General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIs anybody in the MSM going to have the guts to say Kim f---ing clowned Trump ?
Asking for a friend.
Dirty Socialist
(3,252 posts)Strangely, they have been as critical of Trump as anyone on this.
dalton99a
(81,578 posts)(courtesy of U.S. taxpayers, of course)
Pretty slick
karynnj
(59,504 posts)What they should do is to say as many experts and diplomats have said is that Trump got no specifics and no real commitments. Not to mention he was extremely premature in declaring success. Consider Obama was cautious even a few weeks before the Iran deal. This even with an agreed upon detailed framework for the final deal and an interim deal that held.
They then should point out that as in any negotiation, it is good that there are followup meeting scheduled.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)It has to rank as one of the largest diplomatic debacles in the history of the republic. On the world stage it ranks up there with the MolotovRibbentrop Pact.
karynnj
(59,504 posts)The entire thing was backward. Trump should not have met with him until diplomats had successfully negotiated a deal. Obviously, that might never have happened. This would be the case even if he had the best negotiators at work. In fact, some State Department experts are still there
The contrast with Obama is stark and it is not clear Pompeo has the creayivity, diplomatic skill or sheer perseverance of John Kerry.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)karynnj
(59,504 posts)It backward. The Iran deal was well designed, NK was not well defined in any way. Part of Trump's problem is he unlikely to come close to as good a deal as the one he rejected.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Now Putin gets to take Trump to the cleaners. I'm afraid it will take us years if not decades to recover him his blunders.
karynnj
(59,504 posts)The Iran deal was a strong, good deal -- and there really was NO NK deal. Yes, I imagine if things went so badly with NK, the Putin meeting will be worse.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)The damage he is doing abroad and at home is incalculable and perhaps irreversible.
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)I don't have a link because I read it on their odd app on a tablet, but they have been trashing Trump and Pompeo.
Heard some people on MSNBC and CNN laughing about it, too. Are the Atlantic and New Yorker MSM enough? They've talked about it.
The talk now is about the Supreme Court and the upcoming NATO meeting, and a little about the Putin ass-kissing session after that.
Look, even though he has his fans for whom he can do nothing wrong, the simple truth is that he's been fucking up so much it's really hard to keep up.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)IMHO they are understated. Kim undressed him. They got de facto diplomatic recognition and a suspension of American-South Korean military exercises for vague promises.
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)Reporting is about what happened, which was nothing, so there was little to report.
Editorializing and opinion is about how the incomprehensibly incompetent Trump got hosed, and there has been quite a bit of that.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)I read the articles and editorials pertaining to the the botched negotiations on the Bloomberg, WAPO, NYT, The Atlantic, CNN, New Yorker, Mother Jones, and New York Magazine websites. In none of those forums were the botched Korean negotiations characterized as one of the greatest diplomatic debacles in the history of the republic which it was.
Wellstone ruled
(34,661 posts)Golden Raisin
(4,613 posts)Embarrassing diplomatic disaster for the USA. Big PR+ win for N. Korea. All visible on the world stage to our allies and foes.
Hekate
(90,793 posts)soryang
(3,299 posts)I was looking at YTN news this morning over at youtube after having read the English language media postmortems of the Pompeo visit, and while the visit was relatively unproductive, I think the significance of the remarks from the North Korean foreign office have been exaggerated. The ministry said that the US approach was still CVID at the meeting, and was one sided and "gangster like." It seems to me that Choi Son Hui or Ri Yong Ho from the foreign ministry wrote this statement personally. It was probably Choi. This is her style. (강도적인 비핵화 gangster like denuclearization; 강도적심리가 gangster mentality.) The Chinese translation of the North Korean Foreign Ministry's statement at KCNA, said "gangster" as well so their is no ambiguity in the language. Some of the language in the official announcement from the foreign ministry is very similar to Kim Gae Kwan's apologia for Choi Son Hui published on May 24, 2018, which suggests that demands for unilateral nuclear disarmament from the US are a sensitive point for North Korea. ref: http://www.nkleadershipwatch.org/2018/05/25/kim-kye-gwan-issues-statement-on-us-dprk-summit/
On the other hand, North Korea backed off then and the summit went on. So Christopher Hill or whoever said it, was right, it's probably a negotiating tactic. It is also for domestic consumption.
In any event the YTN coverage reveals that the essential difference is still the same, the one bundle approach of the US, versus the step by step, reciprocal moves by both sides that the North Koreans want. However, the North should have taken a substantial step or steps after the US suspended military exercises. By unilaterally suspending the joint military exercises with South Korea, the US suggested implicitly that a tit for tat approach to building trust, and eliminating the nuclear threat could be managed. However, two things happened at the meeting in Pyongyang, Pompeo reverted to the CVID type approach, calling it FFVD, which is a distinction with only a nominal difference, and the North failed to reciprocate to the US South Korean suspension of military exercises, ironically criticizing it as "reversible." Pompeo's public statement in rebuttal of the gangster charge emphasized the one sided nature of the demand for denuclearization by the international community. The ICBM issue is probably a sensitive one for Japan and South Korea. I've heard some South Korean analysts interpret the focus on the ICBM issue as related to Trump's so called America first policy.
Allegedly a major failing of the talks was Pompeo's unresponsiveness to the proposal to have the US jointly declare an end to the Korean conflict next month on the anniversary of the Armistice. This would be a let down from the previous promise of "security guarantees," implied in Pompeo's CVIG formula. (Complete Verifiable Irreversible Guarantee of North Korean security.)
Hekate
(90,793 posts)Blue_Adept
(6,402 posts)So, it's out there.