulted in the split of East and West Berlin was an international war, but the people of West and East Berlin were never at war with one another before the wall went up. 

The people of North and South Korea were at war within their own country against one another, although supported by the US in the South and China in the North, there will still be Koreans from both sides who saw other Koreans from the other side fight against them, kill families, commit war crimes etc etc, this never happened in Berlin did it? 

So the reunification of Berlin was families and people who had been split up happily reuniting. 

If we ever saw the reunification of the Koreas, there will be villages and towns that fired on each other - will they be as happy as the Germans? I don’t know. But it’s not a good comparison in my opinion.

See what you mean now.

Hard one to call regarding how hostile the N/S would be to each other but the years of brainwashing wouldnt help thats for sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, sako751sg said:

See what you mean now.

Hard one to call regarding how hostile the N/S would be to each other but the years of brainwashing wouldnt help thats for sure.

Exactly! Also, I’m not an expert on Korean culture, but other similar Asian cultures are very focused on respecting their ancestors, honouring your family and all that. 

Its not good if the village up the road killer all your ancestors, your at war with them for 50+ years, then all of a sudden your supposed to get along. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

Exactly! Also, I’m not an expert on Korean culture, but other similar Asian cultures are very focused on respecting their ancestors, honouring your family and all that. 

Its not good if the village up the road killer all your ancestors, your at war with them for 50+ years, then all of a sudden your supposed to get along. 

How has it played out in Vietnam?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, amateur said:

How has it played out in Vietnam?

That would be the closest for a similar re-unification. There are too many vested interests and people who would lose power or fear retribution for it to happen peacefully in Korea. But Vietnam was the Commies winning with the inevitable repercussions for those who had fought against them or were considered class enemies. The US would not let the North Koreans take over the South and China would not want a US friendly South taking over the North and sharing a common border with it. Re-unification isn't happening anytime soon. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

The Second World War which resulted in the split of East and West Berlin was an international war, but the people of West and East Berlin were never at war with one another before the wall went up. 

The people of North and South Korea were at war within their own country against one another, although supported by the US in the South and China in the North, there will still be Koreans from both sides who saw other Koreans from the other side fight against them, kill families, commit war crimes etc etc, this never happened in Berlin did it? 

So the reunification of Berlin was families and people who had been split up happily reuniting. 

If we ever saw the reunification of the Koreas, there will be villages and towns that fired on each other - will they be as happy as the Germans? I don’t know. But it’s not a good comparison in my opinion.

No its not a good comparison.
But 70 years later, there are few that actually remember it, would still be able to pick up arms and go at it.

The people of Korea were/are not the most warlike of people, political ideology from the North (And China) pretty much forced conflict upon the South, with the American paranoia about the spread of communism a willing participant.
After WW2 the nations who took the brunt of the damage had pretty much had enough, the economic damage caused ,and thus the ability to wage war, was only possible for a few countries, those that had won.
There are few instances of conflict amongst former neighbourly rivals after WW2.
An exception is Yugoslavia, but its new borders after WW1 were partly to blame for that, as well as racial differences.
And as pointed out, even the bitter conflict in Vietnam, didnt really produce the scenario you are proposing.
Time heals most wounds.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

Keen to come together? Really? 

Their civil war wasn’t seen as ‘America VS the North’ it was North VS South and there was some real hatred there. 

Germany never had a war against itself before they built the Berlin Wall. 

Would that all be so easily forgotten? 

It has been in Vietnam!

2 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

The Second World War which resulted in the split of East and West Berlin was an international war, but the people of West and East Berlin were never at war with one another before the wall went up. 

The people of North and South Korea were at war within their own country against one another, although supported by the US in the South and China in the North, there will still be Koreans from both sides who saw other Koreans from the other side fight against them, kill families, commit war crimes etc etc, this never happened in Berlin did it? 

So the reunification of Berlin was families and people who had been split up happily reuniting. 

If we ever saw the reunification of the Koreas, there will be villages and towns that fired on each other - will they be as happy as the Germans? I don’t know. But it’s not a good comparison in my opinion.

Vietnam came a decade after Korea, and they are happily getting along....I am NOT in favour of a re-unification where the North takes over.....merely stating that "ordinary" people tend to believe what ever their politicians tell them. It,s happening here, millions will vote Labour, with that treacherous nutter, Corbyn, in  charge!  Interesting times ahead..................

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TriBsa said:

That would be the closest for a similar re-unification. There are too many vested interests and people who would lose power or fear retribution for it to happen peacefully in Korea. But Vietnam was the Commies winning with the inevitable repercussions for those who had fought against them or were considered class enemies. The US would not let the North Koreans take over the South and China would not want a US friendly South taking over the North and sharing a common border with it. Re-unification isn't happening anytime soon. 

That is fairly accurate. but we live in strange times.  A North takeover would be a disaster.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pinfireman said:

That is fairly accurate. but we live in strange times.  A North takeover would be a disaster.

Not withstanding all of the issues raised earlier, I could see a scenario where following reunification  the wealthy South bail out the North. The leaders from Kims team acquiesce to the South running the show and they in turn get to keep and spend their personal fortunes. Maybe Pyongyang becomes the fashionable place to live rather like the former East Berlin :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, oowee said:

Not withstanding all of the issues raised earlier, I could see a scenario where following reunification  the wealthy South bail out the North. The leaders from Kims team acquiesce to the South running the show and they in turn get to keep and spend their personal fortunes. Maybe Pyongyang becomes the fashionable place to live rather like the former East Berlin 

Yes, and pigs might fly! Any re-unification will ultimately lead to a North takeover. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎03‎/‎2018 at 06:59, Hamster said:

None so blind as those who will not see. The sanctions is what caused them to build up their conventional arms into the highly capable deterrent it now is even without use of nukes, sanctions is what caused them to eventually manage to build nukes. 

Sanctions hurt ordinary people, they don't stop a determined foe with a good memory to build arms, look at Iran for instance, if it wasn't for being double crossed by murica with whom it used to be allied it would never have had to become self sufficient in the arms race. Sanctions was the making of them. 

First rule of enlightenment, don't believe everything you read in the papers. NK has offered (and been rejected) peace talks before, it just doesn't make the papers unless it's about some relative being killed at the airport or someone being killed by heavy artillery. 

ps. did anyone watch that demonisation documentary on Putin ?  Talk about being butt hurt . 

+ 0ne.  That documentary on Putin was bi assed in the first sentence and the last and all in between.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...