Trump will declare North Korea a state sponsor of terror

DamasR said:
should have happened in the 70s when they were kidnapping japanese teens.
Click to expand...
It did happen. They briefly came off and trump put Them back


How to read article
Read title
Open
Use eyes to look at words below title

. The North had been designated for two decades until 2008 when it was removed in a bid to salvage international talks aimed at halting its nuclear efforts. The talks collapsed soon after and haven't been revived since.

Different source but also was two paragraphs or so down

Here’s from the op nobody read
The decision returns North Korea to a list it was removed from in 2008 to ease nuclear talks with the George W. Bush administration.
 
They got missiles best to be prepared

North Korea idiots should be removed

I think his grandfather kim wasn't that bad but his son and grandson are idiots
 
wonderbread said:
This is just trump trying to find things to stoke his ego. I think the mentally ill bastard is just itching to use a nuke.
Click to expand...
Wiping out them idiots isn't a bad thing

The people would be free

Un is probably worse than hitler
 
If there's anything that requires UN/US intervention, wouldn't it be construction/research of nuclear weapons? What is a bigger global threat than that?

It's bad enough that a select few countries have any, but we should globally be working on dismantling nukes, not creating more.
 
Putting them on the list is incredibly smart.

- Allows the US to have a bargaining chip when conducting talks with the DPRK ("Quit testing missiles, and we will move you off the list")
- Allows us to put pressure on the Chinese to help support us ("Hey guys, you're supporting a nation-state that we consider to be a terrorist regime")
- Allows us to build an international coalition to pressure the DPRK into stopping its missile tests so that the DPRK has a lot more to fear than a smaller coalition of the US/ROC

This is how diplomacy works. Sometimes, you lead with the carrot. Sometimes, you lead with the threat of the stick. It doesn't mean that "OMG! Trump is going to lead us into WWIII! The world is coming to an end!"
 
sub_thug said:
Putting them on the list is incredibly smart.

- Allows the US to have a bargaining chip when conducting talks with the DPRK ("Quit testing missiles, and we will move you off the list")
- Allows us to put pressure on the Chinese to help support us ("Hey guys, you're supporting a nation-state that we consider to be a terrorist regime")
- Allows us to build an international coalition to pressure the DPRK into stopping its missile tests so that the DPRK has a lot more to fear than a smaller coalition of the US/ROC

This is how diplomacy works. Sometimes, you lead with the carrot. Sometimes, you lead with the threat of the stick. It doesn't mean that "OMG! Trump is going to lead us into WWIII! The world is coming to an end!"
Click to expand...
This is fantastic until someone not Trump is in office and decides to take a different approach. This is also how you can still build talking points to justify war in the future. We did this, it did not work, so now that.

But yeah I'm with you, hopefully this works out for the best.
 
Last edited:
mcveteran81 said:
This is fantastic until someone not Trump is in office and decides to take a different approach. This is also how you can still build talking points to justify war in the future. We did this, it did now work, so now that.

But yeah I'm with you, hopefully this works out for the best.
Click to expand...
When someone else takes office, it won't really matter what Trump did. That person is free to remove the DPRK from the list, escalate the situation without regard to said list, or whatever. They will have their own unique set of circumstances and their own approach. This addition of the DPRK to the terror list in no way commits the US to military action in the region.
 
sub_thug said:
Putting them on the list is incredibly smart.

- Allows the US to have a bargaining chip when conducting talks with the DPRK ("Quit testing missiles, and we will move you off the list")
- Allows us to put pressure on the Chinese to help support us ("Hey guys, you're supporting a nation-state that we consider to be a terrorist regime")
- Allows us to build an international coalition to pressure the DPRK into stopping its missile tests so that the DPRK has a lot more to fear than a smaller coalition of the US/ROC

This is how diplomacy works. Sometimes, you lead with the carrot. Sometimes, you lead with the threat of the stick. It doesn't mean that "OMG! Trump is going to lead us into WWIII! The world is coming to an end!"
Click to expand...

But then it's just a completely arbitrary list where the requirements to be on it have nothing to do with its actual name and is just made up of countries that the US are diplomatically aligned against. That is not a problem at all? Why not just call it the "kitten strangelers-list"?

We are supposed to think China is going to take this seriously? China gives zero fucks about US grandstanding and appeal to emotion.
 
Fronk said:
But then it's just a completely arbitrary list where the requirements to be on it have nothing to do with its actual name and is just made up of countries that the US are diplomatically aligned against. That is not a problem at all? Why not just call it the "kitten strangelers-list"?

We are supposed to think China is going to take this seriously? China gives zero fucks about US grandstanding and appeal to emotion.
Click to expand...
The point of the list is for political theater and posturing, nothing more. So yeah, it is a list of countries that are publicly condemned by the US for what they do in regards to terrorism. It doesn't mean that we will use it as a list of "Countries we want to take out." Do you think that the list should have teeth?

China takes posturing seriously, just as we take North Korean posturing seriously. Politics is just a game of move and counter-move. This is our move.
 
CubixRube said:
Which is why I said taking a page out of the Clinton book, ie a large donation via SA to a bullshit "charity" in their daughter's name.

Try to keep up please.
Click to expand...

The Clintons were well known sockpuppets of SA.. They didn´t make election promises about getting tough on SA. Then get 100 mill, bend the knee, have their daughter praise SAs efforts for womens rights and sell them billions in weapons. But I guess whataboutism is becoming the national sport for Trumpkins.

So which one of the banned accounts were you?
 
Remember when neocons supported Bush no matter what, when he designated North Korea as part of the axis of evil, alongside Iraq and Iran?
 
mcveteran81 said:
Were so going to war with NK in the future, it isn't even funny.

Here's a quick peek at what *mainstream media* is telling the American public to soften them up to the idea of it.

Fox news: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/1...g-punishes-officials-for-impure-attitude.html (propaganda to show harsh life)

Fox news: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/1...en-raped-stop-menstruating-defector-says.html (propaganda to show that women get raped and mistreated / aka perfect timing with all the metoo stories to further pull at the heart strings of americans)

ABC news: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/latest-japans-abe-welcomes-us-move-north-korea-51294396 (propaganda to show we are being patient and responsible by using sanctions and politics / aka / a show of us being diplomatic knowing that it is designed to fail and further justify war)

Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-other-global-stories/?utm_term=.6d78f5bfbcba (propaganda to show how harsh life is again)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

American wars are really simple actually.

1)Call someone a bad guy

2) Drum up shit like the ^ to prove how much of a bad guy he is and how the people in that bad guy's nation live in terrible conditions.

3) Offer up sanctions and diplomatic fronts to look reasonable and responsible, thus winning over public approval of how the situation is being handled.

4) Sanctions and diplomatic efforts fail. (As they always do)

5) Drum up more propaganda of how bad the bad guy really is.

6) False Flag If needed because 5) failed to fully assuage the public to green light war, thus assuring war.

Rinse and repeat. We did this to Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria. Guess who next's guys!? North Korea and Iran.
Click to expand...
War? You mean decimate them? Cool rant tho
 
Good?

Almost anything that undermines the regime short of war is a bonus for the world.
 
Prutfis said:
The Clintons were well known sockpuppets of SA.. They didn´t make election promises about getting tough on SA. Then get 100 mill, bend the knee, have their daughter praise SAs efforts for womens rights and sell them billions in weapons. But I guess whataboutism is becoming the national sport for Trumpkins.

So which one of the banned accounts were you?
Click to expand...

Ya, like I said for the 3rd time time, taking a page out of the Clinton playbook.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...e7ba8439ca6_story.html?utm_term=.62c9f507d3c3

It doesn't make somebody a "Trumpkin"(sp?) if they point out how terrible both our last candidates were.
 
Last edited:
Prutfis said:
And like I said. They didn´t campaign on getting tough on SA now did they? But but the Clintons.

And again. What banned account were you?
Click to expand...

Ya, they just campaigned on women's and gay's rights :rolleyes:. Both sides totally aren't hypocrites or anything...

Which banned account were you?
 
CubixRube said:
Ya, they just campaigned on women's and gay's rights :rolleyes:. Both sides totally aren't hypocrites or anything...

Which banned account were you?
Click to expand...

Whataboutism again.

I have never been banned. I am guessing PWENT?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,044
Messages
55,463,552
Members
174,786
Latest member
JoyceOuthw

Share this page

Back
Top