Let's Talk Politics

Legalization is the answer. You could argue that those who instituted the war on drugs have some of that blood on their hands. They created the environment for the thuggery.

But returning to my point about the pardon, I'm against it because of the precedent it sets. It says that if you have a connection to Trump, all will be forgiven. Don't roll on him because he will give you a pardon in exchange for your loyalty.

And it serves to numb us in preparation for a possible pardon from Carrotbottom to Carrotbottom.

Dictator

Or just dick.

What was the purpose of the "Summit" in Singapore? They didn't even agree on the definition of "denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula". As open as this agreement is, it's possible that they could demand inspection of US ships and B-52 and B-2 bombers that pass through our bases.

If it was just to achieve what little it did, was it so important that it occur so close to the G-7 meeting? Or was the schedule fixed on that date as an excuse for Trump to cut out before the boring stuff?

Or was it another "Wag the Dog" moment in Presidential history? The press and all of DC sure is wrapped up in that and off of the investigations.

Well, not quite all of DC. I would imagine that Mueller kept right on investigating without giving any notice to the show under the Big Top.

And picking fights at the G-7? Skipping meetings, showing up late and interrupting the hosts programs? Leaving before the discussions on climate change and the environment? Scheduling his sideshow in Singapore to conflict with the meeting? Getting mad, stomping his feet and refusing to sign the communique when he is called out for behaving like a boor?

And did you know that the thing he cites as unfair trade practice by Canada (dairy tariffs) was due to be dealt with in the TPP which he withdrew us from?

Is this just dickish behavior or was he trying to send a message to Kim that this is how he treats his friends. Imagine how he will treat you?

I'll repeat my belief: Kim is NEVER going to give up his nukes. Not even if you open a KFC, Burger King, McDonalds and Taco Bell in Pyongyang and let Dennis Rodman organize a pro basketball league.

Kim gave nothing and got a whole lot. Trump got played.

Although I agree that it is a good thing, release of detainees is not worthy of gratitude or reward, imo.

"Regime doesn't usually end well, letting the regime decide it wants to improve conditions just might."

Assuming you left out the word "change" that requires that the people of NK agree to let bygones be bygones like Kim said. Improving conditions would be nice for his people but granting them basic freedoms would be much nicer.

Self-determination is what people who are kept under someones thumb crave. One meal with protein a day would certainly be an improvement, though.

And Trump is definitely on a better track now than before but he's being led down the same path that others have already walked down. And he's right that things are better now than they were before the summit but he forgets how they got so bad. He poured gasoline on the fire. Just look at the timeline of missile testing and see the acceleration from November of 2016. And are things less volatile than when Obama was in office? All he can claim is that he has partially put out the fire he accelerated with his rhetoric.

I glanced at a report that the NK press has come out telling the people that we agreed to lift sanctions. I haven't been able to find it and I'm not to keen on clicking on anything that says North Korea in the address. If the report is true, then it came directly from Kim. If true, should we continue to negotiate with someone who is misrepresenting our position to his people?

Edit:  I found it on the Windows news feed. It's a report from the Tribune Washington Bureau that says that the NK press is reporting that we agreed to lift sanctions as part of the process even though there is no language addressing that issue as well as other discrepancies between Trumps and Kims versions. Wasn't a meeting between just the two of them and their translators a great idea? Now two proven liars can say anything they want about what they discussed. If you can't prove their version, what good is either?

That same track has made the Chinese more wealthy but not much freer.

I'm not promoting regime change. I don't want any part of North Korea being the responsibility of the US taxpayers like Afghanistan and Iraq. I'm just inclined to believe that if Kim will lie to his people about this agreement, he will also lie to us. Plus it falsely sets us up as the bad guy in the eyes of the North Korean people. When they bight into that chicken salad sandwich that Kim's giving them and find out that it's actually chicken $%^, they're going to blame us. An honest negotiation leaves no reason to misrepresent the outcome.

And by starting out by putting us in a position where verification of the discussion is impossible doesn't bode well for the concept of rigorous, drop-in inspections to verify compliance to some actual agreement.

He should have gotten Hillary's Reset button. The results would be the same.