Things appear quiet atm :hmmm:

This could cause serious problems for a great many people.

I'm with Trump on this. As far as I understand matters, Kim was offering very little in return.

I think Trump did the right thing not to give in ... He will get ridiculed now, but giving in to Kim would've been worse :yep:

Agreed :yep:

….not if it's a person who really don't like Mr. Trump

Markus

The curious thing about the negotiations with NK is how they differ with past international negotiations. The usual protocol is for foreign ministers/secretaries of state and their advisers to meet and work out all the details of an agreement/deal and then have the leaders of the participating nations meet to sign the final agreement; this prevents or mitigates any possible embarrassment to the nations involved and is one of the reasons you very, very seldom see the sort of 'walk away' you saw in the latest NK situation. One can only suppose Trump pulled the trigger too quickly on the negotiations by his representatives; the possible reasons for such abrupt, preemptive action(s), I leave to your speculation...

I hears an interesting analogy presented by a commentator on a conservative radio show this morning: he likened Trump's actions to those of a fellow has a $110 bill, walks into a used car dealership, and demands to buy a 2018 Porsche fo the $100; he gets the expected "No" and walks away. Trump went into the NK summit knowing there was no real final agreement worked out, knew that NK would not agree to his demands, and made a show of walking out. All in all, a rather pointless, expensive and irresponsible action merely intended to make his Trumpettes happy at home. For the rest of us, its just a big "Meh..."...








<O>

perhaps if 'the Donald' were to offer 'fatboy' his custoary $130,000 bribe he'd make progress...:Kaleun_Wink:

two meglomaniacs with bad haircuts don't need henchmen...I still can't believe Fatboy was'nt arrested for murder(of his half brother) and after the Congressional grilling of his fixer the NK know they are dealing with a 'lame duck' president and can afford to stall on talks....

Well, what can you say; this is what happens when you have a much (self) touted "Master Deal Maker" at the helm...

...and I'm pretty sure Kim is not that cheap a date...:haha:


Kim would have just had the arresting officers executed as well as the prosecutors, something Trump may want to look into, the way things are going for him... :03: :D

... and the 'lame duck' point is very well taken... :up:









<O>

Not according to the news here in Denmark

(used google translate)

"
President Trump didn't do well off at home, the reactions in general is that the president has suffered a significant defeat, says Steffen Kretz, DR News correspondent in the United States.

-Trump is today also criticized by prominent members of his own party, who point out that the failure in Vietnam is largely due to Trump not doing his homework.
"
Here, among the MSM-journalist, the bottom line is--Trump lost big time.

Markus

Well it was not exactly a success, but did anyone expect something else?
Trump boasting about what good friends he and Kim are, really :haha:

Kim is not the easiest character to talk with, and when you can achieve a cheap "victory" by humiliating the world's leading nation you probably use the incident. If this is especially clever.. i don't think so.

Kim is of course backed and partially controlled by China. Usually there are negotiations between nations before the leaders meet, so the agreements are prinicipally done beforehand, and they only mee to sign the negotiated contracts and show the world how great they are. Trump obviously has no clue about negotiating, and he did not do his homework.
Question is if the outcome could have been any different with better preparation.

Well, what we do know is that for Kim it is all or nothing so the ball is now back in the US court.

What I find remarkable is that there are people in the 'orange man bad' camp who are almost gleeful when ever Trump fails at something. In fact they probably hope he fails. Which would you prefer...Trump's attempt at a peaceful settlement or Hillary Clinton's "We came, we saw, he died" approach? How did that turn out?

The administration of President George W. Bush in 2003, negotiated an agreement with Gadhafi. Give up the weapons of mass destruction peacefully, and you can remain in power. Then those two great "negotiators" Obama and Clinton arrived on the scene. The result..a civil war, a humanitarian disaster and refugees flooding Europe, destabilizing governments there. One of her advisers, Sidney Blumenthal encouraged her to tout her "successful strategy" as evidence of her fitness for the White House. Christ.

And that wasn't the only mis-step from the Obama/Clinton 'negotiating team' in the Middle East. There's the Syrian debacle and there is Yemen. Obama bragged about the strategy in Yemen as a model for the war on terror. And that turned out how? One can only imagine what President Hillary Clinton's plan would be for Kim Jong Un.

But yea but...orange man bad.

Other reporting is stating that KJU asked for a reduction of some of the sanctions in return for witnessed irreversible destruction of one of the reactors. Getting them to agree to something irreversible (Reactor destruction) in exchange for something reversible sanctions is a pretty good deal.

Of course this puts one in a sad state of affairs trying to figure out who is more trustworthy: Trump or KJU

I am very disappointed that none of these negotiations seems to introduce the DPRK rejoining the NPT so we can get IAEA inspectors back in.

Maybe it was just a little too much agent orange, for Vietnam.