Topic: Chinese geologists say North Korea nuclear test site collapsed, may explain end of program
squeegee started this discussion 8 years ago #74,760
Lol
> The findings come ahead of Friday’s summit between Kim and South Korean President Moon Jae-in, and follow Pyongyang's assertion last week it would halt all missile tests and shut down its main nuclear test site, a move interpreted outside North Korea as an attempt by Kim to strike a conciliatory tone at a time when he has come under White House-led pressure to give up his nuclear weapons program.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/04/26/north-korea-nuclear-test-site-collapses/552974002/
> The findings come ahead of Friday’s summit between Kim and South Korean President Moon Jae-in, and follow Pyongyang's assertion last week it would halt all missile tests and shut down its main nuclear test site, a move interpreted outside North Korea as an attempt by Kim to strike a conciliatory tone at a time when he has come under White House-led pressure to give up his nuclear weapons program.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/04/26/north-korea-nuclear-test-site-collapses/552974002/
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 40 minutes later[^] [v] #884,861
Peace in Korea should net Trump his first Nobel Peace prize.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 8 minutes later, 48 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #884,862
@previous (B)
Well, people have been fraudulently trying to nominate him for a while. At least they can make a case for him being tangentially connected to this issue.
Well, people have been fraudulently trying to nominate him for a while. At least they can make a case for him being tangentially connected to this issue.
Anonymous B replied with this 8 years ago, 22 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #884,863
Meta joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #884,865
@884,861 (B)
Seriously though if Obama got a Nobel Peace Prize for just making some inspirational speeches, Trump should get one for ending the Korean War.
Seriously though if Obama got a Nobel Peace Prize for just making some inspirational speeches, Trump should get one for ending the Korean War.
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #884,869
hilarious if true
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 15 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #884,872
@884,862 (C)
South Korea has already credited his contribution to ending the at war state between the two Koreas
South Korea has already credited his contribution to ending the at war state between the two Koreas
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #884,874
lololol
(Edited 9 seconds later.)
squeegee (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 19 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,885
Anonymous C replied with this 8 years ago, 24 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,895
@884,872 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
Yeah, South Korea said he helped. Great. They're playing international politics and trying to move a peace process forward with everyone on board. It's not like South Korea would have said anything upsetting.
South Korea politely acknowledging Trump doesn't make him personally responsible for a peace that he only started supporting a little while ago. I get it that some people want to spin it that way, but it's a pretty one dimensional view.
Yeah, South Korea said he helped. Great. They're playing international politics and trying to move a peace process forward with everyone on board. It's not like South Korea would have said anything upsetting.
South Korea politely acknowledging Trump doesn't make him personally responsible for a peace that he only started supporting a little while ago. I get it that some people want to spin it that way, but it's a pretty one dimensional view.
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 11 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,901
@previous (C)
They could have said nothing at all.
The quote:
(CNN) South Korea's foreign minister has said she believes President Donald Trump is largely responsible for bringing North Korean leader Kim Jong-un to the negotiating table.
> Speaking ahead of Friday's historic summit between the leaders of North and South Korea, Kang Kyung-wha told CNN that the US President had played a significant role in bringing the two sides together.
> "Clearly, credit goes to President Trump" Kang told CNN's Christiane Amanpour in Seoul. "He's been determined to come to grips with this from day one."
That's a little bigger than just a polite acknowledgement
They could have said nothing at all.
The quote:
(CNN) South Korea's foreign minister has said she believes President Donald Trump is largely responsible for bringing North Korean leader Kim Jong-un to the negotiating table.
> Speaking ahead of Friday's historic summit between the leaders of North and South Korea, Kang Kyung-wha told CNN that the US President had played a significant role in bringing the two sides together.
> "Clearly, credit goes to President Trump" Kang told CNN's Christiane Amanpour in Seoul. "He's been determined to come to grips with this from day one."
That's a little bigger than just a polite acknowledgement
(Edited 28 seconds later.)
Depressionman !iAYoMftFR2 joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,903
@previous (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
The Asians and the Russians are playing Trump. Make no mistake about it. Asians are clever, subtle, and manipulative, while Trump is a blundering child who believes everything he hears.
The Asians and the Russians are playing Trump. Make no mistake about it. Asians are clever, subtle, and manipulative, while Trump is a blundering child who believes everything he hears.
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 13 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,908
squeegee (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 52 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,942
Big Daddy Derek joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,943
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 10 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,951
Anonymous B replied with this 8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,953
Anonymous C replied with this 8 years ago, 1 hour later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,970
@884,901 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
Did he do something I'm not aware of? What was the big, pivotal thing he did?
Did he do something I'm not aware of? What was the big, pivotal thing he did?
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 4 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,974
@previous (C)
I dont know what he did or didn't do and you don't know either. What we do know is that South Korea has said that he played a critical role. So if you don't believe them, that's fine.
I dont know what he did or didn't do and you don't know either. What we do know is that South Korea has said that he played a critical role. So if you don't believe them, that's fine.
Depressionman !iAYoMftFR2 replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,975
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 3 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,978
@previous (Depressionman !iAYoMftFR2)
Even if thats true (which I doubt it is) he has still helped more progress between the Koreas than has happened in decades.
If this had occurred during Obamas presidency, would you gave said that the cunning, little Asians had played him? I doubt it
Even if thats true (which I doubt it is) he has still helped more progress between the Koreas than has happened in decades.
If this had occurred during Obamas presidency, would you gave said that the cunning, little Asians had played him? I doubt it
(Edited 26 seconds later.)
Depressionman !iAYoMftFR2 replied with this 8 years ago, 6 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,983
@previous (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
Why ds\o you think he did it? Do you think a couple of threatening Tweets are responsible for all of this? That is ridiculous. That is literally all he did.
Why ds\o you think he did it? Do you think a couple of threatening Tweets are responsible for all of this? That is ridiculous. That is literally all he did.
Anonymous C replied with this 8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,987
@884,974 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
Four months ago he was having a Twitter fight with North Korea about whose nuclear button was bigger. Saying "he's been determined to come to grips with this from day one" is a nice, diplomatic way of congratulating everyone, but I don't see him as being instrumental in this process.
South Korea just hammered out a trade deal with the US last month, and are somewhat limited in how friendly they can be with North Korea without getting the US fully behind their efforts. I'm sure they'll say all kinds of nice things, and I'm sure Trump will be happy to take credit for whatever he can. I just don't see how he played more than a tangential role in anything going on over there.
Four months ago he was having a Twitter fight with North Korea about whose nuclear button was bigger. Saying "he's been determined to come to grips with this from day one" is a nice, diplomatic way of congratulating everyone, but I don't see him as being instrumental in this process.
South Korea just hammered out a trade deal with the US last month, and are somewhat limited in how friendly they can be with North Korea without getting the US fully behind their efforts. I'm sure they'll say all kinds of nice things, and I'm sure Trump will be happy to take credit for whatever he can. I just don't see how he played more than a tangential role in anything going on over there.
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 38 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,988
@884,983 (Depressionman !iAYoMftFR2)
But you don't know of what backstage conversations took place. As if now, our only evidence is what has happened so far, and the outright statements of the South Korean highers up.
Do you seriously think that South Korea is plotting against us?
But you don't know of what backstage conversations took place. As if now, our only evidence is what has happened so far, and the outright statements of the South Korean highers up.
Do you seriously think that South Korea is plotting against us?
Depressionman !iAYoMftFR2 replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,992
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 23 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,993
@884,987 (C)
You have no idea about what he has done though. They don't advertise every deal made behind closed doors.
Also of course he is happy to take credit, he was given credit! Wtf
You don't have to like him, but don't make up shit to ease your cognitive dissonance.
You have no idea about what he has done though. They don't advertise every deal made behind closed doors.
Also of course he is happy to take credit, he was given credit! Wtf
You don't have to like him, but don't make up shit to ease your cognitive dissonance.
Depressionman !iAYoMftFR2 replied with this 8 years ago, 16 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,994
@884,988 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
No, South Korea needs us, which is why they compliment Trump, knowing that he soaks it up like the psychopath he is. I think NK is playing Trump. Watch: Kim will be right back to nuclear programs after all of this crap.
No, South Korea needs us, which is why they compliment Trump, knowing that he soaks it up like the psychopath he is. I think NK is playing Trump. Watch: Kim will be right back to nuclear programs after all of this crap.
Anonymous C replied with this 8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,995
@884,993 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
I'm doing the opposite of making things up. I want to know what he did. I don't want to have to imagine that he said something at a secret diplomatic meeting that no one was told about.
I'm doing the opposite of making things up. I want to know what he did. I don't want to have to imagine that he said something at a secret diplomatic meeting that no one was told about.
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 17 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,996
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 27 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,997
@884,994 (Depressionman !iAYoMftFR2)
We will just wait and see. What has happened is monumental and didn't occur under any other presidency.
Btw, how will you feel if this turns out well?
We will just wait and see. What has happened is monumental and didn't occur under any other presidency.
Btw, how will you feel if this turns out well?
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 double-posted this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #884,999
@884,995 (C)
You're making stuff up by saying that he had nothing to do with it, when the involved parties claim otherwise
You're making stuff up by saying that he had nothing to do with it, when the involved parties claim otherwise
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 triple-posted this 8 years ago, 6 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,003
@884,995 (C)
@884,994 (Depressionman !iAYoMftFR2)
A question. What proof would you need,in order to believe that Trump played a huge part in this?
@884,994 (Depressionman !iAYoMftFR2)
A question. What proof would you need,in order to believe that Trump played a huge part in this?
Anonymous C replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,004
@884,999 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
I'm saying that I can't see how he was more than tangentially connected to this. Maybe someone can show me what he did that was so awesome. The fact that South Korean diplomats say diplomatic things isn't showing me that.
I'm saying that I can't see how he was more than tangentially connected to this. Maybe someone can show me what he did that was so awesome. The fact that South Korean diplomats say diplomatic things isn't showing me that.
(Edited 23 seconds later.)
Anonymous C double-posted this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,006
@885,003 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
> What proof would you need,in order to believe that Trump played a huge part in this?
Anything. What the fuck did he do?
> What proof would you need,in order to believe that Trump played a huge part in this?
Anything. What the fuck did he do?
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,008
@885,004 (C)
@previous (C)
What would show you? Name some things that would count as proof to you, besides the word of South Koreas president?
@previous (C)
What would show you? Name some things that would count as proof to you, besides the word of South Koreas president?
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 4 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,012
"South Korea is working with Russian hackers! That's why Hillary didn't get credit for this peace deal"
~Matt, Squeegee, anon C
~Matt, Squeegee, anon C
Anonymous C replied with this 8 years ago, 6 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,013
@885,008 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
What role did he play? What did he say and to whom? If you want to give him credit for this, great, but why? Beyond South Korea saying nice things about him, what has he done?
What role did he play? What did he say and to whom? If you want to give him credit for this, great, but why? Beyond South Korea saying nice things about him, what has he done?
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 26 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,014
You too Matt. What would be proof for you?
Anonymous K replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,015
@885,013 (C)
He brokered a peace deal. He used Russian hackers, and South Korean men told their wives to vote for peace.
He brokered a peace deal. He used Russian hackers, and South Korean men told their wives to vote for peace.
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 43 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,016
@885,013 (C)
You didnt answer my question though. What would you accept as proof? Negotiations behind closed doors have likely been going on for months
You didnt answer my question though. What would you accept as proof? Negotiations behind closed doors have likely been going on for months
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 double-posted this 8 years ago, 7 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,019
Btw Matt your response to South Korea crediting Trump, was basically "Asians are sneaky, and untrustworthy". Aren't you supposed to be a progressive?
(Edited 4 minutes later.)
Anonymous K replied with this 8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,021
@previous (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
Trump is working on peace in the Middle East right. The left is already claiming Jews are sneaky, and untrustworthy now. What a world we live in...
Trump is working on peace in the Middle East right. The left is already claiming Jews are sneaky, and untrustworthy now. What a world we live in...
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 56 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,023
Another thing. We don't often see presidents do anything. We see them go places and make statements and give speeches. We never expect to see any of the wheeling and dealing. Why is it different for this president?
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 double-posted this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,024
Anonymous K replied with this 8 years ago, 18 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,025
@885,023 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
Oh, just ignore the fact that the new secretary of state has been in North Korea making this deal. "TRUMP DIDN'T DO IT, HE PLAYS GOLF"
Oh, just ignore the fact that the new secretary of state has been in North Korea making this deal. "TRUMP DIDN'T DO IT, HE PLAYS GOLF"
Meta replied with this 8 years ago, 10 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,027
@885,019 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
> Btw Matt your response to South Korea crediting Trump, was basically "Asians are sneaky, and untrustworthy". Aren't you supposed to be a progressive?
Not only that but he fetishizes Asians ?
> Btw Matt your response to South Korea crediting Trump, was basically "Asians are sneaky, and untrustworthy". Aren't you supposed to be a progressive?
Not only that but he fetishizes Asians ?
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 56 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,028
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 double-posted this 8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,030
@885,027 (Meta)
Families that have been torn apart for decades are going to be reunited but fuck them, those little yellow fellas are sneaky
Families that have been torn apart for decades are going to be reunited but fuck them, those little yellow fellas are sneaky
Anonymous K replied with this 8 years ago, 48 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,031
@885,028 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
inb4 the peace process is moving too slowly after 60+ years of war for lefty libs... Why isn't it just called Korea already, instead of North and South?
inb4 the peace process is moving too slowly after 60+ years of war for lefty libs... Why isn't it just called Korea already, instead of North and South?
Anonymous C replied with this 8 years ago, 36 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,032
@885,016 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
Something that showed his involvement leading to peace overtures? Some kind of causal link maybe? So far, a meeting has taken place between North and South Korea. That's a start. Negotiations between North and South Korea have been going on since January as far as I can tell. The US has played a part. China has played a part. Trade has played a part. The upcoming Olympics have played a part. Sanctions on North Korea have played a part. If you want to say Trump played a big part, then there should be something to point to showing that him or his policies somehow steered geopolitics to get this result. If you had to write a history book and say that Trump brokered peace in Korea, what evidence would you show?
Something that showed his involvement leading to peace overtures? Some kind of causal link maybe? So far, a meeting has taken place between North and South Korea. That's a start. Negotiations between North and South Korea have been going on since January as far as I can tell. The US has played a part. China has played a part. Trade has played a part. The upcoming Olympics have played a part. Sanctions on North Korea have played a part. If you want to say Trump played a big part, then there should be something to point to showing that him or his policies somehow steered geopolitics to get this result. If you had to write a history book and say that Trump brokered peace in Korea, what evidence would you show?
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 4 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,034
@previous (C)
Lets say this. What if by doing this, we stop all sanctions on North Korea. Would you look at that and agree, okay Trump offered to remove sanctions if they stopped war with South Korea? See what I mean?
Regarding the history book, I would write that Donald Trump helped negotiate a deal with North Korea to end the war and open up borders. Would I be able to write everything that he said? Of course not. History books never do!
Lets say this. What if by doing this, we stop all sanctions on North Korea. Would you look at that and agree, okay Trump offered to remove sanctions if they stopped war with South Korea? See what I mean?
Regarding the history book, I would write that Donald Trump helped negotiate a deal with North Korea to end the war and open up borders. Would I be able to write everything that he said? Of course not. History books never do!
Anonymous K replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,035
Anonymous C replied with this 8 years ago, 15 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,042
@885,034 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
I wish Trump luck with North Korea. If Trump's weird brand of loose cannon diplomacy can shake out a change in DPRK policy, then everybody is probably better off for it. I just don't see him as the prime mover in this process. US policy is one factor on the geopolitical stage, and I'm hesitant to rush to praise to a guy who changes direction so often and doesn't appear to have a plan. If peace talks sour, I can easily see Trump saying that he was against it from the start. He's an endless self-promoter.
I'm not really looking for a reason to hate him, but it's going to take more than a diplomatic thank you from South Korea to show that he is responsible for this.
I wish Trump luck with North Korea. If Trump's weird brand of loose cannon diplomacy can shake out a change in DPRK policy, then everybody is probably better off for it. I just don't see him as the prime mover in this process. US policy is one factor on the geopolitical stage, and I'm hesitant to rush to praise to a guy who changes direction so often and doesn't appear to have a plan. If peace talks sour, I can easily see Trump saying that he was against it from the start. He's an endless self-promoter.
I'm not really looking for a reason to hate him, but it's going to take more than a diplomatic thank you from South Korea to show that he is responsible for this.
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,043
@previous (C)
Thats fine. What about my hypothetical scenario with the sanctions? If that were true, would you credit Trump?
Thats fine. What about my hypothetical scenario with the sanctions? If that were true, would you credit Trump?
Anonymous C replied with this 8 years ago, 18 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,046
@previous (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
If Trump pursued a policy that eased tensions, then I would credit Trump with pursuing a policy that successfully eased tensions. Sanctions on North Korea aren't really a US-only issue though. So far, Trump has really doubled down on US economic sanctions against North Korea and sought support from other nations in that effort. That's not a new policy, but he's taken a bit further since he's been in office. If he can work out some kind of carrot and stick approach because of that, then good for him. Credit where credit is due. If he pursues peace and succeeds, then he should get credit for doing that.
It's harder to say that he's pursuing peace when he was talking about being tough on North Korea only a few months ago. That's why I think saying Trump is behind this is a little doubtful. But if he rides the wave of good relations to ease tensions, then great! That will be quite a feather in his cap.
If Trump pursued a policy that eased tensions, then I would credit Trump with pursuing a policy that successfully eased tensions. Sanctions on North Korea aren't really a US-only issue though. So far, Trump has really doubled down on US economic sanctions against North Korea and sought support from other nations in that effort. That's not a new policy, but he's taken a bit further since he's been in office. If he can work out some kind of carrot and stick approach because of that, then good for him. Credit where credit is due. If he pursues peace and succeeds, then he should get credit for doing that.
It's harder to say that he's pursuing peace when he was talking about being tough on North Korea only a few months ago. That's why I think saying Trump is behind this is a little doubtful. But if he rides the wave of good relations to ease tensions, then great! That will be quite a feather in his cap.
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 4 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,047
@previous (C)
Good you now sound reasonable.
All I'm hoping for is the closure of all generational labor camps and internet for all residents.
Good you now sound reasonable.
All I'm hoping for is the closure of all generational labor camps and internet for all residents.
Anonymous K replied with this 8 years ago, 2 seconds later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,048
Anonymous K double-posted this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,049
@885,047 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
Closing labor camps absolutely yes, but internet is probably not their first priority.
Closing labor camps absolutely yes, but internet is probably not their first priority.
Anonymous C replied with this 8 years ago, 20 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,051
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 3 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,052
squeegee (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 1 hour later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,062
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 36 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,070
@previous (squeegee)
Do you mean the "Panmunjom Declaration for Peace, Prosperity and Unification of the Korean Peninsula"?
Do you mean the "Panmunjom Declaration for Peace, Prosperity and Unification of the Korean Peninsula"?
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 1 hour later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,079
All these liberal tears are soooo delicious...nom nom nom..
Anonymous K replied with this 8 years ago, 2 hours later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,086
@885,052 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
I think that there might be a need to stop a mass exodus from North to South, because there is really good internet in South Korea.
This problem is terrible and is totally Donald Trumps fault though.
I think that there might be a need to stop a mass exodus from North to South, because there is really good internet in South Korea.
This problem is terrible and is totally Donald Trumps fault though.
Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 37 seconds later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,087
lol
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 5 hours later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,124
Syntax joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 22 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,125
Meta replied with this 8 years ago, 21 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,130
@885,030 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)I think he's secretly a bit racist.
@884,987 (C)
> a Twitter fight with North Korea about whose nuclear button was bigger. Saying "he's been determined to come to grips with this from day one" is a nice, diplomatic way of congratulating everyone, but I don't see him as being instrumental in this process.
What if Trump's bombastic, loose cannon communication style was more suited to talking to Kim Jong Un than Obama's measured subtle coolness?
North Korean diplomacy isn't exactly subtle. They're always threatening to annihilate the US and/or South Korea and Japan in a lake of fire. What if Trump's tweets about "my rocket is bigger than yours" is him just speaking Kim's language? It sounds shocking to us but Jong Un grew up from birth steeped in this kind of discourse.
Syntax replied with this 8 years ago, 7 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,133
@previous (Meta)
Out of Curiosity/Research (FatFuck) calls it stalking - I just looked up Restaurants in North Korea. They do have a few but only for the tourists and most are in hotels for tourists only. No North Koreans are going to line up at the border so they can rush in to view In n Out showing them the potato cause all but a few are starving to death and have no money for even a single burger.
Kim Jong Un may have a bigger IQ than Trump. Must be pissing off Trump who realizes he has everything to lose and Kim has nothing to lose except a chance to taste extra crispy fries.
Found a disgusting example of how North Koreans cook fresh live clams.
Out of Curiosity/Research (FatFuck) calls it stalking - I just looked up Restaurants in North Korea. They do have a few but only for the tourists and most are in hotels for tourists only. No North Koreans are going to line up at the border so they can rush in to view In n Out showing them the potato cause all but a few are starving to death and have no money for even a single burger.
Kim Jong Un may have a bigger IQ than Trump. Must be pissing off Trump who realizes he has everything to lose and Kim has nothing to lose except a chance to taste extra crispy fries.
Found a disgusting example of how North Koreans cook fresh live clams.
(Edited 27 seconds later.)
Syntax double-posted this 8 years ago, 3 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,134
@884,903 (Depressionman !iAYoMftFR2)
> Make no mistake about it. Asians are clever, subtle, and manipulative
Still grinds your gears how dem Asians payed you a minimum wage to teach English and forced you to eat garbage and manipulated you to brag about and wrapped your brain so you still do.
> Make no mistake about it. Asians are clever, subtle, and manipulative
Still grinds your gears how dem Asians payed you a minimum wage to teach English and forced you to eat garbage and manipulated you to brag about and wrapped your brain so you still do.
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 53 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,149
Syntax replied with this 8 years ago, 13 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #885,154
@previous (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
Yea Exactly Amazing how Chinese recycle sewage for food use and North Korea cooks the live critters with raw Gas by pouring it over the clams. I had on clue until 2day -
At the beach where I live people dig for clams at night and light fires with charcoal under rocks. They simply lay the live clams on the rocks and wait until they pop open and grab and eat away. One wood think them North Koreans wood get more smart as my locals are.
Yea Exactly Amazing how Chinese recycle sewage for food use and North Korea cooks the live critters with raw Gas by pouring it over the clams. I had on clue until 2day -
At the beach where I live people dig for clams at night and light fires with charcoal under rocks. They simply lay the live clams on the rocks and wait until they pop open and grab and eat away. One wood think them North Koreans wood get more smart as my locals are.
Anonymous C replied with this 8 years ago, 3 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,230
@885,130 (Meta)
> What if Trump's bombastic, loose cannon communication style was more suited to talking to Kim Jong Un than Obama's measured subtle coolness?
Yeah, I started going down that path @885,042 (C) too. Maybe Kim Jong Un needed to meet another bully on the playground and be acknowledged on his own terms? It's a nice story to tell with the benefit of hindsight, but I have no idea if that was the right or sanest thing to do. Would North Korea have actually risked a military strike and retaliation or were they just pushing the envelope a little to see how the international community would react? Was it calculated saber rattling to save a little face before serious diplomatic overtures? If North Korea was all bluster, then a Hillary Clinton or a Ted Cruz would probably have arrived at the same place. If North Korea was serious, then I have trouble seeing how Trump did anything to talk them down. I'm glad they didn't nuke Hawaii for Christmas, but I'm skeptical as to whether Trump's taunting helped or just made us a convenient target for threats.
My hope is that Kim Jong Un is starting to step out of his dad's shadow and entertain his own ideas about how to run his country. It looks like he followed his father's template from 2011 on and started to realize it kind of sucked. Maybe Kim Jong Un will find Trump's similar temperament easier to interact with than the reserved calm that most world leaders show. Maybe it'll help them find some common ground. Here's hoping.
> What if Trump's bombastic, loose cannon communication style was more suited to talking to Kim Jong Un than Obama's measured subtle coolness?
Yeah, I started going down that path @885,042 (C) too. Maybe Kim Jong Un needed to meet another bully on the playground and be acknowledged on his own terms? It's a nice story to tell with the benefit of hindsight, but I have no idea if that was the right or sanest thing to do. Would North Korea have actually risked a military strike and retaliation or were they just pushing the envelope a little to see how the international community would react? Was it calculated saber rattling to save a little face before serious diplomatic overtures? If North Korea was all bluster, then a Hillary Clinton or a Ted Cruz would probably have arrived at the same place. If North Korea was serious, then I have trouble seeing how Trump did anything to talk them down. I'm glad they didn't nuke Hawaii for Christmas, but I'm skeptical as to whether Trump's taunting helped or just made us a convenient target for threats.
My hope is that Kim Jong Un is starting to step out of his dad's shadow and entertain his own ideas about how to run his country. It looks like he followed his father's template from 2011 on and started to realize it kind of sucked. Maybe Kim Jong Un will find Trump's similar temperament easier to interact with than the reserved calm that most world leaders show. Maybe it'll help them find some common ground. Here's hoping.
Anonymous P joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 36 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,251
@885,008 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
> What would show you? Name some things that would count as proof to you, besides the word of South Koreas president?
lol. literally anything
> What would show you? Name some things that would count as proof to you, besides the word of South Koreas president?
lol. literally anything
Anonymous P double-posted this 8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,252
@885,034 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
> I would write that Donald Trump helped negotiate a deal with North Korea to end the war and open up borders.
In what capacity? We don't know. I don't see the point of this argument
or this history book hypothetical
lol
> I would write that Donald Trump helped negotiate a deal with North Korea to end the war and open up borders.
In what capacity? We don't know. I don't see the point of this argument
or this history book hypothetical
lol
Anonymous B replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,253
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 53 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,280
@885,251 (P)
Saying literally anything means nothing though. South Korea saying that Trump helped is "anything" but it wasn't enough for you.
What would be enough?
Saying literally anything means nothing though. South Korea saying that Trump helped is "anything" but it wasn't enough for you.
What would be enough?
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 double-posted this 8 years ago, 31 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,281
Anonymous P replied with this 8 years ago, 3 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,351
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,354
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 double-posted this 8 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,377
New info:
Full Text of the Blue House announcement.
Speaker: Yoon Young-chan, Senior Secretary to the President for Public Communication
There are two things to announce today.
First, Public disclosure of the closing of North Korean nuclear test facility
North Korea's chairman Kim Jong Un, at the inter-Korean summit with president Moon held on 27th at the Southern side of Panmunjom's Peace House, has said that Northern nuclear test facility will be closed in May and that to transparently disclose it to the international community the S.Korean and American experts and media will be invited to N.Korea soon. Chairman Kim expressed this at the morning session of the summit with president Moon and said, "Some say that we are closing the ones that is unusable. They will know when they come and see that we have two bigger tunnels than the current test facilities and they are very much up and well."
President Moon has immediately welcomed chairman Kim's plan to disclose N.Korean nuclear test facilities and the both leaders have agreed to decide on the timing of the inviting the S.Korean and the US experts and media as soon as N.Korea is ready.
Chairman Kim's announcement of plans to close the nuclear test facilities and disclose the closure is an expression of his will to proactively engage the soon to follow discussion on verifying N.Korean nukes.
Chairman Kim also said, "Though the US has an innate dislike of N.Korea, once they talk with us, they will know that I'm not the kind of person to launch nuke towards the South or over the Pacific or target the US. If we meet often in the future and build trust with the US and if the end of war and non-aggression is promised, then why would we live in difficulty with the nukes?"
Chairman Kim continued, "We will not repeat the painful history of the Korean war. There must not be another instance of spilling blood on our common land of our people. I affirm that there will never be the using of violence."
Chairman Kim said that there needs to be an effective measure to systematically manage and prevent an accidental military clashes or the risk of expanding to a war which are the problem.
Second, Unifying Pyongyang standard time to Seoul standard time.
Chairman Kim expressed his position to fit Pyongyang standard time to Seoul standard time, which is 30 minutes behind. In the afternoon of the 27th at the talks between the leaders and their first ladies, Chairman Kim has said, "In the reception room of the Peace House there were two clocks. One pointed at the Seoul time and the other pointed at Pyongyang's. Seeing this, I was very saddened. Let's unite the inter-Korean time first." Chairman Kim said, "We have changed the time standard that we used to share, so we will return to how it was. You may disclose this publicly."
Uniting the standard time is a difficult measure that carries many administrative difficulties and cost within N.Korea. The fact that chairman Kim has decided thus carries significance that they are stepping up actively to join the international community and it was a decision to remove the obstacles on the path to inter-Korean and NK-US exchange and cooperation that are to come.
Full Text of the Blue House announcement.
Speaker: Yoon Young-chan, Senior Secretary to the President for Public Communication
There are two things to announce today.
First, Public disclosure of the closing of North Korean nuclear test facility
North Korea's chairman Kim Jong Un, at the inter-Korean summit with president Moon held on 27th at the Southern side of Panmunjom's Peace House, has said that Northern nuclear test facility will be closed in May and that to transparently disclose it to the international community the S.Korean and American experts and media will be invited to N.Korea soon. Chairman Kim expressed this at the morning session of the summit with president Moon and said, "Some say that we are closing the ones that is unusable. They will know when they come and see that we have two bigger tunnels than the current test facilities and they are very much up and well."
President Moon has immediately welcomed chairman Kim's plan to disclose N.Korean nuclear test facilities and the both leaders have agreed to decide on the timing of the inviting the S.Korean and the US experts and media as soon as N.Korea is ready.
Chairman Kim's announcement of plans to close the nuclear test facilities and disclose the closure is an expression of his will to proactively engage the soon to follow discussion on verifying N.Korean nukes.
Chairman Kim also said, "Though the US has an innate dislike of N.Korea, once they talk with us, they will know that I'm not the kind of person to launch nuke towards the South or over the Pacific or target the US. If we meet often in the future and build trust with the US and if the end of war and non-aggression is promised, then why would we live in difficulty with the nukes?"
Chairman Kim continued, "We will not repeat the painful history of the Korean war. There must not be another instance of spilling blood on our common land of our people. I affirm that there will never be the using of violence."
Chairman Kim said that there needs to be an effective measure to systematically manage and prevent an accidental military clashes or the risk of expanding to a war which are the problem.
Second, Unifying Pyongyang standard time to Seoul standard time.
Chairman Kim expressed his position to fit Pyongyang standard time to Seoul standard time, which is 30 minutes behind. In the afternoon of the 27th at the talks between the leaders and their first ladies, Chairman Kim has said, "In the reception room of the Peace House there were two clocks. One pointed at the Seoul time and the other pointed at Pyongyang's. Seeing this, I was very saddened. Let's unite the inter-Korean time first." Chairman Kim said, "We have changed the time standard that we used to share, so we will return to how it was. You may disclose this publicly."
Uniting the standard time is a difficult measure that carries many administrative difficulties and cost within N.Korea. The fact that chairman Kim has decided thus carries significance that they are stepping up actively to join the international community and it was a decision to remove the obstacles on the path to inter-Korean and NK-US exchange and cooperation that are to come.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Sheila LaBoof joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 22 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,378
PENIS PENIS PENIS
Anonymous C replied with this 8 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,379
@885,377 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
> "Some say that we are closing the ones that is unusable. They will know when they come and see that we have two bigger tunnels than the current test facilities and they are very much up and well."
So some may have become unusable, but they have others?
> "We will not repeat the painful history of the Korean war. There must not be another instance of spilling blood on our common land of our people. I affirm that there will never be the using of violence."
That's a hopeful message. Sounds like he's interested in helping unite the Korean people. Hope that works. It'll be interesting to see how Internet and an open press fits in with that plan.
> "Some say that we are closing the ones that is unusable. They will know when they come and see that we have two bigger tunnels than the current test facilities and they are very much up and well."
So some may have become unusable, but they have others?
> "We will not repeat the painful history of the Korean war. There must not be another instance of spilling blood on our common land of our people. I affirm that there will never be the using of violence."
That's a hopeful message. Sounds like he's interested in helping unite the Korean people. Hope that works. It'll be interesting to see how Internet and an open press fits in with that plan.
Anonymous M replied with this 8 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,380
OUR PRESIDENT HELPED TO UNITE THE KOREAN PEOPLES..
Trump in 2020...Making the world great..
Trump in 2020...Making the world great..
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Sheila LaBoof replied with this 8 years ago, 21 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,383
what's with all the letters of the alphabet showing up in Anonymous's posts
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 9 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,434
@885,379 (C)
From what I've heard, he has two more working facilities
I'm pretty optimistic. Kim Jong un had a Western education, unlike his father and grandfather. So I feel like it has given him a different way of thinking.
From what I've heard, he has two more working facilities
I'm pretty optimistic. Kim Jong un had a Western education, unlike his father and grandfather. So I feel like it has given him a different way of thinking.
Anonymous R joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 39 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,445
liberals when a peace treaty is signed; still part of obama's legacy
liberals when no peace treaty is signed; trump fucked up again
liberals when no peace treaty is signed; trump fucked up again
squeegee (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,462
@previous (R)
It's a sure thing the way red hats are talking. Trump would have to screw up pretty bigly to fuck this up.
It's a sure thing the way red hats are talking. Trump would have to screw up pretty bigly to fuck this up.
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 43 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,474
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 double-posted this 8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,475
Also North Korea still has two functioning nuclear test sites that they will be closing under South Korean and American scrutiny.
Quote: Full Text of the Blue House announcement.
Speaker: Yoon Young-chan, Senior Secretary to the President for Public Communication
There are two things to announce today.
First, Public disclosure of the closing of North Korean nuclear test facility
North Korea's chairman Kim Jong Un, at the inter-Korean summit with president Moon held on 27th at the Southern side of Panmunjom's Peace House, has said that Northern nuclear test facility will be closed in May and that to transparently disclose it to the international community the S.Korean and American experts and media will be invited to N.Korea soon. Chairman Kim expressed this at the morning session of the summit with president Moon and said, "Some say that we are closing the ones that is unusable. They will know when they come and see that we have two bigger tunnels than the current test facilities and they are functioning and well."
President Moon has immediately welcomed chairman Kim's plan to disclose N.Korean nuclear test facilities and the both leaders have agreed to decide on the timing of the inviting the S.Korean and the US experts and media as soon as N.Korea is ready.
Chairman Kim's announcement of plans to close the nuclear test facilities and disclose the closure is an expression of his will to proactively engage the soon to follow discussion on verifying N.Korean nukes.
Chairman Kim also said, "Though the US has an innate dislike of N.Korea, once they talk with us, they will know that I'm not the kind of person to launch nuke towards the South or over the Pacific or target the US. If we meet often in the future and build trust with the US and if the end of war and non-aggression is promised, then why would we live in difficulty with the nukes?"
Chairman Kim continued, "We will not repeat the painful history of the Korean war. There must not be another instance of spilling blood on our common land of our people. I affirm that there will never be the using of violence."
Chairman Kim said that there needs to be an effective measure to systematically manage and prevent an accidental military clashes or the risk of expanding to a war which are the problem.
Second, Unifying Pyongyang standard time to Seoul standard time.
Chairman Kim expressed his position to fit Pyongyang standard time to Seoul standard time, which is 30 minutes behind. In the afternoon of the 27th at the talks between the leaders and their first ladies, Chairman Kim has said, "In the reception room of the Peace House there were two clocks. One pointed at the Seoul time and the other pointed at Pyongyang's. Seeing this, I was very saddened. Let's unite the inter-Korean time first." Chairman Kim said, "We have changed the time standard that we used to share, so we will return to how it was. You may disclose this publicly."
Uniting the standard time is a difficult measure that carries many administrative difficulties and cost within N.Korea. The fact that chairman Kim has decided thus carries significance that they are stepping up actively to join the international community and it was a decision to remove the obstacles on the path to inter-Korean and NK-US exchange and cooperation that are to come.
Quote: Full Text of the Blue House announcement.
Speaker: Yoon Young-chan, Senior Secretary to the President for Public Communication
There are two things to announce today.
First, Public disclosure of the closing of North Korean nuclear test facility
North Korea's chairman Kim Jong Un, at the inter-Korean summit with president Moon held on 27th at the Southern side of Panmunjom's Peace House, has said that Northern nuclear test facility will be closed in May and that to transparently disclose it to the international community the S.Korean and American experts and media will be invited to N.Korea soon. Chairman Kim expressed this at the morning session of the summit with president Moon and said, "Some say that we are closing the ones that is unusable. They will know when they come and see that we have two bigger tunnels than the current test facilities and they are functioning and well."
President Moon has immediately welcomed chairman Kim's plan to disclose N.Korean nuclear test facilities and the both leaders have agreed to decide on the timing of the inviting the S.Korean and the US experts and media as soon as N.Korea is ready.
Chairman Kim's announcement of plans to close the nuclear test facilities and disclose the closure is an expression of his will to proactively engage the soon to follow discussion on verifying N.Korean nukes.
Chairman Kim also said, "Though the US has an innate dislike of N.Korea, once they talk with us, they will know that I'm not the kind of person to launch nuke towards the South or over the Pacific or target the US. If we meet often in the future and build trust with the US and if the end of war and non-aggression is promised, then why would we live in difficulty with the nukes?"
Chairman Kim continued, "We will not repeat the painful history of the Korean war. There must not be another instance of spilling blood on our common land of our people. I affirm that there will never be the using of violence."
Chairman Kim said that there needs to be an effective measure to systematically manage and prevent an accidental military clashes or the risk of expanding to a war which are the problem.
Second, Unifying Pyongyang standard time to Seoul standard time.
Chairman Kim expressed his position to fit Pyongyang standard time to Seoul standard time, which is 30 minutes behind. In the afternoon of the 27th at the talks between the leaders and their first ladies, Chairman Kim has said, "In the reception room of the Peace House there were two clocks. One pointed at the Seoul time and the other pointed at Pyongyang's. Seeing this, I was very saddened. Let's unite the inter-Korean time first." Chairman Kim said, "We have changed the time standard that we used to share, so we will return to how it was. You may disclose this publicly."
Uniting the standard time is a difficult measure that carries many administrative difficulties and cost within N.Korea. The fact that chairman Kim has decided thus carries significance that they are stepping up actively to join the international community and it was a decision to remove the obstacles on the path to inter-Korean and NK-US exchange and cooperation that are to come.
Anonymous R replied with this 8 years ago, 11 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,480
@885,474 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
wearing a maga cap will get you verbally and psychically attacked
its amazing how intolerant those self professed tolerant liberals are
only tolerant to views they agree with, no dissenting voices allowed
wearing a maga cap will get you verbally and psychically attacked
its amazing how intolerant those self professed tolerant liberals are
only tolerant to views they agree with, no dissenting voices allowed
squeegee (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,481
@previous (R)
Oh, dissenting voices are allowed. And so is criticism of it. Free speech works both ways. Maga.
Oh, dissenting voices are allowed. And so is criticism of it. Free speech works both ways. Maga.
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,484
Anonymous R replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,485
@885,481 (squeegee)
ah, so campuses banning people from speaking because some students could be hurt or offended by it are not impeding free speech
i see, i see
ah, so campuses banning people from speaking because some students could be hurt or offended by it are not impeding free speech
i see, i see
squeegee (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,486
squeegee (OP) double-posted this 8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,489
@885,484 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
What's distressing is that there isn't recognition that this happens on both sides. People with liberal views get unfairly characterized as socialist and there are plenty of examples of liberals being attacked and threatened for having liberal views. You say we don't need an us vs them mentality but look, you're one of the biggest offenders.
What's distressing is that there isn't recognition that this happens on both sides. People with liberal views get unfairly characterized as socialist and there are plenty of examples of liberals being attacked and threatened for having liberal views. You say we don't need an us vs them mentality but look, you're one of the biggest offenders.
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 40 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,491
Meta replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,492
@885,230 (C)
All I know is the previous Clinton-Bush-Obama style of negotiation doesn't seem to have worked.
I wonder if some sort of amnesty deal for the Kim clan could be worked out. Where in exchange for them stepping down America guarantees their personal safety, forgives everything they did in the past, and puts them up in Switzerland or China or something with a $100,000,000 a year allowance (less than 1/10th the cost of defending South Korea from North Korea)
All I know is the previous Clinton-Bush-Obama style of negotiation doesn't seem to have worked.
I wonder if some sort of amnesty deal for the Kim clan could be worked out. Where in exchange for them stepping down America guarantees their personal safety, forgives everything they did in the past, and puts them up in Switzerland or China or something with a $100,000,000 a year allowance (less than 1/10th the cost of defending South Korea from North Korea)
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 19 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,493
I guess I'll have to come out and state this.
I don't hate liberals and I wish them no harm
I don't hate liberals and I wish them no harm
Anonymous R replied with this 8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,494
@885,486 (squeegee)
its not about if its the govt or not, and please spare me the legalities
its about campuses famous for their free speech do these things now
but you're fine with that because you don't agree with the speakers
i guess you're not a free speech support, which is fine
its not about if its the govt or not, and please spare me the legalities
its about campuses famous for their free speech do these things now
but you're fine with that because you don't agree with the speakers
i guess you're not a free speech support, which is fine
Anonymous R double-posted this 8 years ago, 12 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,495
@885,484 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
the left can't even get it out of their mouths that antifa is violent and are the true fascists
their intellectual honesty and hypocrisy is mind blowing
like facebook and twitter and google can ban conservatives because they're private companies
yet a privately owned christian bakery can't refuse to bake a cake for a gay wedding
both can not be true at the same time, either private company can do what they want or they can't
its sad when facts and logic are less important than feelings and preventing people from being hurt or upset
the left can't even get it out of their mouths that antifa is violent and are the true fascists
their intellectual honesty and hypocrisy is mind blowing
like facebook and twitter and google can ban conservatives because they're private companies
yet a privately owned christian bakery can't refuse to bake a cake for a gay wedding
both can not be true at the same time, either private company can do what they want or they can't
its sad when facts and logic are less important than feelings and preventing people from being hurt or upset
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,499
squeegee joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 11 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,504
@885,491 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
because you buy into every piece of fear mongering about liberals every single time. whether it's the transexual panic or liberal college professors corrupting the youth you buy it all and everything else. you call the left corrupt and use that as a reason to question anything from a liberal, but if it's a conservative who's corrupt you use whataboutism to try and normalize them, "oh, the left is just as bad." you show a super clear bias, and you stand there and try and act like you're not one of the most partisan people here!
@previous (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
no shit you completely agree, this is more conservative fear mongering. If i were to show you the examples from the right where conservatives are violent, hypocritical and violated the rights of people then you'd dismiss it and say THE LEFT IS JUST AS BAD. you pretend that you're not hyper partisan, kook, but you believe any fringe conspiracy that's aimed at "liberals." i don't know how you can sit there and pretend like you don't cultivate an us vs. them environment.
because you buy into every piece of fear mongering about liberals every single time. whether it's the transexual panic or liberal college professors corrupting the youth you buy it all and everything else. you call the left corrupt and use that as a reason to question anything from a liberal, but if it's a conservative who's corrupt you use whataboutism to try and normalize them, "oh, the left is just as bad." you show a super clear bias, and you stand there and try and act like you're not one of the most partisan people here!
@previous (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
no shit you completely agree, this is more conservative fear mongering. If i were to show you the examples from the right where conservatives are violent, hypocritical and violated the rights of people then you'd dismiss it and say THE LEFT IS JUST AS BAD. you pretend that you're not hyper partisan, kook, but you believe any fringe conspiracy that's aimed at "liberals." i don't know how you can sit there and pretend like you don't cultivate an us vs. them environment.
squeegee double-posted this 8 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,505
calling people red hats is cultivating an us vs. them mentality but calling liberals the true fascists is something you completely agree with. you believe every stereotype about "liberals" down to the feel-feel special snowflake nonsense. there's never been a more special snowflake than the one in the white house.
Anonymous R replied with this 8 years ago, 10 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,510
@885,504 (squeegee)like what part of my post is fear mongering?
why don't you refute my post point by point instead of just saying something without any arguments
also the way you write implies we automatically agree with conservaties using violence or boycotting, i dont
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous R double-posted this 8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,512
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,515
@885,504 (squeegee)
I dont believe everything that I hear about both sides. I do see a liberal bias in the media though and what feels like people being apologists for bad behavior while also claiming to be the progressive good guys.
I don't demonize liberals, or wish them harm, or call them things like libtards.
I also dont love Donald Trump. I hate him as I hate all politicians.
I dont believe everything that I hear about both sides. I do see a liberal bias in the media though and what feels like people being apologists for bad behavior while also claiming to be the progressive good guys.
I don't demonize liberals, or wish them harm, or call them things like libtards.
I also dont love Donald Trump. I hate him as I hate all politicians.
Anonymous R replied with this 8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,516
@previous (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)i think there's a more recent study but i can't find it
https://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-donald-trumps-first-100-days/
squeegee replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,517
@885,495 (R)
> the left can't even get it out of their mouths that antifa is violent and are the true fascists
you say "the left" and then attribute some belief to all of them.
> their intellectual honesty and hypocrisy is mind blowing
ad-hominem
> like facebook and twitter and google can ban conservatives because they're private companies
> yet a privately owned christian bakery can't refuse to bake a cake for a gay wedding
> both can not be true at the same time, either private company can do what they want or they can't
> its sad when facts and logic are less important than feelings and preventing people from being hurt or upset
attributing a single belief to the entirety of all liberals based on absolutely nothing but a fear mongering statement implying liberals want to take freedom of speech from conservatives, and, the attributing the special snowflake stereotype to all liberals at the same time.
typical liberal fearmongering. there's not much to refute, since you blanket attribute these beliefs across all democrats. it's a gish-gallop, it's meaningless, and it's as you say intellectually dishonest. which makes you a hypocrite.
> the left can't even get it out of their mouths that antifa is violent and are the true fascists
you say "the left" and then attribute some belief to all of them.
> their intellectual honesty and hypocrisy is mind blowing
ad-hominem
> like facebook and twitter and google can ban conservatives because they're private companies
> yet a privately owned christian bakery can't refuse to bake a cake for a gay wedding
> both can not be true at the same time, either private company can do what they want or they can't
> its sad when facts and logic are less important than feelings and preventing people from being hurt or upset
attributing a single belief to the entirety of all liberals based on absolutely nothing but a fear mongering statement implying liberals want to take freedom of speech from conservatives, and, the attributing the special snowflake stereotype to all liberals at the same time.
typical liberal fearmongering. there's not much to refute, since you blanket attribute these beliefs across all democrats. it's a gish-gallop, it's meaningless, and it's as you say intellectually dishonest. which makes you a hypocrite.
Anonymous R replied with this 8 years ago, 19 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,518
@885,515 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
> I hate him as I hate all politicians.
i like you
but i do love trump for his trolling abilities, sorry
> I hate him as I hate all politicians.
i like you
but i do love trump for his trolling abilities, sorry
Anonymous R double-posted this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,519
@885,517 (squeegee)
you didn't even address anything
lets keep it simple; is a christian bakery allowed to refuse to bake a cake to a customer for whatever reason?
you didn't even address anything
lets keep it simple; is a christian bakery allowed to refuse to bake a cake to a customer for whatever reason?
squeegee replied with this 8 years ago, 23 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,528
@previous (R)
see, what you're doing here is wanting me to stand up and speak for all "liberals" by asking me this line of questioning. my personal opinion on the matter isn't going to impact the legal questions about this matter that have been ongoing with the courts for years, nor will my opinion have any impact of your characterization of liberals, you'll try and use me to discredit "the left" by first blanket attributing a single belief and then use my opinion to either call me hypocritical or call the left fascist. you're taking a very small number of incidents and court cases and tried to elevate it to become a central column of "liberalism" the same way you'd characterize a small number of college campuses cancelling speeches as "the left" censoring freedom of speech.
personal opinion, private businesses are free to associate with whatever customers they see fit, unless they violate a small set of specific rules like discrimination. unfortunately discrimination can be arguable in some cases because the laws related to this are argued to cover specific classes rather than offer blanket protection, which means if those groups aren't specifically mentioned then discrimination may be legal. to fix this, it will eventually be necessary for courts to either further extend protections, or, ultimately agree that discrimination in these cases is legal. i would prefer to see less discrimination, and require businesses to associate with more customers than their more narrow perspectives may allow for.
that being said, if protections were offered to people with political beliefs such that discriminating against them would be illegal, would you agree that the same protections should be applied to people's sexual orientations? because i do agree that if it should be illegal to discriminate based on sexual orientation it should also be illegal to discriminate based on political orientation. i'm not sure why that's even a question, to be honest.
see, what you're doing here is wanting me to stand up and speak for all "liberals" by asking me this line of questioning. my personal opinion on the matter isn't going to impact the legal questions about this matter that have been ongoing with the courts for years, nor will my opinion have any impact of your characterization of liberals, you'll try and use me to discredit "the left" by first blanket attributing a single belief and then use my opinion to either call me hypocritical or call the left fascist. you're taking a very small number of incidents and court cases and tried to elevate it to become a central column of "liberalism" the same way you'd characterize a small number of college campuses cancelling speeches as "the left" censoring freedom of speech.
personal opinion, private businesses are free to associate with whatever customers they see fit, unless they violate a small set of specific rules like discrimination. unfortunately discrimination can be arguable in some cases because the laws related to this are argued to cover specific classes rather than offer blanket protection, which means if those groups aren't specifically mentioned then discrimination may be legal. to fix this, it will eventually be necessary for courts to either further extend protections, or, ultimately agree that discrimination in these cases is legal. i would prefer to see less discrimination, and require businesses to associate with more customers than their more narrow perspectives may allow for.
that being said, if protections were offered to people with political beliefs such that discriminating against them would be illegal, would you agree that the same protections should be applied to people's sexual orientations? because i do agree that if it should be illegal to discriminate based on sexual orientation it should also be illegal to discriminate based on political orientation. i'm not sure why that's even a question, to be honest.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous R replied with this 8 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #885,532
@previous (squeegee)
i believe private business and website can do whatever they want
twitter can ban anyone they want and a bakery can refuse any customer they want
you believe sort of the same except for things that could be discrimination
but you also know thats open to anything; the gay person can argue they been discriminated against just like the conservative can
maybe you just want more lawsuits, i don't know
> see, what you're doing here is wanting me to stand up and speak for all "liberals" by asking me this line of questioning.
such bs, you're assuming things and filling in what i meant or or tried to say
if true then please tell me where i said i expect you speak for all X or Y people?
> this line of questioning
i guess i'll just ignore you form now on
you present no arguments and put words into people's mouth
a very dishonest way to have discourse
enjoy your internet "win" though
i believe private business and website can do whatever they want
twitter can ban anyone they want and a bakery can refuse any customer they want
you believe sort of the same except for things that could be discrimination
but you also know thats open to anything; the gay person can argue they been discriminated against just like the conservative can
maybe you just want more lawsuits, i don't know
> see, what you're doing here is wanting me to stand up and speak for all "liberals" by asking me this line of questioning.
such bs, you're assuming things and filling in what i meant or or tried to say
if true then please tell me where i said i expect you speak for all X or Y people?
> this line of questioning
i guess i'll just ignore you form now on
you present no arguments and put words into people's mouth
a very dishonest way to have discourse
enjoy your internet "win" though
squeegee replied with this 8 years ago, 14 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #885,541
@previous (R)
typical. lose an argument, call the person dishonest. i'll just point out that you're the one attributing "wins" here, not me. and where do you get off claiming that i must "want more lawsuits" and then claim i'm the one putting words in people's mouths. lol. talk about "dishonest." you're going to ignore me because i see through your bullshit and you know it.
and also, discrimination isn't open to anything, it's actually a very specific set of rules covering narrowly defined classes of people under specific circumstances. otherwise we wouldn't be having these kinds of conversations. these protections are not extended to all categories of people. nor should they be.
typical. lose an argument, call the person dishonest. i'll just point out that you're the one attributing "wins" here, not me. and where do you get off claiming that i must "want more lawsuits" and then claim i'm the one putting words in people's mouths. lol. talk about "dishonest." you're going to ignore me because i see through your bullshit and you know it.
and also, discrimination isn't open to anything, it's actually a very specific set of rules covering narrowly defined classes of people under specific circumstances. otherwise we wouldn't be having these kinds of conversations. these protections are not extended to all categories of people. nor should they be.
(Edited 4 minutes later.)
Anonymous C replied with this 8 years ago, 11 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #885,555
@885,492 (Meta)
> I wonder if some sort of amnesty deal for the Kim clan could be worked out. Where in exchange for them stepping down America guarantees their personal safety, forgives everything they did in the past, and puts them up in Switzerland or China or something with a $100,000,000 a year allowance (less than 1/10th the cost of defending South Korea from North Korea)
Just a happy retirement from political life? I don't know if they'd buy it. It might work. It's either a cost-saving solution to bring about peace or coddling murders and enemies of democracy by paying them off with hard earned tax dollars. I guess that'll depend on who is in office at the time.
The peace process, if it goes forward, will probably be slower. I would guess that Kim takes his cues from the Putins and Medvedevs of the world. I'm sure they could gradually embrace capitalism while setting themselves up as plutocrats down the road.
> I wonder if some sort of amnesty deal for the Kim clan could be worked out. Where in exchange for them stepping down America guarantees their personal safety, forgives everything they did in the past, and puts them up in Switzerland or China or something with a $100,000,000 a year allowance (less than 1/10th the cost of defending South Korea from North Korea)
Just a happy retirement from political life? I don't know if they'd buy it. It might work. It's either a cost-saving solution to bring about peace or coddling murders and enemies of democracy by paying them off with hard earned tax dollars. I guess that'll depend on who is in office at the time.
The peace process, if it goes forward, will probably be slower. I would guess that Kim takes his cues from the Putins and Medvedevs of the world. I'm sure they could gradually embrace capitalism while setting themselves up as plutocrats down the road.
Meta replied with this 8 years ago, 4 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #885,633
@previous (C)
> coddling murders and enemies of democracy by paying them off with hard earned tax dollars
If it worked we could cut our expenses in defending South Korea by 90% overnight which would benefit taxpayers in both countries. It would probably take some of the pressure off Japan too. The North Koreans get freedom, the Kim clan still gets to live like royalty, and taxpayers in USA and South Korea get a break (and South Koreans get to breathe a massive sigh of relief after 60-odd years). Something for everyone.
The Kim family gets away with being murderous despots but is it worth spending billions a year indefinitely and keeping most of the North Korean people starving to hold them accountable?
Keep in mind we could split the costs with South Korea.
> coddling murders and enemies of democracy by paying them off with hard earned tax dollars
If it worked we could cut our expenses in defending South Korea by 90% overnight which would benefit taxpayers in both countries. It would probably take some of the pressure off Japan too. The North Koreans get freedom, the Kim clan still gets to live like royalty, and taxpayers in USA and South Korea get a break (and South Koreans get to breathe a massive sigh of relief after 60-odd years). Something for everyone.
The Kim family gets away with being murderous despots but is it worth spending billions a year indefinitely and keeping most of the North Korean people starving to hold them accountable?
Keep in mind we could split the costs with South Korea.
Anonymous T joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 7 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #885,703
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 16 hours later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #885,870
Seems as though both South and North Korea are ending the use of loud speakers to broadcast propaganda across the DMZ
Quote:
SEOUL, April 30 (Yonhap) -- South Korea's military said Monday it will soon pull back all high-decibel loudspeakers installed along the border with North Korea in its first step to implement the bilateral summit agreement reached last week.
The Ministry of National Defense said it will begin the work to remove the equipment from the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) on Tuesday.
In their talks last Friday, President Moon Jae-in and the North's leader Kim Jong-un agreed to "completely cease all hostile acts against each other in every domain."
The two leaders added that the two sides will cease all hostile acts and eliminate their means, including broadcasting through loudspeakers and distribution of leaflets, in the areas along the Military Demarcation Line.
The South already stopped blaring anti-Pyongyang broadcasts over the border ahead of the Moon-Kim summit. The North has also reportedly suspended its own propaganda broadcasts.
Quote:
SEOUL, April 30 (Yonhap) -- South Korea's military said Monday it will soon pull back all high-decibel loudspeakers installed along the border with North Korea in its first step to implement the bilateral summit agreement reached last week.
The Ministry of National Defense said it will begin the work to remove the equipment from the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) on Tuesday.
In their talks last Friday, President Moon Jae-in and the North's leader Kim Jong-un agreed to "completely cease all hostile acts against each other in every domain."
The two leaders added that the two sides will cease all hostile acts and eliminate their means, including broadcasting through loudspeakers and distribution of leaflets, in the areas along the Military Demarcation Line.
The South already stopped blaring anti-Pyongyang broadcasts over the border ahead of the Moon-Kim summit. The North has also reportedly suspended its own propaganda broadcasts.
Anonymous O replied with this 8 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #885,871
@previous (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
" President Moon Jae-in and the North's leader Kim Jong-un agreed to "completely cease all hostile acts against each other in every domain."
Well now do you think any North Korean can now just walk across the border into South Korea without any interruption?
" President Moon Jae-in and the North's leader Kim Jong-un agreed to "completely cease all hostile acts against each other in every domain."
Well now do you think any North Korean can now just walk across the border into South Korea without any interruption?
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 45 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #885,880
@previous (O)
No I dont think that the border is open yet, but I do think that South Korea will keep its own citizens from crossing as will North Korea
No I dont think that the border is open yet, but I do think that South Korea will keep its own citizens from crossing as will North Korea
(Edited 51 seconds later.)
Anonymous O replied with this 8 years ago, 5 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #885,881
@previous (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
Based on the history of how North Korea treats South Koreans or people from anywhere, it would be ill advised for anyone to travel to North Korea.
Based on the history of how North Korea treats South Koreans or people from anywhere, it would be ill advised for anyone to travel to North Korea.
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 8 years ago, 12 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #885,883
@previous (O)
I've read a few books about people who visit there and they usually have a safe time as long as they arent pulling bullshit. Usually when they get hassled, they are encouraging/documenting escapees or are preaching Christianity.
You should check out a youtube channel called Jaka Parker. Its a business man (middle eastern maybe?) who documents Pyongyang the capital of North Korea and the area where everything is nicer. He undercover records there restaurants and stores. Pretty neat.
Once he even visited a Christmas themed potluck for various foreigners staying in North Korea. So there must be quite a few.
I've read a few books about people who visit there and they usually have a safe time as long as they arent pulling bullshit. Usually when they get hassled, they are encouraging/documenting escapees or are preaching Christianity.
You should check out a youtube channel called Jaka Parker. Its a business man (middle eastern maybe?) who documents Pyongyang the capital of North Korea and the area where everything is nicer. He undercover records there restaurants and stores. Pretty neat.
Once he even visited a Christmas themed potluck for various foreigners staying in North Korea. So there must be quite a few.
(Edited 1 minute later.)