Trumps UN Speech

[Baruch]

What does a "back door communication to NorK" even mean? As far as we know, every president had a backdoor channel or the ability to get it.

We should hope so ... having that in 1962 means you and I are still alive.

[Mike Cl]

And you believe him?  Silly rabbit ...

First, he did not address me with that command.  And do I believe him?  At least he is consistent in that he lies every day, so of course I don't believe him.  But then, the real question is if his staff believes him or not.

[Baruch]

First, he did not address me with that command.  And do I believe him?  At least he is consistent in that he lies every day, so of course I don't believe him.  But then, the real question is if his staff believes him or not.

MK Ultra crisis actors are everywhere.  His staff are as fake as he is ... as was the WH before him.  Think real Zapruder film.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

[chill98]

What is Trump proposing to do about North Korea?

Don't quote speech rhetoric -- summarize actionable agenda items.

The topic is

TRUMPS UN SPEECH

so I will quote Trumps speech if I so desire.

[chill98]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but what you're saying is that if T-Rex were to cringe during Trump's speech, he'd cringe at Trump [allegedly] preventing him from getting his buddies great deals?

If so, then that's ridiculous because both are on the same page when it comes to getting their filthy rich buddies (and themselves) great deals at the expense of the middle class and the poor. An example comes to mind -- repeal of estate tax -- which benefits the filthy rich like Trump and T-Rex, and shifts more tax burden from top 1% to the middle class and poor.

Actually I was guessing at which parts Tillerson [allegedly] cringed at.  A discussion of Body Language is just that.  Regardless of Trumps actual position.   REGARDLESS of Trumps actual position.  Get it?   I read the transcript, I didnt watch the speech and from that could see which parts Tillerson could cringe at.  No one has said the cringe happened elsewhere.

The estate tax, while better than it was a few years ago, it still remain BS.  But again, this was not part of Trumps UN speech was it?  Nice try at deflection but I prefer (not always successful admittedly) to stay On Topic.

[Sylar]

The topic is

TRUMPS UN SPEECH

so I will quote Trumps speech if I so desire.

Actually I was guessing at which parts Tillerson [allegedly] cringed at.  A discussion of Body Language is just that.  Regardless of Trumps actual position.   REGARDLESS of Trumps actual position.  Get it?   I read the transcript, I didnt watch the speech and from that could see which parts Tillerson could cringe at.  No one has said the cringe happened elsewhere.

The estate tax, while better than it was a few years ago, it still remain BS.  But again, this was not part of Trumps UN speech was it?  Nice try at deflection but I prefer (not always successful admittedly) to stay On Topic.

You are using topic of thread as pretext to avoid answering. I'll reframe my question.

What actions does Trump plan to take with respect to North Korea as a follow-up to his speech's rhetoric at the United Nations?

If that's what you're guessing, then you're guessing wrong. I gave you the estate tax as an example of you guessing wrong. T-Rex wouldn't 'cringe' at that part because he's not at odds with Trump about getting his buddies and himself great deals. Repeal of estate tax is an example of a great deal.

Lastly, Trump's speech didn't happen in a vacuum. It has impacts on US domestic and foreign policy. It is only but a subset of US politics. Therefore, estate tax repeal and agenda items on NK are both fair game for discussion. The mods decide otherwise, not you.

[Shiranu]

The estate tax, while better than it was a few years ago, it still remain BS.

Completely off-topic, but I am legitimately curious... what changed about the estate tax to make it better, and are you implying that the concept of an estate tax is BS?

[Cavebear]

What does a "back door communication to NorK" even mean? As far as we know, every president had a backdoor channel or the ability to get it.

Of all the US presidents the past 50+ years, Trump probably has no channel to N Korea...

[chill98]

What actions does Trump plan to take with respect to North Korea as a follow-up to his speech's rhetoric at the United Nations?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/21/world/asia/trump-korea-japan.html

I gave you the estate tax as an example of you guessing wrong. T-Rex wouldn't 'cringe' at that part because he's not at odds with Trump about getting his buddies and himself great deals. Repeal of estate tax is an example of a great deal.

I am going out on a limb here and guessing you did not watch the Trump speech and personally have no idea what parts people [allegedly] cringed at, which is why you have to resort to (I am guessing a personal fav for you) the estate tax.   You are making up scenarios to compensate for your lack of firsthand knowledge of the ACTUAL speech.

Here's my personal (and too poor to be affected by it) opinion on the Death Tax.

The Estate Tax === Grave robbing.

You're not going to change my opinion about that.

Lastly, Trump's speech didn't happen in a vacuum. It has impacts on US domestic and foreign policy. It is only but a subset of US politics.

The UN is a vacuum.  Congress, SCotUS, the executive branch, and ultimately the US voters are what impacts US policy.  Period.  And that is the way it should be.

Therefore, estate tax repeal and agenda items on NK are both fair game for discussion. The mods decide otherwise, not you.

Fair game for discussion if you have a willing participant in a related topic.  Therefore, I decide which participants are worth discussion with.  The mods are irrelevant to that end. 

Finally, thoughout this thread the only substantial complaint about the ACTUAL speech comes from the N. Korean statement, when, if looked at as written, is more hot air from the complainers and I quote:

The United States has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea.

/quote

And that will be entirely Rocketmans fault if it happens. 

[Cavebear]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/21/world/asia/trump-korea-japan.html

I am going out on a limb here and guessing you did not watch the Trump speech and personally have no idea what parts people [allegedly] cringed at, which is why you have to resort to (I am guessing a personal fav for you) the estate tax.   You are making up scenarios to compensate for your lack of firsthand knowledge of the ACTUAL speech.

Here's my personal (and too poor to be affected by it) opinion on the Death Tax.

The Estate Tax === Grave robbing.

You're not going to change my opinion about that.

The UN is a vacuum.  Congress, SCotUS, the executive branch, and ultimately the US voters are what impacts US policy.  Period.  And that is the way it should be.

Fair game for discussion if you have a willing participant in a related topic.  Therefore, I decide which participants are worth discussion with.  The mods are irrelevant to that end. 

Finally, thoughout this thread the only substantial complaint about the ACTUAL speech comes from the N. Korean statement, when, if looked at as written, is more hot air from the complainers and I quote:

The United States has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea.

/quote

And that will be entirely Rocketmans fault if it happens.

Too much inherited wealth creates dynasties of descendants with little or no practical experience.  That's rather "royalish".  I'm more in favor of riches being spread around a bit.  Sure, give the kids a leg up, but not so much that they need not learn some useful skills to make their own way in the world.

I remember an old joke (updated to modern wealth).  "My Dad gave me some great financial advice.  Son here is a billion dollars; don't lose it" ...

The US will stay the US for decades or even a century.  But the UN can be helpful.  People who aren't starving seldom attack thoes with slightly more.  Food and comfort is the tide that raises all boats.  Give people hope at home and they will stay there.

N Korea could easily be destroyed.  But they would kill millions in S Korea on the way out.  That is the essential dilemma. 

[Mike Cl]

N Korea could easily be destroyed.  But they would kill millions in S Korea on the way out.  That is the essential dilemma.

Do you really think that it would be that easy?  Do you think a nuke war could be contained within NK?  You brought up SK--what of China, Japan, Russia, etc.  Would they all sit on the sidelines of a Nuke exchange and do nothing?  Could Japan or even the US be hit by some?  Is NK capable of simply firing off a bunch of nukes in all directions before they die?  Does war ever go as planned?

[Cavebear]

Do you really think that it would be that easy?  Do you think a nuke war could be contained within NK?  You brought up SK--what of China, Japan, Russia, etc.  Would they all sit on the sidelines of a Nuke exchange and do nothing?  Could Japan or even the US be hit by some?  Is NK capable of simply firing off a bunch of nukes in all directions before they die?  Does war ever go as planned?

Warplans fail in the first encounter with the enemy.  But N Korea does not actually have useful nuclear weapons.  What they have is a bizarre number of rockets and artillery aimed right at Seoul.  They could kill 5 million people at will.

That's the major problem.  Radiation fallout across Japan would kill may.  We would really need a country-killer bomb with no fallout.    And I bet we don't have that. 

But I do sometimes wonder if a few neutron bombs might be up our sleeves. 

[Mike Cl]

Warplans fail in the first encounter with the enemy.  But N Korea does not actually have useful nuclear weapons.  What they have is a bizarre number of rockets and artillery aimed right at Seoul.  They could kill 5 million people at will.

That's the major problem.  Radiation fallout across Japan would kill may.  We would really need a country-killer bomb with no fallout.    And I bet we don't have that. 

But I do sometimes wonder if a few neutron bombs might be up our sleeves.

Nukes, of any and all sizes, have fallout.  And it matters not where (underground, on ground, or air burst).  And it does not matter is the NK weapons are very good.  Just being nukes makes them effective.  And I think 5 million dead would be conservative.  Fallout is the death dealer that just keeps on giving.

[Cavebear]

Nukes, of any and all sizes, have fallout.  And it matters not where (underground, on ground, or air burst).  And it does not matter is the NK weapons are very good.  Just being nukes makes them effective.  And I think 5 million dead would be conservative.  Fallout is the death dealer that just keeps on giving.

The idea would be to basically eliminate all the N Korean artillery stuff at the start.  After that, they are gone.  Before they get nuclear weapons to launch.