|
Mightypeon posted:Nah, Il Sungs degree of ripping of was actually pretty normal. He could also, not unfactually, state that his North Koreans did kick the South Koreans in the Korean war, before the US/UN troops intervened. In their communications, they claimed it as a victory because the US agreed on a White peace, despite intervening directly and despite the Soviets not being forced to intervene directly themselfs. You can guess that the Chinese, especially a decade or so later, were kind of offended by this reasoning since it placed them a Tier below the Soviets, who sacrificed far less. So how long was KJI running the show before KIS kicked the bucket?
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2014 16:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 21:19 |
|
|
If you think it's a bad thing for the US give NK the opportunity for good optics and believe the only acceptable outcome is NK to give up their nukes, how, exactly, would you go about that diplomatically? What aspect of the last 60+ years of militarily-enforced isolation do you believe was effective to that end?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2018 14:12
|
|
|
Vladimir Putin posted:The US holds most of the leverage in negotiations. There was no reason to give some of that up for nothing in return and certainly not in the fashion that it happened. Moon is either making GBS threads himself right now or is the dumbest of the three because apparently Trump negotiated away a JOINT exercise for nothing without consulting nor even informing Moon ahead of time. I bet Moon regrets getting this meeting back on track. The entire reason that we've had a stalemate on the peninsula for nearly 70 years is that we've already exhausted our non-military leverage. We rightly decided that the risk of going to war with a non-nuclear NK was not worth escalation, and now that they're nuclear, we have even less leverage. The solution to a nuclear NK would have been to abide by our agreements in the 90s and 00s, giving them reason to do likewise. I guess I won't say that they'll never give them up, but they will demand extraordinary concessions that they'll be skeptical that we'll ever abide by.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2018 14:36
|
|
|
Vladimir Putin posted:That’s just flat out wrong. The only reason Kim is even blackmailing anybody is because he wants economic aid. That’s a lever but it has to be properly managed based on the overall scenario. Did our aid agreements get them to dismantle their artillery? Is the expectation that we will hold out aid until they denuclearize? Isn't the endgame of that approach mass starvation, by the way?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2018 14:47
|
|
|
Look, I agree that this not a particularly good way to handle diplomacy and that we're very unlikely to see a substantive agreement come out of the process. I also know that we have a belligerent simpleton with a fetish for nukes in the White House. If this is what it takes to keep him from literally taunting a nuclear-armed country, I'll take it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2018 15:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 21:19 |
|
|
sean10mm posted:*Ron Howard narration* It won't. Maybe not! We do have a goldfish-for-brains president. But this is still a better present state of affairs than we had a year ago. Hopefully it mollifies Trump, and maybe it will open up room for future administrations to engage in an actual diplomatic process.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2018 15:17
|
|