The Trump hate is completely unnecessary. Trump's contribution was effectively repeatedly saying "I'mma nuke you first." No Nobel committee is ever going to give that the Peace Price.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
Printable View
The Trump hate is completely unnecessary. Trump's contribution was effectively repeatedly saying "I'mma nuke you first." No Nobel committee is ever going to give that the Peace Price.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
They gave Yassir Arafat the prize.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
I was embarrassed for the Nobel committee and for Obama when they gave it to him for no apparent reason.
After Arafat was actually sitting down and negotiating yes. We haven't seen Trump doing that with North Korea.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Fairly or not, Arafat had a far better global reputation than Trump. Kissinger is the better example, and the Vietnam War was a slightly bigger deal.
Cogs are in motion, its entirely possible he will within the next couple of years.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
Then he can be discussed in terms of peace prize potential after the next couple of years have passed.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Agreed. I only responded because the topic was being discussed and you were saying it couldn't happen. Its extremely unlikely but could in the future.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
And I'm right. I said it couldn't happen, that he would never be considered for the "contributions" he has made to peace on the Korean peninsula.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
"Trump's contribution was effectively repeatedly saying "I'mma nuke you first." No Nobel committee is ever going to give that the Peace Price."
Think this is a very clear and informative piece on both this subject and on the related subject of Iran:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/ampht...c0a_story.html
Arafat's contribution was I am bombing you until he stopped. No Nobel committee would give that the peace prize either.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
If the committee can look past a history of actual bombings when a potential peace agreement for a decades old conflict is reached then looking past threats of bombings for a peace agreement to a decades old conflict should be possible.
But he DID stop (at least for a while, and the Nobel was given during that period when he was genuinely negotiating and not using force). Trump has not done this. Future actions are not on the table, we have no idea what they'd be. I'm talking about what he's actually done, and THAT material is not something the committee is ever going to offer a Nobel for. You may want to talk about something else, you often do. I don't give a rat's ass. You replied to ME, that means MY topic is the one we're discussing.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Arafat was part of that agreement. Trump has not participated here so far, beyond issuing nuclear threats. So from what incredibly warped perspective do you view doing nothing but trumpeting bellicose rhetoric as of Nobel consideration?Quote:
If the committee can look past a history of actual bombings when a potential peace agreement for a decades old conflict is reached then looking past threats of bombings for a peace agreement to a decades old conflict should be possible.
Not to mention that he's actively fanning the flames on another front: Iran.
Yes, and why Trump approaching this from his business-oriented "art of the deal" is naive and dangerous. When Trump made his announcement today to withdraw from the Iran deal, he said the US was done with empty threats, and that he will keep his promises.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
Well, he's threatened NK with fire-and-fury, and total annihilation. And he's promised Israel that Iran will never ever have nuclear weapons. :eek:
Eh screw Iran. The original 'deal' was garbage anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
Reneging on the deal screws the US. It is an epic self-own.
Where did you get that idea? Breitbart or Fox? If it was such a garbage deal, why did France, Germany, the UK, the EU, China, and Russia all agree to the original terms?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
edit: and why did Macron, Merkel, and May <and even Boris Johnson> make special efforts to convince Trump to stay in the agreement if it was such "garbage"?
The Deal aimed to stop Iran's nuclear program. It clearly stopped Iran's nuclear program. I take it you prefer either a nuclear Iran or yet another American war in the Middle East?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
Seems like the US has been telegraphing to the world that, in diplomacy, we are unreliable negotiating partners and untrustworthy to stick by our word -- thinking not just the Iran deal, but the Paris Climate deal and the TPP. The lesson here, I suppose, is in the risk of making diplomatic deals without an official treaty ratified by the Senate. Trump has really gone out of his way to demonstrate that nothing done by the executive branch alone is stable from one administration to the next, no matter how sensible, beneficial, practical or smart the policy is. That's the rub, when the Obama administration negotiated all that stuff, they were forced to work around the Senate, which would never have worked with Obama on anything at all. And I'm guessing it seemed to them like an only moderately risky path to take because they expected the next administration to behave rationally, Republican or Democrat. Well, so much for that gamble.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Can't help but feel like American Iran hawks with their heads firmly stuck up their asses are going to let Saudis help them drag the US into a stupid, stupid armed conflict or outright war with Iran.
Warships are on the move.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
Let the Saudis drag us? No. Bolton and his clique are doing the dragging. They've been tugging and pulling in this direction since the second war with Iraq. Assuming they didn't regard that war as just a means to set-up to take on Iran.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
Iran is a part of the Axis of Evil and a major sponsor of international terrorism after all ...
I did say "help". Referring to the ship sabotage nonsense.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
You think that's a pretext to attack Iran? Gulf of Tonkin...
I think that's how they've decided to frame it. Idiots. Goddamn' idiots.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
https://www.ft.com/content/e6678754-...d-7c18c0ea0201
Quote:
The US is evacuating all but essential staff from its embassy and consulate in Iraq as tensions rise between the US and Iraq’s neighbour Iran in the volatile Gulf region.