Trump to North Korean leader: my nuclear button ‘is bigger & more powerful’

[jamahir]

The South’s unification minister Cho Myoung-Gyon told a press conference Tuesday that Seoul was “reiterating our willingness to hold talks with the North at any time and place in any form.”

The North and South must talk of reunification, without the participation of the USA government.

But Haley, the US Ambassador to the UN, told reporters Washington could not take the talks seriously “if they don’t do something to ban all nuclear weapons in North Korea.”

She said: “We consider this to be a very reckless regime. We don’t think we need a band-aid and we don’t think we need to smile and take a picture.

We have Nikki Haley acting like an ominous film character with the " we will always remember".

This Nikki Haley is as toxic as Hillary "we came, we saw, he died" Clinton.

By the way, it is the USA government which has been among the most reckless regimes in the history of mankind. If there is any country that must be removed of its weapons of mass destruction it is the USA.

Uh righto buddy. The President has control over the Nuclear weapons. People on here thinking that the US government consists of sane people are deluded. They are all war mongering maniacs. Heck a lot of them can't wait for the end of days.

Obomba ( Obama ) was among the most war-mongering presidents. Launched wars against Syria and Libya and a regime change action against Venezuela.

All this while having the Nobel Peace Prize.

 

[gambit]

The North and South must talk of reunification, without the participation of the USA government.

And without the participation of China.

By the way, it is the USA government which has been among the most reckless regimes in the history of mankind. If there is any country that must be removed of its weapons of mass destruction it is the USA.

And whose balls are big enough to do that, your India ?

 

[jamahir]

And without the participation of China.

China and Russia are neighbors to North Korea, so their participation is automatic.

And whose balls are big enough to do that, your India ?

The UNO perhaps. What is the UNO for then, if not this kind of dialogue??

I am just putting out a common sense statement - either every reasonably powerful country must have WMDs or none should have them. There must be simultaneous global disarmament. It is hypocrisy that certain countries can have WMDs and certain others cannot develop them.

There is already the history of the START disarmament talks between USSR and USA, why can't there be a expanded version for the present??

 

[padamchen]

China and Russia are neighbors to North Korea and their participation is automatic.



The UNO perhaps. What is the UNO for then, if not this kind of dialogue??

I am just putting out a common sense statement - either every reasonably powerful country must have WMDs or none should have them. There must be simultaneous global disarmament. It is hypocrisy that certain countries can have WMDs and certain others cannot develop them.

There is already the history of the START disarmament talks between USSR and USA, why can't there be a expanded version for the present??

Things have not really changed since the end of WWII.

The UNSC veto vote of 5 is bollocks.

The only veto that actually counts in this world order is the veto of 2.

And the Libyan and Syrian conflicts have underlined that clearly.

Neither will push the other beyond the point of no return.

Either will take out anyone else without blinking an eyelid.

Unless the other puts himself in the way. Directly. Explicitly.

Its as simple as that.

Cheers, Doc

 

[maxpayne]

World leaders fighter over who have the bigger phunno! [emoji38]

 

[Reichsmarschall]

What if God refused to bless ?

God always bless those who are righteous

 

[jamahir]

Things have not really changed since the end of WWII.

The UNSC veto vote of 5 is bollocks.

"Bollocks" - tell me you made a mistake.

The only veto that actually counts in this world order is the veto of 2.

USA and who??

And the Libyan and Syrian conflicts have underlined that clearly.

Later in the Syrian conflict, Russia realized that it made a mistake in not participation in Libya and Syria. Recently ( three days ago, I think ), China too landed a special forces unit in Syria.

 

[gambit]

China and Russia are neighbors to North Korea, so their participation is automatic.

And we are ally to SKR, therefore our participation is equally automatic.

The UNO perhaps. What is the UNO for then, if not this kind of dialogue??

I am just putting out a common sense statement - either every reasonably powerful country must have WMDs or none should have them. There must be simultaneous global disarmament. It is hypocrisy that certain countries can have WMDs and certain others cannot develop them.

There is already the history of the START disarmament talks between USSR and USA, why can't there be a expanded version for the present??

No, you -- the highlighted -- have NOT.

Every ban must have a mean of enforcement, which begs the question of who is more powerful than US to enforce the ban that no country is allowed to have nuclear weapons.

As far as treaties goes, your argument proved you have a shallow understanding of them. In the absence of enforcement capability, as neither US nor USSR is capable of invading each other's country to enforce the treaties, the alternative is the escalation of what was proposed to reduce or banned, which was undesirable. As it stands currently, the UN Security Council is content with the status quo.

God always bless those who are righteous

So since NKR have been economically miserable all these decades...

 

[padamchen]

"Bollocks" - tell me you made a mistake.



USA and who??



Later in the Syrian conflict, Russia realized that it made a mistake in not participation in Libya and Syria. Recently ( three days ago, I think ), China too landed a special forces unit in Syria.

It's always been the russkies n the yanks man.

Since before the first atom bomb was dropped on Japan.

And why the Japs got nuked in the first place, not once but twice, in spite of negotioating for surrender weeks earlier.

Both individually will annihilate China without raising one cheek off the chair.

Cheers, Doc

 

[Yaseen1]

u.s will lose much if nuke exchange occur as u.s has much developed infrastructure than nkorea which is already near stoneage and underdeveloped

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

You know. If it was anybody else, I would have said click bait headline but with trump I knew he would say that and lo & behold. Good lord. What was going in the head of american people when they elected this guy?

The same staffs as what's going inside Trump's head now. ..

 

[$@rJen]

 

[jamahir]

And we are ally to SKR, therefore our participation is equally automatic.

But what is the USA establishment's view of the South Korea Ministry of Unification?? Surely, USA governments do not like such a ministry to exist because USA governments either want to destroy the North or keep the division boiling forever because USA's weapons manufacturing companies can earn.

No, you -- the highlighted -- have NOT.

Every ban must have a mean of enforcement, which begs the question of who is more powerful than US to enforce the ban that no country is allowed to have nuclear weapons.

As far as treaties goes, your argument proved you have a shallow understanding of them. In the absence of enforcement capability, as neither US nor USSR is capable of invading each other's country to enforce the treaties, the alternative is the escalation of what was proposed to reduce or banned, which was undesirable. As it stands currently, the UN Security Council is content with the status quo.

I agree about the underlined and will say the below :

I believe that during the time of the USSR, generally there was the an understanding that both USA and USSR, by themselves or through NATO and Warsaw Pact, could bring about Third World War, not through full-scale invasion of territorial USA and USSR but by either incremental invasion of allies or missile war. This understanding was taken as is, at face value. Even at that time, the UNO-SC was not powerful than NATO and Warsaw Pact.

Presently, there is NATO and the SCO ( Shanghai Cooperation Organization ). The latter, if it really wants to, can provide a means for sensible mutual disarmament. We read on PDF three or four days ago that a unit of Chinese special forces have landed in Syria in support of the Syrian government. Russia is already operating in Syria and both actions are despite the decisions in UNO-SC.

 

[Zibago]

And he is making the super power the laughing stock. We have Nikki Haley acting like an ominous film character with the " we will always remember". This is what happens when you blindly vote in hatred.

Put on notice,taking names these are words middle-schoolers use

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

You won't get any argument on that from me. I think the man is a clown and an embarrassment.

That being said, due to blatant confirmation bias, many people with other agendas here will focus much more on Trump's response.

But yet will conveniently overlook the almost equally bellicose statement that Kim made which is what instigated Trump's response. As childish as that response was.

In my opinion, Trump was punching down and shouldn't have responded. It doesn't change the fact that Kimmy's statement was very bellicose as well.

Do you think that maybe people expect such statements from North Korea, but they don't expect such statements from the USA?

It's not really as if Trump needed an excuse to be belligerent, he has gone after North Korea, Iran and Pakistan in the span of two days. With the Jerusalem vote just a short while before that.

Kind of makes one miss HongWu.