Could this be one of the dumbest ideas in modern history?

[RandBlade]

After Arafat was actually sitting down and negotiating yes. We haven't seen Trump doing that with North Korea.

Cogs are in motion, its entirely possible he will within the next couple of years.

[LittleFuzzy]

Cogs are in motion, its entirely possible he will within the next couple of years.

Then he can be discussed in terms of peace prize potential after the next couple of years have passed.

[RandBlade]

Then he can be discussed in terms of peace prize potential after the next couple of years have passed.

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.

[LittleFuzzy]

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.

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.

"Trump's contribution was effectively repeatedly saying "I'mma nuke you first." No Nobel committee is ever going to give that the Peace Price."

[RandBlade]

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.

"Trump's contribution was effectively repeatedly saying "I'mma nuke you first." No Nobel committee is ever going to give that the Peace Price."

Arafat's contribution was I am bombing you until he stopped. No Nobel committee would give that the peace prize either.

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.

[LittleFuzzy]

Arafat's contribution was I am bombing you until he stopped. No Nobel committee would give that the peace prize either.

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.

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.

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?