Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
Vacamion

President Trump & the USA

By Vacamion, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

Jattdogg

Jattdogg

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, MattP said:

Not really that hard to fathom surely? Low unemployment, economy doing well and recent foreign policy success.

 

How long that will last is another thing.

Well how much of that can be attributed to the end of Obama's presidency? who knows some ,maybe none?

 

From a voting standpoint on personality alone how or why? lol dont get me wrong hillary was an awful candidate. Anyways thats old news.

 

Will be interesting to see if he can win a reelction. Dems have got to put out good policy and a great candidate though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
maynefox

maynefox

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, MattP said:

Yes. 

 

When the President of South Korea is calling for you to win the Nobel peace prize it's probably a success.

I wouldn't see it as a success; especially as nothing concrete has happened. Of course, this may be a new chapter for the Korean peninsular but there's history of warming relations only for the North Koreans to go rouge again.

 

This is a success and a victory for Kim Jong-Un. It has cost him nothing to do this. Denuclearise? Fat chance. He's ending the nuclear programme, for now, because he blew his own site up!
- he's been treated as an international equal to that of the U.S. (huge achievement for the "rogue nation". 

- kept the nuclear programme thus far and I think he will continue to do so. Think about it, it's the North Koreans only guarantor against the U.S. why get rid of it?

- he behaves for China and reaches out to South Korea. In return for what? Nothing and maybe that he will denuclearise North Korea?

Kim has matched Trump's rhetoric and given the U.S. the finger. His reward? A summit and keeping his nuclear arsenal. Huge win.

 

Because Kim's stature as an international statesmen has been legitimised he and the South are dealing with Korea, without the U.S. 

 

Trump is doing this for his own ego. He wants to be the first President to go to North Korea just for the history books. After all the "Rocket Man" talk and threatening to blow North Korea up, he now wants to do a deal with Kim? Bizarre. Trump has legitimised Kim. I feel this is all a delay and breather tactic for the North. Possibly a chance to alleviate some of the sanctions. Kim has completely fooled Trump into his own narcissism. 

 

Conversely, you could say a Korean peace summit is a massive success - but the U.S. aren't spearheading the summit? Let's see how much of a "success" this will be later on this year.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest FriendlyRam

Guest FriendlyRam

Posted
Posted

He's admitted to the affair pretty much, and who else thinks that child (stormy's) is his? lol

 

In many ways though its like we've watched a really badly scripted TV show, I have doubt any of this is actually legit (the whole Trump saga), its so bad its quite comical. 

 

We've had all the usual within it, the criminality, the affair, the abused wife etc etc

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest FriendlyRam

Guest FriendlyRam

Posted
Posted

Even the lawyers look like TV characters, the porn star, christ even the scruffy looking personal doctor looks like something you'd see in a movie, in fact he looks like Dr Brackish Okun (independence day) lol 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fuchsntf

fuchsntf

Posted
Posted
On 02/05/2018 at 22:21, maynefox said:

I wouldn't see it as a success; especially as nothing concrete has happened. Of course, this may be a new chapter for the Korean peninsular but there's history of warming relations only for the North Koreans to go rouge again.

 

This is a success and a victory for Kim Jong-Un. It has cost him nothing to do this. Denuclearise? Fat chance. He's ending the nuclear programme, for now, because he blew his own site up!
- he's been treated as an international equal to that of the U.S. (huge achievement for the "rogue nation". 

- kept the nuclear programme thus far and I think he will continue to do so. Think about it, it's the North Koreans only guarantor against the U.S. why get rid of it?

- he behaves for China and reaches out to South Korea. In return for what? Nothing and maybe that he will denuclearise North Korea?

Kim has matched Trump's rhetoric and given the U.S. the finger. His reward? A summit and keeping his nuclear arsenal. Huge win.

 

Because Kim's stature as an international statesmen has been legitimised he and the South are dealing with Korea, without the U.S. 

 

Trump is doing this for his own ego. He wants to be the first President to go to North Korea just for the history books. After all the "Rocket Man" talk and threatening to blow North Korea up, he now wants to do a deal with Kim? Bizarre. Trump has legitimised Kim. I feel this is all a delay and breather tactic for the North. Possibly a chance to alleviate some of the sanctions. Kim has completely fooled Trump into his own narcissism. 

 

Conversely, you could say a Korean peace summit is a massive success - but the U.S. aren't spearheading the summit? Let's see how much of a "success" this will be later on this year.

 

Hey !! if it works,I couldnt care a dogs dinner,history has had  its weird unconventional  ways of turning,

things with its problems on its head.Russia and Chinas full of seemingly irrelevant intricacies and intrigue,where

Power-kings and despots, had to change tact,and pick up the softer face to the Outside world.

I am also sure you are not far wrong,but...hey-ho.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Being retorted that Trump has told Macron that he's going to leave the or an deal, reinstate sanctions and introduce new sanctions. Ridiculous if true.

The worry would be that he thinks the Korean situation shows that escalation can lead to a positive outcome and tries it again. 

The bloke really is an idiot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest FriendlyRam

Guest FriendlyRam

Posted
Posted

Oh but he's playing "4d chess" 

 

Threatening to wipe countries off the map is the new way of forcing them into doing what those scum want, threatening genocide is ok nowadays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest MattP

Guest MattP

Posted
Posted

I wish you were all so vocal when Iran was threatening to wipe Israel off the map.

 

He'll probably get more results from this and then the usual lot will be crying again he did it the wrong way.

 

Imagine being so obsessed with hating Trump you get upset at potential peace breaking out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
breadandcheese

breadandcheese

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Being retorted that Trump has told Macron that he's going to leave the or an deal, reinstate sanctions and introduce new sanctions. Ridiculous if true.

The worry would be that he thinks the Korean situation shows that escalation can lead to a positive outcome and tries it again. 

The bloke really is an idiot.

I think it's fair to argue, as Trump is, that the current Iran deal is pretty poor.

 

The deal in its current form is a deal that allows Iran to research nuclear development whilst keeping a freeze to nuclear weapons development for at least 10 years (at the point the deal was signed).  So instead, Iran are focusing on developing their missile capability.  This means that the deal in its present form allows Iran to develop a weapons delivery system for a nuclear bomb, before then developing the warhead in eight years time without being in breach of the agreement.  We know that Iran has plans for a nuclear warhead, as this was exposed by the IAEA a few years back and shown again to the public last week when Israel stole their data.

 

So as it currently stands, in eight years time, when the deal ends, Iran will have nuclear capable ballistic missiles, improved nuclear capabilities, production capabilities and the knowhow to weaponise a nuclear bomb.  They will then, the day after the agreement expires, be able to produce the nuclear bomb.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, breadandcheese said:

I think it's fair to argue, as Trump is, that the current Iran deal is pretty poor.

 

The deal in its current form is a deal that allows Iran to research nuclear development whilst keeping a freeze to nuclear weapons development for at least 10 years (at the point the deal was signed).  So instead, Iran are focusing on developing their missile capability.  This means that the deal in its present form allows Iran to develop a weapons delivery system for a nuclear bomb, before then developing the warhead in eight years time without being in breach of the agreement.  We know that Iran has plans for a nuclear warhead, as this was exposed by the IAEA a few years back and shown again to the public last week when Israel stole their data.

 

So as it currently stands, in eight years time, when the deal ends, Iran will have nuclear capable ballistic missiles, improved nuclear capabilities, production capabilities and the knowhow to weaponise a nuclear bomb.  They will then, the day after the agreement expires, be able to produce the nuclear bomb.

 

 

 

They rather need to bring the whole region to heel then, not just the countries they don't like. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, breadandcheese said:

I think it's fair to argue, as Trump is, that the current Iran deal is pretty poor.

 

The deal in its current form is a deal that allows Iran to research nuclear development whilst keeping a freeze to nuclear weapons development for at least 10 years (at the point the deal was signed).  So instead, Iran are focusing on developing their missile capability.  This means that the deal in its present form allows Iran to develop a weapons delivery system for a nuclear bomb, before then developing the warhead in eight years time without being in breach of the agreement.  We know that Iran has plans for a nuclear warhead, as this was exposed by the IAEA a few years back and shown again to the public last week when Israel stole their data.

 

So as it currently stands, in eight years time, when the deal ends, Iran will have nuclear capable ballistic missiles, improved nuclear capabilities, production capabilities and the knowhow to weaponise a nuclear bomb.  They will then, the day after the agreement expires, be able to produce the nuclear bomb.

 

 

 

4

In a similar fashion to North Korea then, it would seem.

 

And, just like the NK's, they would never be stupid enough to use it - especially as there is already a very well-established nuclear power right next-door who have made it very clear what the consequences would be.

 

13 minutes ago, MattP said:

I wish you were all so vocal when Iran was threatening to wipe Israel off the map.

 

He'll probably get more results from this and then the usual lot will be crying again he did it the wrong way.

 

Imagine being so obsessed with hating Trump you get upset at potential peace breaking out.

 

Better to focus on nations that can actually carry out their threats without being annihilated themselves, perhaps?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
breadandcheese

breadandcheese

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, toddybad said:

They rather need to bring the whole region to heel then, not just the countries they don't like. 

Iran is the pressing issue.  If Iran get the bomb, Saudi will get one too. Syria will go for it afterwards, as will other nations in the Middle East.  It's not something we want to see.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, breadandcheese said:

Iran is the pressing issue.  If Iran get the bomb, Saudi will get one too. Syria will go for it afterwards, as will other nations in the Middle East.  It's not something we want to see.

 

 

No, but you forgot the first country in the region getting one leading to Iran's efforts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest MattP

Guest MattP

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Better to focus on nations that can actually carry out their threats without being annihilated themselves, perhaps?

I think when a country openly has stated it wants the destruction of another for no other reason than the religion of that country it deserves a lot of focus.

 

But hey it's just a bunch of Jews so I don't expect those on the left to care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
breadandcheese

breadandcheese

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

In a similar fashion to North Korea then, it would seem.

 

And, just like the NK's, they would never be stupid enough to use it - especially as there is already a very well-established nuclear power right next-door who have made it very clear what the consequences would be.

It depends on the deterrent effect.  Iran has said for the last thirty years plus that they are committed to destroying Israel and wiping it off the map.  They have been consistent with that message, arming and training terrorist groups, establishing a presence in Syria on Israel's doorstep.  This is despite Israel being a nuclear power.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, MattP said:

I think when a country openly has stated it wants the destruction of another for no other reason than the religion of that country it deserves a lot of focus.

 

But hey it's just a bunch of Jews so I don't expect those on the left to care.

As stated above, however, that nation happens to have a rather impressive selection of WMD cultivated over the course of decades - and the assurance that it won't only be Iran or some other aggressors that gets it in the kidneys should it fall.

 

Those Jews, as you put it, are hardly defenceless this time around - and given the past they've every reason not to be.

 

2 minutes ago, breadandcheese said:

It depends on the deterrent effect.  Iran has said for the last thirty years plus that they are committed to destroying Israel and wiping it off the map.  They have been consistent with that message, arming and training terrorist groups, establishing a presence in Syria on Israel's doorstep.  This is despite Israel being a nuclear power.

 

 

"Committed to" - absolutely.

 

"Capable of doing so without destroying themselves and all around them" - not now, not ever.

 

I agree that proliferation in the ME is hardly the best thing going but let's not pretend that the Iranians are stupid enough to collectively wish to go straight to Armageddon. Even the most ridiculous fundies don't believe that in enough numbers (hopefully, anyway).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest FriendlyRam

Guest FriendlyRam

Posted
Posted

Trump supporters cant and wont criticise him so its pointless even debating them imo 

 

He could set off nukes and they'd praise him 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Buce

Buce

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, MattP said:

I think when a country openly has stated it wants the destruction of another for no other reason than the religion of that country it deserves a lot of focus.

 

But hey it's just a bunch of Jews so I don't expect those on the left to care.

 

 

That's a rather simplistic view, Matt, and not entirely accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...