missmuffet Posted August 15, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 34 Topic Count: 1,991 Topics Per Day: 0.48 Content Count: 48,689 Content Per Day: 11.81 Reputation: 30,343 Days Won: 226 Joined: 01/11/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted August 15, 2017 35 minutes ago, Running Gator said: They (NK) has been talking trash for 50 plus years, much of it aimed at the US. They have never once backed up that trash talk in all that time. But now all of a sudden it is the trash talk from our president that stopped them. What was it that stopped them the last 50 years? Have we ever seriously confronted them? Have we ever said " You and your country will be history"?. Or has America always just patted them on the head? I don't know. Do you have documentation that America has seriously confronted NK as much as we recently have done? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running Gator Posted August 15, 2017 Group: Royal Member * Followers: 8 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 10,596 Content Per Day: 3.69 Reputation: 2,743 Days Won: 25 Joined: 06/16/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted August 15, 2017 1 minute ago, missmuffet said: Have we ever seriously confronted them? Have we ever said " You and your country will be history"?. Or has America always just patted them on the head? I don't know. Do you have documentation that America has seriously confronted NK as much as we recently have done? What have we done lately other than talk trash back to them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve_S Posted August 15, 2017 Group: Servant Followers: 25 Topic Count: 275 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 5,208 Content Per Day: 1.00 Reputation: 1,893 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/02/2010 Status: Offline Share Posted August 15, 2017 1 minute ago, Running Gator said: What have we done lately other than talk trash back to them? I think that it may be a mistake to simply assume that this is no more than mindless trash talk. This may be a serious attempt at the administration to communicate to the north koreans that they are legitimately contemplating war. How they go about it may not be what you or I would consider a logical way to do so, but that doesn't mean that's not their true intent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted August 15, 2017 Share Posted August 15, 2017 18 minutes ago, MorningGlory said: According to the looney leftists NK backed away from the brink because they magically saw the light. I say that they realized that the end of their regime was at hand and decided it was better to stay in power than to be thrown to the mercies of the millions who have been starved and tortured over the years. Thisl is one time when what happened to Mussolini comes to mind; maybe it did for Kim as well. Yes, exactly. The Left cannot have it both ways. They cannot, on the one hand blame the rhetoric of Trump for any escalation of tension, but then pretend Trump's rhetoric had nothing to do with why the crazy fat kid finally came to his sense. It may be combination of Trump and Mattis, but it was a consistent tough rhetoric that ended up causing him to back down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missmuffet Posted August 15, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 34 Topic Count: 1,991 Topics Per Day: 0.48 Content Count: 48,689 Content Per Day: 11.81 Reputation: 30,343 Days Won: 226 Joined: 01/11/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted August 15, 2017 14 minutes ago, Steve_S said: I think that it may be a mistake to simply assume that this is no more than mindless trash talk. This may be a serious attempt at the administration to communicate to the north koreans that they are legitimately contemplating war. How they go about it may not be what you or I would consider a logical way to do so, but that doesn't mean that's not their true intent. Yes, we were saying to them that we really mean business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running Gator Posted August 15, 2017 Group: Royal Member * Followers: 8 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 10,596 Content Per Day: 3.69 Reputation: 2,743 Days Won: 25 Joined: 06/16/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted August 15, 2017 17 minutes ago, Steve_S said: I think that it may be a mistake to simply assume that this is no more than mindless trash talk. This may be a serious attempt at the administration to communicate to the north koreans that they are legitimately contemplating war. How they go about it may not be what you or I would consider a logical way to do so, but that doesn't mean that's not their true intent. So, do you think that Kim heard our "serious attempt to communicate" and thought to himself..."Oh my, I didn't know they had the capability to wipe me off the face of the earth"? I do not see that as very likely. Or, do you think that Kim heard our "serious attempt to communicate" and thought to himself..."Oh my, if I nuke Guam they wipe me off the face of the earth, I never would have thought of that had it not been for this serious attempt to communicate." I do not see that as very likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve_S Posted August 15, 2017 Group: Servant Followers: 25 Topic Count: 275 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 5,208 Content Per Day: 1.00 Reputation: 1,893 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/02/2010 Status: Offline Share Posted August 15, 2017 2 minutes ago, Running Gator said: So, do you think that Kim heard our "serious attempt to communicate" and thought to himself..."Oh my, I didn't know they had the capability to wipe me off the face of the earth"? I do not see that as very likely. Or, do you think that Kim heard our "serious attempt to communicate" and thought to himself..."Oh my, if I nuke Guam they wipe me off the face of the earth, I never would have thought of that had it not been for this serious attempt to communicate." I do not see that as very likely. I'm not really making that case. I'm simply stating that donald trump does not communicate in traditional political terms. The last US president to really make a threat such as this was harry truman and he was obviously pretty serious about it. The point that I'm getting at is that I don't think it's necessarily safe to assume that trump wasn't serious simply because of the language he used in the statement. He said a lot of things through the campaign that folks were 100 percent positive that he wasn't serious about at the time, starting with announcing that he was running for president. Where most recent presidents, obama or bush for instance, would've probably said something along the lines of "the united states would view the launching of a missile from the territory currently controlled by the democratic people's republic of korea in the most serious of terms and such a thing would carry grave consequences" or something along those lines, trump just said "if you attack us we will burn your country to the ground" or thereabouts. I mean, all he's really doing is saying what would actually happen as opposed to couching it in politicized rhetoric. He seems to not be willing to speak in that sort of way, so he just says it how it crosses his mind. At the very end of the day those things are pretty much equivalent in meaning. That's primarily why i think that it's at least possible that it wasn't just "trash talk." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningGlory Posted August 15, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1,022 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 39,193 Content Per Day: 6.11 Reputation: 9,977 Days Won: 78 Joined: 10/01/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted August 15, 2017 24 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: Yes, exactly. The Left cannot have it both ways. They cannot, on the one hand blame the rhetoric of Trump for any escalation of tension, but then pretend Trump's rhetoric had nothing to do with why the crazy fat kid finally came to his sense. It may be combination of Trump and Mattis, but it was a consistent tough rhetoric that ended up causing him to back down. But rational thinking doesn't fit with the leftist narrative so they can't embrace it regardless of how foolish and nonsensical they look. They are still in Obama mode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SavedByGrace1981 Posted August 15, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 104 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 2,923 Content Per Day: 0.61 Reputation: 462 Days Won: 2 Joined: 04/02/2011 Status: Offline Birthday: 03/22/1953 Share Posted August 15, 2017 9 hours ago, Running Gator said: Why would Pres Trump get credit for NK doing what they have done for the last 50 years? Do you believe they "backed down" because of his words? It was a joke, son. Blessings, -Ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running Gator Posted August 15, 2017 Group: Royal Member * Followers: 8 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 10,596 Content Per Day: 3.69 Reputation: 2,743 Days Won: 25 Joined: 06/16/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted August 15, 2017 1 hour ago, Steve_S said: I'm not really making that case. I'm simply stating that donald trump does not communicate in traditional political terms. The last US president to really make a threat such as this was harry truman and he was obviously pretty serious about it. The point that I'm getting at is that I don't think it's necessarily safe to assume that trump wasn't serious simply because of the language he used in the statement. He said a lot of things through the campaign that folks were 100 percent positive that he wasn't serious about at the time, starting with announcing that he was running for president. Where most recent presidents, obama or bush for instance, would've probably said something along the lines of "the united states would view the launching of a missile from the territory currently controlled by the democratic people's republic of korea in the most serious of terms and such a thing would carry grave consequences" or something along those lines, trump just said "if you attack us we will burn your country to the ground" or thereabouts. I mean, all he's really doing is saying what would actually happen as opposed to couching it in politicized rhetoric. He seems to not be willing to speak in that sort of way, so he just says it how it crosses his mind. At the very end of the day those things are pretty much equivalent in meaning. That's primarily why i think that it's at least possible that it wasn't just "trash talk." I think Trump was fully serious, almost wishful if I were to be honest. Trash talk does not preclude action, in fact it is often designed to elicit a particular action so that you can "react". I will not comment on my view how Trump talks as I get in trouble for expressing my opinion on that topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts