North Korea

[sglowrider]

And you don’t understand relevance. Desk photos will never matter to starving people.

Patriotism and national pride trump all that.

I just dont understand why you are not getting all this CoH? It's so blatantly obvious and yet... unless you are just trolling.
Or has so skilled in the dark arts of nuance been so detrimental to your worldview, that you cant see it like a brick is to a window now?

 

[MonroeCity]

Per Kyodo News: North Korea summit back on and North Korea may have agreed to give up some nukes.
IF...IF...IF North Korea did agree to give up part of its nuclear arsenal and its ICBMs, that would be a positive first step towards total denuclearization.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Patriotism and national pride trump all that.

I just dont understand why you are not getting all this CoH? It's so blatantly obvious and yet... unless you are just trolling.
Or has so skilled in the dark arts of nuance been so detrimental to your worldview, that you cant see it like a brick is to a window now?

I get this from experience. I have never felt that "status" of the participants matters a wit in a negotiation. I have never been impressed with desk pictures. That stuff is for amateurs or other nonparticipant observers. It is irrelevant to the issues at stake. Or it might be from your desperate need to criticize Trump for everything.

 

[sglowrider]

I get this from experience. I have never felt that "status" of the participants matters a wit in a negotiation. I have never been impressed with desk pictures. That stuff is for amateurs or other nonparticipant observers. It is irrelevant to the issues at stake. Or it might be from your desperate need to criticize Trump for everything.

You are seeing things from your prism only. The world works quite differently.

Btw.I am not desperate to criticise Trump. I dont generate the crap, I only highlight it -- unlike you dont support Trump, but you constantly defend him.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

You are seeing things from your prism only. The world works quite differently.

Btw.I am not desperate to criticise Trump. I dont generate the crap, I only highlight it -- like you dont support Trump, but you constantly defend him.

You are talking about emotional things. Yeah, that is a large part of how the world works. Did you watch enjoy the wedding a week or so ago? That is how the world works too. That’s okay, but status is irrelevant to the objectives of the summit.

I don’t like Trump. I defend many of his decisions. If you want to call that “support,” that’s okay with me. More emotionalism.

 

[sglowrider]

 

[MonroeCity]

If Trump can't come away from Singapore with something substantial, his best play is to say he tried and wash his hands of it. A half-baked, half-assed disarmament agreement monitored by the IAEA which has never met a dictator it wouldn't kowtow to is going to be a stunning political loss for Trump and he can't afford it, particularly in this election year.

 

[sglowrider]

I get this from experience. I have never felt that "status" of the participants matters a wit in a negotiation. I have never been impressed with desk pictures. That stuff is for amateurs or other nonparticipant observers. It is irrelevant to the issues at stake. Or it might be from your desperate need to criticize Trump for everything.

From someone who dealt at the highest level, John Brennan. See 5mins onwards:


You may need to re-look at your own prism when you cant see something so basic and obvious even for a mere minion like me.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

From someone who dealt at the highest level, John Brennan. See 5mins onwards:

View embedded media

You may need to re-look at your own prism when you cant see something so basic and obvious even for a mere minion like me.

LOL. I'll stipulate that Kim wants the picture for his desk. So what? That has zero effect on the objectives of the summit.

John Brennan is a NBC/MSNBC paid liberal/Trump-hating pundit. I think a partisan TV gig is unprecedented for a former Director of Central Intelligence. That tells me what a political hack Brennan is. If you are going to lecture me about "re-looking at my own prism" you are going to need a better starting point than John Brennan.

 

[sglowrider]

LOL. I'll stipulate that Kim wants the picture for his desk. So what? That has zero effect on the objectives of the summit.

John Brennan is a NBC/MSNBC paid liberal/Trump-hating pundit. I think a partisan TV gig is unprecedented for a former Director of Central Intelligence. That tells me what a political hack Brennan is. If you are going to lecture me about "re-looking at my own prism" you are going to need a better starting point than John Brennan.

I get it now. Someone who doesn't prescribe to your perception is labeled as in this case, a political hack, liberal/Trump-hating pundit. How convenient.
Ironically, nuance isnt one of your strongest attributes either --- when you cant see the value of a visual image of standing next to a POTUS (even if its Trump) splashed across the world's press and more importantly the North Korean citizens.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

when you cant see the value of a visual image of standing next to a POTUS (even if its Trump) splashed across the world's press and more importantly the North Korean citizens.

I agree, many would be impressed with that visual image. Those people are impressed by superficial nonsense. Are you impressed with that kind of visual image when you see one?

 

[sglowrider]

I agree, many would be impressed with that visual image. Those people are impressed by superficial nonsense. Are you impressed with that kind of visual image when you see one?

I don't particularly care but the images of standing next to a prime minister or CEO of a massive company isn't for my personal consumption -- it's for others or even the company employees. It opens up avenues either internally or the public.

My own achievements are more mundane, simple -- I shifted a company (one of the largest in the world) stock value by E$1.30 because of my actions and I had sex in the Prime Minister's house quite a few times, out of view of the cameras and no pictures either.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I don't particularly care but the images of standing next to a prime minister or CEO of a massive company isn't for my personal consumption -- it's for others or even the company employees. It opens up avenues either internally or the public.

My own achievements are more mundane, simple -- I shifted a company (one of the largest in the world) stock value by E$1.30 because of my actions and I had sex in the Prime Minister's house quite a few times, out of view of the cameras and no pictures either.

Pictures might open up avenues, but they mean zilch when negotiating serious issues. I suppose Brennan would call off the summit because Trump shouldn’t be seen at the same table as Kim. Brennan was in charge of the Central Intelligence Agency when according to him our enemy pulled off the mother of all covert ops.

 

[sglowrider]

Pictures might open up avenues, but they mean zilch when negotiating serious issues. I suppose Brennan would call off the summit because Trump shouldn’t be seen at the same table as Kim. Brennan was in charge of the Central Intelligence Agency when according to him our enemy pulled off the mother of all covert ops.

It does at a political level, especially for a pariah state. It gives them legitimacy and status.

 

[76-1]

It does at a political level, especially for a pariah state. It gives them legitimacy and status.

With who?

 

[sglowrider]

With who?

You mean, says who?

Spoiler: says who

 

[CO. Hoosier]

It does at a political level, especially for a pariah state. It gives them legitimacy and status.

Lol. A picture is too high a price to pay for a nuke deal. Got it.

 

[76-1]

You mean, says who?

Spoiler: says who

No, I said what I meant. You just evidently can't answer the question.

 

[sglowrider]

Lol. A picture is too high a price to pay for a nuke deal. Got it.

Duh!! You wont get a nuke deal. All Kim wants is to be seen to be on a world stage with a POTUS. There is prestige in that photo-op.

I really dont know why you guys don't get this -- it's like telling a kid to drink Vit C as its good for you.
Its that obvious. Its all about optics.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Duh!! You wont get a nuke deal. All Kim wants is to be seen to be on a world stage with a POTUS. There is prestige in that photo-op.

I really dont know why you guys don't get this -- it's like telling a kid to drink Vit C as its good for you.
Its that obvious. Its all about optics.

I’ll assume you are right. So what? Optics is not a good reason to not talk and tell South Korea and Japan, among others, to f—- off.

 

[sglowrider]

I’ll assume you are right. So what? Optics is not a good reason to not talk and tell South Korea and Japan, among others, to f—- off.

Apologies for a shortish answer but I am like 16hrs ahead of you and I hate typing longish response on a phone.

First thing you do is to find.out each others objectives and goals. We can't assume they are the same as both nations are coming from different angles, for purposes and stature - like even simple commercial contract consist of parties with differing objectives.
Kim's objectives will not to give up his dozen or so nukes unless he is in a position to do so. Being a pariah state, the first thing anyone wants would be recognition and acceptance by the world community starting with the current #1, USA. He knows realistically that giving up his bombs could also be the begining of his demise ala Gaddafi. So baby steps would be this: recognition and the perception of having a seat at the big boys table.

Trump's hastily arranged summit implies that he wants publicity and stature too.

Here they have common ground. Trump seeks global recognition as a statesman. And Kim too.

The liberal CIA has said that they won't give up their nukes. So what do u think the joint communique will be?
Further talks... Which would only enhance Kim's stature both domestically and internationally.
Trump has done his bit. And would move on to something else since he has realised that this nuclear marlarky is actually quite complicated and hard .. like Obamacare.

So if this was a boxing match.. we already had all the pre-match jabber, fire&fury etc. I think Kim has already won a few rounds even without showing up in S'pore yet.
Like a boxing match that was lost on points both boxers will think they both won.
The we will have more re-matches which will have Kim ropeadoping Trump till he gets bored with it... Like Obamacare. And he will move on to something else.

Trump is an entertaininer at heart. Ain't no policy wonk. But is a business guy who loves attention and to entertain. If you think he is anything but that, I have a little bridge in Singapore to sell you.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

I’ll assume you are right. So what? Optics is not a good reason to not talk and tell South Korea and Japan, among others, to f—- off.

I suppose you have seen the clip of conservative commentators blasting Obama for the suggestion he would meet with Kim without major concessions in advance.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

I suppose you have seen the clip of conservative commentators blasting Obama for the suggestion he would meet with Kim without major concessions in advance.

And liberal commentators lauding him for the idea. Now we have conservative commentators both criticizing and lauding him for the effort while liberal commentators mostly blast him for it. Isn't politics grand?

 

[CO. Hoosier]

First thing you do is to find.out each others objectives and goals.

That’s not the first thing you do. Not the second. It usually wont be in the top 5. We aren’t talking about mediation here where win win is the objective.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

The liberal CIA has said that they won't give up their nukes. So what do u think the joint communique will be?
Further talks... Which would only enhance Kim's stature both domestically and internationally.
Trump has done his bit. And would move on to something else since he has realised that this nuclear marlarky is actually quite complicated and hard .. like Obamacare.

The alternative to a failed negotiation is status quo. Trump clearly has the upper hand there. Kim knows it. Trump knows it. And Trump is applying that leverage very well.

 

[sglowrider]

That’s not the first thing you do. Not the second. It usually wont be in the top 5. We aren’t talking about mediation here where win win is the objective.

I think we come from different perspectives professionally. I am at the tip of the spear/process. We see things quite differently.
I will not need and legal input till further down the track after I have a framework agreed upon. As a result you may not see the same thing or consider the same things I would.
I have similar mismatch in understanding or conversations with my lawyer brother in law too.

 

[sglowrider]

The alternative to a failed negotiation is status quo. Trump clearly has the upper hand there. Kim knows it. Trump knows it. And Trump is applying that leverage very well.

What leverage? Sanctions? You need China to be onboard and what us Trump doing? Threatening China with tarriffs. Good luck there.
Plus now it looks like the Russians are getting their two cents worth too.
America is looking weaker imo.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I think we come from different perspectives professionally. I am at the tip of the spear/process. We see things quite differently.
I will not need and legal input till further down the track after I have a framework agreed upon. As a result you may not see the same thing or consider the same things I would.
I have similar mismatch in understanding or conversations with my lawyer brother in law too.

Grin. You call me when the other guy grabs your spear and breakes it.

I fully understand your point here. That said, before I start in with a negotiation on behalf of I client, I insist they give me a clear understanding of what they want and what they are willing to pay, or give up when no money is involved, to obtain what they want. Surprisingly they usually haven’t thought about it in those terms. For those clients for whom I served as general counsel they often would say “do what you think is best”. Ugh! That’s okay to settle a case, but not to negotiate a transaction. One client had an excellent CFO who was also a reserve military officer. I learned a lot from him.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

What leverage? Sanctions? You need China to be onboard and what us Trump doing? Threatening China with tarriffs. Good luck there.
Plus now it looks like the Russians are getting their two cents worth too.
America is looking weaker imo.

China doesn't want the Nork refugees and illegal immigrants. Neither does Russia.

 

[sglowrider]

Grin. You call me when the other guy grabs your spear and breakes it.

I fully understand your point here. That said, before I start in with a negotiation on behalf of I client, I insist they give me a clear understanding of what they want and what they are willing to pay, or give up when no money is involved, to obtain what they want. Surprisingly they usually haven’t thought about it in those terms. For those clients for whom I served as general counsel they often would say “do what you think is best”. Ugh! That’s okay to settle a case, but not to negotiate a transaction. One client had an excellent CFO who was also a reserve military officer. I learned a lot from him.

You need to put things on paper. But before there is that are a lot of posturing, optics, bouncing around of ideas etc.
Like when I am planning a platform from a blank piece of paper..dependingd on its complexity I don't really deep dive into the go to market details or even sales till much further down the track ... Until I know the product had undergone multiple iterations. It's messy at the start.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

And liberal commentators lauding him for the idea. Now we have conservative commentators both criticizing and lauding him for the effort while liberal commentators mostly blast him for it. Isn't politics grand?

That is exactly the problem, the government only has our support when it is owned by "our" side.

I would feel more comfortable if Trump were well read on North Korea. We know Trump refuses to be well read on anything. That is my fear with Trump on this, and frankly, most things. I may not have agreed with Bush 41, but I trusted he was making informed decisions. I had less faith in Bush 43, and no faith at all in Trump making an informed decision.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

You need to put things on paper. But before there is that are a lot of posturing, optics, bouncing around of ideas etc.
Like when I am planning a platform from a blank piece of paper..dependingd on its complexity I don't really deep dive into the go to market details or even sales till much further down the track ... Until I know the product had undergone multiple iterations. It's messy at the start.

Many in the business/legal/transaction world think posturing and optics are important considerations. They aren't. In my world we call the posturing, preening, optic lawyers litigators. Those who cut to the chase are trial lawyers.

 

[MonroeCity]

Bill Kristol goes on Twitter rant over Trump meeting with Kim Jong Un's deputy.
It is really hard to understand what Kristol's objections are here beyond grief over the failure of Hillary Clinton to be president or grief over a real shit-kicker of a war that might be avoided. Right now, whether you like Trump or despise him, you should be rooting for his success in Singapore. If you can't do that, then you probably have a few marbles that have popped loose rolling around in your skull.

 

[UncleMark]

Bill Kristol goes on Twitter rant over Trump meeting with Kim Jong Un's deputy.
It is really hard to understand what Kristol's objections are here beyond grief over the failure of Hillary Clinton to be president or grief over a real shit-kicker of a war that might be avoided. Right now, whether you like Trump or despise him, you should be rooting for his success in Singapore. If you can't do that, then you probably have a few marbles that have popped loose rolling around in your skull.

You forgot the link.

 

[MonroeCity]

Lack of attention to detail has been an issue with past negotiations with North Korea. We have been to eager to try to achieve an agreement in the past. I'm worried we could come out of this with a vague joint statement.
I would hope that our starting point is that North Korea must accept the U.N. definition of denuclearization: complete, verifiable, irreversible dismantlement of the regime's weapons arsenal, fissile material, and complete nuclear programs.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Lack of attention to detail has been an issue with past negotiations with North Korea. We have been to eager to try to achieve an agreement in the past. I'm worried we could come out of this with a vague joint statement.
I would hope that our starting point is that North Korea must accept the U.N. definition of denuclearization: complete, verifiable, irreversible dismantlement of the regime's weapons arsenal, fissile material, and complete nuclear programs.

There is a lot of items to discuss. For example, they have thousands of nuclear and rocket scientists. In theory, they need to be moved out of North Korea to be really denuclearized.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

And liberal commentators lauding him for the idea. Now we have conservative commentators both criticizing and lauding him for the effort while liberal commentators mostly blast him for it. Isn't politics grand?

You remember incorrectly. Obama drew criticism across the spectrum when he first made those comments. I encourage you to find an example of specific liberal individuals defending Obama's comments at the time who now attack Trump for his stance on talks. I bet you can't do it. On the other hand, as Marvin pointed out, it's very easy to find specific conservative individuals who are acting like raging hypocrites on this issue.

It seems very important to you, personally, Aloha, to always stress that liberals are just as bad as conservatives. Whenever conservatives are criticized for something, you are anxious to point out that liberals have done or are doing the same thing. Except, you often - as you did in this case - phrase your retort in such a way as to imply that the liberals are actually slightly worse. In this case, your retort is simply false. Liberals are not slightly worse at this. They are not slightly more hypocritical on North Korea. Instead, it is conservatives who are more hypocritical - and not slightly, either.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

You remember incorrectly. Obama drew criticism across the spectrum when he first made those comments. I encourage you to find an example of specific liberal individuals defending Obama's comments at the time who now attack Trump for his stance on talks. I bet you can't do it. On the other hand, as Marvin pointed out, it's very easy to find specific conservative individuals who are acting like raging hypocrites on this issue.

It seems very important to you, personally, Aloha, to always stress that liberals are just as bad as conservatives. Whenever conservatives are criticized for something, you are anxious to point out that liberals have done or are doing the same thing. Except, you often - as you did in this case - phrase your retort in such a way as to imply that the liberals are actually slightly worse. In this case, your retort is simply false. Liberals are not slightly worse at this. They are not slightly more hypocritical on North Korea. Instead, it is conservatives who are more hypocritical - and not slightly, either.

You have a case of selective memory. You always do on these matters because the idea that Democrats are also hypocrites obviously bothers you. I also didn’t intend to say liberals are slightly worse at hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is a trait shared by politicians all over the spectrum.

 

[MonroeCity]

Marvin, I agree there are a lot of issues that need to be discussed. I guess what I was trying to say is that we need to get them to accept the U.N. definition of denuclearization so that there in no misunderstanding of the terminology.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Marvin, I agree there are a lot of issues that need to be discussed. I guess what I was trying to say is that we need to get them to accept the U.N. definition of denuclearization so that there in no misunderstanding of the terminology.

I do agree with that. I would hope that was worked out last week when the envoy was here. I think my point is there is so much to workout that I don't expect anything buy a vague statement from the summit. I cannot imagine they can hammer out anything concrete or even close to concrete in one summit.