A reason would be that they've violated every single agreement in the past which is what has brought them to this place and made them a nuclear country. No agreement is going to steer them from their strategic goals. Thats been proven countless times already.

That seems like a great place to start ;)

The best indicator of future performance is past performance. ;)

I disagree with how North Korea has been handled by the US government for decades. It's been kick the can sitch for a long while now.

But there's a lot of space between kick the can and threatening nuclear war. It should be completely unacceptable for the POTUS to verbally and childishly threaten nuclear war as a negotiating tactic.

I don't think people even took the time to look. NK signed this type of thing in 1985. They broke it time and time again. Now Trump breaks the Iran deal and it's the big bad Trump that doesn't keep his word. Not the North who go broke and need food every 6 months and for 30 years everyone says ''be good here is some food'' they shut up till that runs out then they run their mouth again to get fed... rinse and repeat. Now Trump has China on board and NK realizes they are finally going to have to have a real talk here.

Albert Einstein is broadly credited with exclaiming “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results”.

Maybe just maybe, Trump talking tough is the reason they are actually willing to make some serious concessions. Because god knows it hasn't worked for 30 years your way.

but trump can hold their feet to the fire of an agreement because...trump?

they're both agreements. the difference being one has the backing of the world and would be codified into law, the other can be broken, just like trump did with iran.

but they are not willing to make any nuclear concessions.

Maybe this time when no aid comes their way and people start to starve and his regime is in trouble he might change his tune? Trump won't cave like other Presidents have, Kim knows this.

A picture of Kim with Trump and a meeting that goes nowhere is only advantageous to Kim. So good for Trump walking away, but the same people who just 2 months ago called Trump a moron for flirting with the idea of having the meeting are now calling him an idiot for canceling that meeting. Up is down and down is up these days.

North Korea has done this over and over again. We've had multiple agreements with them and they've always fallen apart. But in this case Trump rushed in looking for what he thought was a quick win with no consideration to the past history and how complicated this is.

To date I have yet to see any indication Iran has violated the agreement. In fact, the only country who has violated the agreement is the United States. We cannot just pull out of the agreement because Trump doesn't like it or thinks Iran is in violation; According the agreement itself there is a list of steps that must be taken before a country can withdraw from the agreement and the Untied States failed to abide by the agreement.

To make matters even worse, the agreement is still in force, we just aren't a part of it. On top of that, our allies aren't in step with us and have shown no sign of supporting us with this agreement.

Emotions run high around trump, I understand.

I have to draw a line at childish threats of nuclear annihilation.

The agreement was done by Executive order because it wouldn't have passed properly. So Trump had ever right to get rid of the agreement. I mean you can't even inspect their Nuclear sites so can you even know they are abiding by the deal?

I guess the question is: Unacceptable to who?
Us?
North Korea?

Who gets to tell the President that what he says is unacceptable?

And which is worse...Trump using language to get shit done (as Reagan did in the 1980's when all the liberal media were screaming that the things he was saying would lead to nuclear war)...or Truman DROPPING atomic bombs on Japan?

I think what Trump's obvious strategy is, is to use tough talk to gain leverage to find a diplomatic solution.
I'm going to go with Trump's lifetime of real world experience over a bunch of diplomatic nerds and politicians and bureaucrats who have never negotiated anything successfully in their entire careers of sucking on the govt. teat.

Yeah...I'm a bit jaded about bureaucrats and politicians at the moment. lol
Their track record should be enough to convince anyone that Trump's way is a better way that the old and tired b.s. that has failed for some long.

YEAH but Robbie don't you know that Billionaire Trump who owns properties with his name all over them across the globe as well as a long line of merchandise in a variety of verticals is a FRAUD? He has never negotiated a single deal? Even people told us he hasn't.

Becoming a real estate billionaire is EZ don't ya know

Of course!
Everybody knows that Trump is a buffoon who made billions off a million dollar loan from his dad. He just lucks into everything. :1orglaugh

And to those idiots... I say: Good. We can use this buffoon bumbling his way to success for our country. :pimp

For me, the answer to your question is everyone. Everyone should tell the POTUS it's unacceptable.

We're still getting criticized for Hiroshima/Nagasaki 75 years later. We get to have nuclear weapons because we claim to hold the moral high ground.

Trump is trampling on those things as well.

I agree that Trump is trampling on the LIE that we have the "moral high ground".

Just like all the anti-Trump "liberals" are now praising the FBI and CIA to the high heavens (because Trump is calling them out on their misdeeds).

Our country used those two agency's to do some of the most horrible and atrocious acts over the years. And in the time before Trump...the media and the "liberals" were no friends of these spy agencies.
But now? Suddenly they are the "Intelligence Community" and are above reproach.
What a bunch of hypocritical horseshit.

Anybody that knows modern history is aware of how the FBI has done horrible things here in the U.S. and the CIA has been a nightmare around the world.

Our country has NEVER really been "moral". It's been a fabrication to justify invading other country's, secretly overthrowing leaders, assassinations, corruption...and now even trying to rig an election for Hillary Clinton.

I think Trump is the most transparent President we've ever had in that regard. You don't have to guess what he thinks.

With polished fake politicians like President Obama you would get this measured, scripted smooth talk. And then you were left to wonder what this plastic person REALLY was doing behind the scenes.

With Trump...he will TWEET to you exactly what he is thinking and doing.

I like that.

EDIT: By the way...we don't "get to have" nuclear weapons because of some imaginary moral high ground. We have them because nobody can take them from us.
I would bet you that IF we magically told the UN to take a vote if they want us to keep our nuclear weapons...they would strip us of them by unanimous vote. lol

So what? That saved literally hundreds of thousands of lives. Anyone who criticizes that action is dead wrong and has zero knowledge of the Pacific campaign during WW2

He's the only president to lie to the American people and say he's going to show his tax returns and then refused to show his tax returns.

That's not transparent

Trump refuses to interview with his FBI

That's not transparent

Trump refuses to publicly disclose all of his dealings with Russia.

That's not transparent

But to a brain dead trump supporter, Trump has the most transparent president in history :disgust

I agree except for the so what part. What I'm suggesting is that since the criticism about it still exists to this day, right or wrong, we should realize it does exist. Threatening nuclear annihilation, especially in the way trump does, scares the bejezus out of many people.

Putting aside our differences on the man, Trump, the issue here is nuclear weapons and how to diplomatically wield them. callously and lackadaisically trading nuke threats with a madman is not right or good diplomacy.

I think you know what I mean when I said we get to have nuclear weapons. Sure we can nuke the living shit outta anyone that tries to take our nukes. That doesn't negate the fact that the world has given it an OK in large part because we haven't abused it in various ways.

I think we should all be stripped of nuclear weapons in fact. They're an anomaly of history.

Also, the world looks to us for how to manage nuclear weapons right? Do we want to put forth the precedent of making nuclear threats and taunts or do we want to show a better way?

Seems to me it's dangerous to taunt and threaten with nuclear strikes like the POTUS does.

For years Robbie complained about the US sticking its nose in the business of other countries, now he's ok with trump threatening to nuke them. :1orglaugh

Also,

When Trump threatens to use nukes, then he means it right? otherwise he's just kidding about using nuclear strikes and that's OK?

The fact of the matter is Trump has something on NK. My guess is it has something to do with the Obama admin and/or Hillary. My other guess is they were using NK to sell arms. The fact that Kim did a 180 and is now pretty much begging Trump to the negotiation table is very telling.

He's not threatening to nuke them.. If you remember correctly it was Kim that was showing off his rockets and making threats. Trump is just saying, "You don't scare us, we have bigger guns and they don't shoot blanks"

The best way of looking at the whole thing is through Chinese glasses.

Yeah China is nosing in as well.. But, they are the ones who brought it together.. Everyone is just flexing their muscles.

that was absolutely a nuclear threat and you know it. We don't play word games with our nuclear weapons.


And another passive aggressive threat of a nuclear strike is embedded in Trump's breakup letter:

"You talk about nuclear capabilities, but ours are so massive and powerful that I pray to God they will never have to be used."



As Americans, we should agree this is not how we want to represent ourselves.

Fake nic troll has been melting down all day

seriously.


trump's tweet:

"North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un just stated that the “Nuclear Button is on his desk at all times.” Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!"

Trump is just saying, "You don't scare us, we have bigger guns and they don't shoot blanks"

So you think making veiled phony threats of nuclear strikes as a negotiating tactic to get a signed deal is good and right for America(ns)?

Hi Mark! It seems that you ignored the facts I posted yesterday. Here it is again:

What the media failed to acknowledge was that North Korea had been refusing to respond to U.S. diplomats who’d been trying to arrange the details of the June 12 summit. So Trump called it off, and in the process called Pyongyang’s bluff.

^^ This was the correct move, and now NK is saying they want to have the talks. Rachel Madcow lied to you AGAIN.


^^ So clueless. Rocgard, you listed 3 deals that Trump wasn't involved in. They were ALL terrible deals so he pulled out- an excellent move on all 3 of them. And no, it wasn't a "tax break for the rich" - It was for ALL Americans. Why would you be opposed to lower taxes? Oh right, the media tells you to hate Trump no matter what. You got duped buddy :2 cents:

Acepimp, are you OK with America using taunts and threats of nuclear strikes as bargaining chips in negotiating deals?

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

NK has launched how many missiles over Japan? Maybe a veiled threat is in order.

That's all that we're going to get with Trump other than his obvious desperation for a deal to save face. Trump would go-to war to distract from the fact he fucked up President Moons negotiations, and Trumps obvious corruption in illegally cashing in on his presidency.

The letter is very interesting. It was written by Trump himself. The part where he says the only talk that matters is between himself and Kim is particularly interesting. NK said what they did because Bolton and Pence both made reference to the Libyan model, this obviously isn't something any nation with nukes wants and it caused NK to react poorly and make a threat. So Trump responded with his own threat which obviously worked. Overall read the letter and it is a very sympathetic one, it does show that Trump really was keen on the meeting IMO

2018 and nuclear threats are now OK. I think you should reconsider.

He said months ago at that UN speech that if NK doesn't get with the program, they'll be totally destroyed. They know the deal- this is all just theater

you know I know you know you're avoiding the question.

Think about it...the U.S. has ALWAYS done that. So does every other country.
They usually do it behind closed doors.

Remember in 2006 when the Pakistan President revealed that top U.S. officials threatened to "bomb Pakistan back to the Stone Age" after 9-11?

No, they didn't tweet it out and tell everyone...but YES our country has ALWAYS threatened and taunted.
That's all part of arguments, negotiations, etc.

In the end...all these diplomats are just: People.
They aren't geniuses. They aren't some kind of infallible super-men and women.

Threats are made all the time. At the U.S. and by the U.S.

You just are getting a President that doesn't hide shit from the American people anymore and we aren't used to seeing the truth.
We have gotten used to being lied to by govt. and placated to FEEL "safe".

EDIT:
Here's a quick history lesson:
"In 1953, Eisenhower threatened the use of nuclear weapons to end the Korean War if the Chinese refused to negotiate.

The United States issued several nuclear threats against the People's Republic of China in the 1950s to force the evacuation of outlying islands and the cessation of attacks against Quemoy and Matsu, part of Republic of China.

Recently declassified documents from the National Archives (UK) indicate that the United Kingdom considered threatening China with nuclear retaliation in 1961 in the case of a military reclamation of Hong Kong by China.
Ali Magoudi, a psychoanalyst of French president François Mitterrand, claimed that Margaret Thatcher threatened nuclear war against Argentina during the 1982 Falklands War in order to procure codes from France to disable Argentina's French-made missiles. This claim has not been confirmed by either the French or British governments.

In 1981, the United States Department of Energy said there had been 75 cases of nuclear blackmail against the United States, though only several were serious attempts."

What will Princess and company say if the summit happens anyway?

↑↑↑ He's manic

Percy said Trump deserved a Nobel Peace Prize even though Trump has never met with the leader of North Korea. Then he says it's inevitable and Trump created peace. Now he says it's no big deal. Then he says it's going to happen.

This is what happens when your mind is so susceptible to suggestion that you literally change your mind 5 times in the day about a topic. Poor Robbie do sad to see the deterioration of his mind online.

Nk isn't going to get rid of their nukes. If the deal they come up with is worse than The Iran deal then he'll try and find a way to make it look great. NK will probably throw in a few hotel/golf/ resort deals for him and his family

Robbie, my point about being better/smarter than needing to threaten with nukes is exactly on account of history. The very first example you stated is Korea 65 years ago and here we are 65 years later and threatening again with nukes. that makes sense? in what way? It didn't work the first time, Korea has been at war ever since. We did not win in Korea.

We should be way beyond the need to childishly taunt and threaten others with nuclear weapons. Regardless of the POTUS.

We're supposed to have evolved. Learned from the past, grown. Lead by example.






We can't allow ourselves to be nuclear thugs Robbie.

Trump would do ANY deal to have an international Trump high rise hotel with attached resort and golf course in North Korea... anything

My point is...taunts and threats have ALWAYS been used in negotiations.

Sure, if our diplomats are sipping tea with their pinky fingers extended as they negotiate a deal with the Swedish ambassador... then no threats are needed.

But when dealing with backward country's who only respect strength? It requires manning up and a little bit of trash talking.

800 military bases in 70 countries makes you just conventional thugs :thumbsup the protection racket is going strong :2 cents::2 cents:

All of those countries, other than a couple, we are there at the invitation of the governments. They want us there for a variety reasons. We are the richest most powerful nation the world has ever known but we are a benevolent power.