Pelosi Statement on Trump

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by darksithpro, Jun 12, 2018.

  1. darksithpro macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2016
    #1
    So, Nancy Pelosi releases a statement, criticizing Trump for the summit. She writes: https://www.democraticleader.gov/newsroom/61218/ Now I'm going to quote a few things here...

    "Apparently, the President handed Kim Jong-un concessions in exchange for vague promises that do not approach a clear and comprehensive pathway to denuclearization and non-proliferation."

    What does she mean by concessions? Does she mean the suspension of joint military exercises between the US and South Korea? If that's true my question is if you're going into negotiations with a hostile nation in good faith and you know the North Koreans find these exercises provocative, wouldn't the suspension of such exercises be healthy for further negotiations, so that they don't break down?

    "In his haste to reach an agreement, President Trump elevated North Korea to the level of the United States while preserving the regime’s status quo."

    This is simply untrue. The document signed by both parties clearly indicate they will continue to work together for peace and the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula, that is not the current status quo :
    1. Reaffirming the April 27, 2018 Panmunjom Declaration, the DPRK commits to work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.
    "The United States and the DPRK commit to hold follow-on negotiations, led by the U.S. Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, and a relevant high-level DPRK official, at the earliest possible date, to implement the outcomes of the U.S.–DPRK summit."


    Honestly, my question is why is she playing partisan politics, or have I misses something? Perhaps someone here who has Government experience can opine? The document clearly states they are in the initial stage of negotiations, yet the political left see's this as the only, or final document, end all, be all? "scratches head".

    1. Was it expected that Mr. Trump was supposed to have KJU sign a comprehensive denuclearization peace treaty on the very first day he met with KJU? Has that ever happened before?

    2. If this is all wrong what would have been the proper way for Trump to handle this?
     
  2. NT1440 macrumors G5

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #2
    It’s quite clear that some people will view any results from Trump as a nagative, regardless of the result being potential peace.

    Now, do I like that Trump nearly pushed us into a war with NK prior to this? **** no.

    Am I upset that his turnaround is purely for his own image going into the elections? Not if it’s an actual peace.

    That said, the neocons running the Trump Administration have a long, long history of making deals in such a way that they can be undermined behind the scenes this setting the stage for a “justified” war of our own making.

    I don’t trust this at all, because I think it’s a ruse to get Americans to accept an impending war. The neocons were making the same moves at the end of Obama’s administration (pushing to claim Iran violated it by pointing to missile tests that ARE NOT FORBIDDEN BY THE JCOA) and look where we are today.
     
  3. Rhonindk macrumors 68040

    Rhonindk

  4. Apple OC macrumors 68040

    Apple OC

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2010
    Location:
    Hogtown
    #4
    I was waiting for her response... she is pure gold for 2020 :cool:
     
  5. 0007776 Suspended

    0007776

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #5
    The proper way for Trump to handle this would have been to start out negotiations at a lower level in the State department. Get some concessions in exchange for a pause in military exercises in South Korea instead of giving it up for nothing more than words on paper that don't even go as far as previous agreements.

    If Trump wanted to meet with Kim and legitimize him on the world stage it should have been after the lower level diplomats got us almost all the way to a final deal and then their meeting should have been about putting the finishing touches on an agreement and signing it.
     
  6. MacAndMic macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2009
    #6
    Are stopping bomb tests / missle launches and releasing some hostages not a good faith move? You can’t expect a hard agreement and resolution that goes fully in your favor without building a relationship and trust.
     
  7. Videomanmac Suspended

    Videomanmac

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2015
    #7
    The only good faith move the left wants is for Kim to nuke us.
     
  8. 0007776 Suspended

    0007776

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #8
    If they were doing everything else in the right order then the administration might have been able to sell a pause in military exercises as a response to that, but as it is it looks more like we gave them their propaganda photo op in exchange for those.
     
  9. NT1440 macrumors G5

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #9
    Yet that’s exactly what the US has expected from Iran for decades, but especially now that WE violated the deal.

    I expect the same dynamic for NK...after the midterms.
    --- Post Merged, Jun 12, 2018 ---
    Boo hoo?

    I can’t understand the rationale that says a *chance* at descalation of tensions is not worth a propaganda victory that EVERYONE KNOWS is propaganda.
    --- Post Merged, Jun 12, 2018 ---
    It’s not the left who’s bellicose rhetoric brought us to the brink before an abrupt about face.

    There’s also the fact that NK’s entire military posture, as declared for decades by our own military in the QDR statements, is explicitly to slow down an invasion to force diplomacy. That is a defensive posture by definition. Anyone who sees danger in other nations defensive posture is by definition one with an imperialist mindset.

    “They might punch us IF we punch first”-mindset in a nutshell
     
  10. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #10
    It’s quite clear that some people will view any results from Trump as a positive, regardless of the result (or lack of).

    If Obama or a Clinton had done the same "deal" under the same conditions they would have been crucified by the right (and I would agree). Doubt it? Look no further then the much better Iran deal........
     
  11. 0007776 Suspended

    0007776

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #11
    The reason it is not worth the propaganda win is because that win allows Kim to undo much of the damage that the sanctions are doing to his regime. So now instead of the people of North Korea getting fed up and deposing him they see on North Korean media that he is winning against the West and decide to give him more time.
     
  12. NT1440 macrumors G5

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #12
    I don’t give a **** what reactionaries think, they don’t bother with facts to begin with.
    --- Post Merged, Jun 12, 2018 ---
    You realize sanctions are war by another means right? The goal is to make civilians so desperate that they overthrow their government. Why that human suffering is ok when termed “sanctions” is beyond me. What you’re describing is regime change, which is an international crime.
     
  13. MacAndMic macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2009
    #13
    I’d agree with you if we turned the clock back a few years but the left have given no credit to Trump for anything. The guy could give away bags of gold from his personal stash and the left would complain, it’s too heavy, I have to go too far, it’s probably from ripping people off, etc.

    I hated Obama but still respected the Presidential position, the left have all but made respect a thing of the past.
     
  14. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #14
    Nah, Trump made respect a thing of the past on the campaign trail (and afterwards), "the left" at one point just accepted it......
     
  15. NT1440 macrumors G5

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #15
    Wow, ignoring the fact that not one of the current democrats could be considered “left of center” (let alone “left”)....what party refused a sitting president a Supreme Court nomination? You know, the thing where the only response was a speech that Biden gave years ago that spoke about it but never actually took that unprecedented action?

    I hated Obama’s pick, he was a center corporatist (just as Obama was/is), but the notion that “respect” has any relation to the GOP’s governing philosophy is a real hoot.
     
  16. tshrimp, Jun 12, 2018
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2018

    tshrimp macrumors 6502

    tshrimp

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2012
    #16
    You are trying to understand something that Nancy Pelosi stated? That my not be possible :). The sad thing is, this meeting is something that Nancy Pelosi, and most people should be celebrating. Instead she tries to make it into something it is not.
     
  17. MacAndMic macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2009
    #17
    Are you talking about where there is a tradition to let incoming presidents pick their own justices when the outgoing is in their final year?
     
  18. RichardMZhlubb Contributor

    RichardMZhlubb

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2010
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #18
    Uh, there is no such "tradition." This happened exactly once in US history (in 2016).
     
  19. NT1440 macrumors G5

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #19
    I’m talking about the constitutional duty bestowed upon the President and the GOP that invented whole-cloth an exception to this constitutional duty.

    The GOP blocked Obama’s pick, I didn’t even like the guy, but the GOP went beyond anything seen in American history by refusing to let the process play out.

    So I don’t want to hear anything about “respect”. And again I’d like to point out that there is little about the Obama presidency I liked.
     
  20. MacAndMic macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2009
    #20
    The things you read, see and hear about Trump in daily life is disgusting. I stand by my point, he or his position is shown no respect by anyone on the left, from the government all the way down to the posters on this forum.
     
  21. NT1440 macrumors G5

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #21
    Actions speak louder than words my friend. I don’t buy authoritarian notions that a president is to be respected when he’s clearly an *******. In my book that goes back decades worth of presidents.
     
  22. Fancuku macrumors 6502a

    Fancuku

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2015
    Location:
    PA, USA
    #22
    If Donnie cared what the left thinks he would have never been the president.
    Forget the left. Let them scream at the sky all day if they feel like it.
    The train will keep on rolling.
     
  23. Apple OC macrumors 68040

    Apple OC

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2010
    Location:
    Hogtown
    #23
  24. NT1440 macrumors G5

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #24
    It’s what they’ve been asking for for decades. Meanwhile, regardless of the party in power we’ve been practicing “decapitation” of their regime once a year for decades.

    The problem is that this country has two war parties, and no anti war movement to speak to these truths.
     
  25. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #25
    He's unworthy of respect regardless of his politics
     

Share This Page