Comments on: Trump tweets: We are about to go to war

By: MikeN

MikeN — Thu, 17 Aug 2017 02:36:20 +0000

By now we should have tens of thousands dead, perhaps hundreds of thousands, according to the brilliant sage Greg Laden.
For other predictions he makes, should we divide by 10000, 100000, or subtract?

Here’s hoping war continues to be avoided. Predicting no war by Wednesday was an easy call though.

By: MikeN

MikeN — Thu, 17 Aug 2017 02:33:26 +0000

” This agreement will help to achieve a longstanding and vital American objective: an end to the threat of nuclear proliferation on the Korean Peninsula. This agreement is good for the United States, good for our allies, and good for the safety of the entire world. It reduces the danger of the threat of nuclear spreading in the region. It’s a crucial step toward drawing North Korea into the global community . . . This agreement represents the first step on the road to a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula. It does not rely on trust. Compliance will be certified by the International Atomic Energy Agency”

By: Wow

Wow — Tue, 15 Aug 2017 09:47:12 +0000

I also note,”mike”, that there’s no place where the appeasments were supposed to prevent NK getting nukes like you complained of earlier.

Still looking? Or not bothering because you don’t care what’s true or not, just what sounds nice to you?

By: Wow

Wow — Tue, 15 Aug 2017 09:46:04 +0000

Yeah, right. By “backs down” you mean didn’t bomb Guam like the rightwing media said when Kim said he’d lob bombs near it. You know, like when you go “I’m not touching you! Don’t complain to Mum, I’m not touching you at all!” when you troll your brother or sister.

It’s not a win. Every time the “appeasement” got NK to not be a dick on the international stage, it was just as much a win. Kim’s a nutjob and they fluff the public with these bombasts. It’s not for international consumption, it’s for propaganda at home. Much like trump’s rehashed unthinking “like the world. Has never. Seen believe me.”. It’s for the consumption of his supporters, like the bomb threat.

Looks like Trump backed down too beccuse it doesn’t look like North Korea is going to stop calling them shit instead of “the shit” and Trump no longer has the excuse “but he threatened innocent civilians!!!”. Where is the hidden threat in the “He’d better stop talking like that”?

By: RickA

RickA — Tue, 15 Aug 2017 01:57:34 +0000

It looks like Kim did back down.

Win for Trump.

By: Wow

Wow — Mon, 14 Aug 2017 15:04:51 +0000

But it looks YUGE in his tiny paws.

Even Racoons say to each other “doesn’t he have tiny paws?”.

By: Helianthus

Helianthus — Mon, 14 Aug 2017 12:46:29 +0000

heaven forbid our leaders to talk and act like Teddy Roosevelt

I just read an appropriate answer to this in some other comment section:

Teddy Roosevelt was about speaking softly and carrying a big stick.
Your president speaks bigly and is carrying a small stick.

By: Tyvor Winn

Tyvor Winn — Mon, 14 Aug 2017 00:28:10 +0000

Re: #27
My remarks about Korea were not meant to deny that the foreign policies of the U. S. and the subrosa activities of the CIA as part of that policy) have been misguided and tragic in their effects on people in many other countries. Korea, though, as I said, was not in that category.

Regardless of whether your higher estimates or much lower estimates I have seen are closer to correct, I agree that many millions of people who themselves posed no immediate or latent threat to the U. S. have died as a result of U. S. foreign policy. War forced by an attack is tragic enough but these kinds of deaths and hardships are just disgusting.

By: Gerrit Bogaers

Gerrit Bogaers — Sun, 13 Aug 2017 23:03:23 +0000

Do we want peace?

By: Tyvor Winn

Tyvor Winn — Sun, 13 Aug 2017 22:22:24 +0000

#28: “What a flippant remark”

General Sherman didn’t mean it flippantly and neither did I. It is a truly horrible thing.

I note that you never acknowledged my remarks about Korea or what the non-war alternative was to the North Korean invasion. Do you imagine that there would not have been a significant death toll in South Korea in the aftermath of a North Korean success? Do you think there would be even an approximation of freedom if Korea had been successfully united by North Korean conquest? Maybe you should try asking some South Koreans what they think about the UN forces role in their country’s history.