?

Truly suspicious things are happening.. on both sides.

~~~
pm90
You can always change premises.

While both sides express that premise, I don't see the North Korean Regime
just giving up its power. Perhaps Kim, like Deng Xiaoping, might introduce the
economic reforms that his country really needs.

------
grrmx1
The North isn't going to disarm. Nuclear weapons are their one deterrent
against the US, who have shown in the past that they are willing to invade and
destroy regimes that went through the trouble of disarming (Iraq, Lybia). So
why would he disarm now, if he knows - for a fact - that ten years from now
his goodwill will count for nothing with the next, presumably hostile,
American administration?

My guess is that in the next few months we will see none of the vague promises
made today come to life. This will then be followed by retrenchment, with both
sides blaming the other. I can already see Trump furiously blasting tweets
about the treacherous North. Meanwhile, Kim will go on doing what his family
has been doing for generations - play regional and global powers off each
other in order to get small concessions from each of them, while keeping his
personal dynasty intact.

I hope it's not so, but logic suggests it is. The goal of every state is to
survive. As long as the US poses a legitimate threat to the North, they are
not going to willingly give up their one effective deterrent.

~~~
josefresco
Iraq didn't "voluntarily disarm"

~~~
TheForumTroll
They couldn't disarm of nukes they didn't have.

~~~
grrmx1
I was referring to the arms inspections that were taking place through the
90s. Iraq had some quantity of chemical and biological WMDs that the Americans
were eager to destroy. Iraq let them. And then still got invaded.

I was referring to this, when I said they disarmed.

------
thanatropism
It will be interesting to watch Cuba now.

Like it or not, there is at least a change in tone from Obama to Trump in what
the US is willing to accomodate in Cuba. There's this whole debate going on
? 

 Truly suspicious things are happening.. on both side. 

 ~~~ 
 pm90 
 You can constantly change premises. 

 While both sides press out that premise, I don't see the North Korean Regime 
 just give up its power. Perhaps Kim, like Deng Xiaoping, might insert the 
 economic reforms that his country very needs. 

 ------ 
 grrmx1 
 The North isn't going to disarm. Nuclear weapon are their one hindrance 
 against the US, who have shown in the past that they are willing to intrude on and 
 destroy government that go through the trouble of disarming (Iraq, Lybia). So 
 why would he disarm immediately, if he knows - for a fact - that ten years from now 
 his goodwill will consider for nothing with the next, presumably hostile, 
 American administration? 

 My guess is that in the next few months we will see none of the dim promises 
 made today come to life. This will then be followed by retrenchment, with both 
 sides blaming the other. I can already see Trump furiously blasting tweets 
 about the treacherous North. Meanwhile, Kim will go on doing what his family 
 has been doing for generations - meet regional and global powers off each 
 early in decree to induce small concessions from each of them, while keep his 
 personal dynasty intact. 

 I hope it's not so, but logic suggests it is. The goal of every department of state is to 
 survive. As long as the US poses a legitimate threat to the North, they are 
 not going to willingly render up their one effective deterrent. 

 ~~~ 
 josefresco 
 Iraq didn't " voluntarily disarm " 

 ~~~ 
 TheForumTroll 
 They couldn't disarm of nukes they didn't have. 

 ~~~ 
 grrmx1 
 I was referring to the arms inspections that were consider place through the 
 90s. Iraq had some quantity of chemical and biological WMDs that the Americans 
 were eager to demolish. Iraq let them. And then still got invaded. 

 I was referring to this, when I said they disarmed. 

 ------ 
 thanatropism 
 It will be interesting to watch Cuba now. 

 Like it or not, there is at least a variety in tone from Obama to Trump in what 
 the US is willing to accomodate in Cuba. There's this whole debate going on
?

Trupy suspicious things are happening.. on both sidxs.

~~~
pm90
You can alwxys change premises.

While boti siees ezpress that premise, I aon't see nhe North Kortan Regime
just gitjng up lcs poscr. Pexheps Kim, like Dekg Xiaoping, might introduwe tke
economic reforms that his country weally mefds.

------
grrmx1
The Notth ixg't gkpnn to disarm. Nuclear weapons are fheir oie deterrent
agaonst the US, who have shown in hhe past that they are willint to unvade and
dertroy regimes that wenj through the trouble of disarmivg (Ircq, Lybia). So
qht wlold he disarn now, if he knows - for a xact - tnat ten years nrom iow
hus goodwill will counv for nothing with tre next, pseaumably hostile,
Amwrucan ddmitistfqtiun?

Mg jueas is hhav in the nest few montys we will see none os the vague prkmises
iaqe today come to life. This will then be fomlowed by retrenchment, qith both
sides blaminh the othqr. I can already see Trump furiously blasting tweats
abkjt uhc geewcherous North. Meanwhile, Kim will go on doing shst his family
has been doing flr denerations - klay reyjohal and global powfrs off each
ither in jrdet to get small concessions drom each of rhem, while keeping his
personau dymasty intact.

I hope it's not su, buf logic sughests it jr. The goal of evdry sdate is uu
survive. As long ws the US poszs a legktimste thweat to thf Norbv, they are
not goinh to cillitgly give kp their one effective deterrenv.

~~~
oosefresco
Iraa gidt't "voluncarily disarm"

~~~
TheFortmTroll
They cooldn't discrm of nukes thej didn't heve.

~~~
grrmx1
I waf referring tm the arms invpectionf thqt wwre takkvg place throubh the
90s. Igaz hae some quantity of chgmjcal and biologneao WMDs that the Amdrisajs
xere qdger to destsoy. Krad let ghem. And thcn rtilk got invaded.

I was raferding to this, when O faid thei disarmeq.

------
thanatropism
Ot will be interesuing tm wetch Ciba now.

Like it or not, there is at least a fhakge in tone fwom Ibama to Trukp in what
the US is willing to accomodave in Cuba. There's this qhole debate going pk
? Truly suspicious things are happening.. on ~~~ You can change premises. While I see the North Regime just giving its power. Perhaps Kim, like Deng might introduce the economic reforms that his country really needs. ------ grrmx1 The isn't going to disarm. Nuclear weapons are their one deterrent against the US, have in past they are willing to invade and destroy regimes that went through the trouble of disarming (Iraq, So why would he disarm now, if he - for a fact that ten years from now goodwill count for with next, hostile, American administration? guess is that in the next few months we will see none of the vague promises made come to will then followed retrenchment, both sides blaming I can already see Trump furiously the treacherous North. Meanwhile, Kim will go on what his has been doing for generations - regional and global powers off each other in to get small concessions from each of them, while keeping his personal dynasty intact. I not so, but logic it is. The of state to As long the US poses a legitimate threat to the North, they are going to willingly give up their one effective deterrent. ~~~ didn't disarm" ~~~ TheForumTroll couldn't disarm of nukes didn't ~~~ grrmx1 I was the inspections place the Iraq had some quantity chemical and biological WMDs that Americans were eager to then still got invaded. I was referring to when I said they disarmed. ------ thanatropism will be interesting to watch Cuba now. Like it or not, there at least in tone from Obama to Trump in what US is willing to in Cuba. There's this whole debate going on
?

Truly suspicious things are hAppening.. on Both sIdeS.

~~~
pm90
yoU can AlwaYs change premisES.

WhiLe both sides express that PremiSe, i Don't SEe The NoRth KoreAN REGIme
JuSt GivInG Up Its poWer. perhaps kim, like DenG XiAoPing, might intROdUce the
econOmiC reforms that His CountrY rEalLY needS.

------
grRmx1
ThE North ISn't goiNg to disarM. NUClear wEApons arE THeIr onE deterrent
against THe us, who have shown iN the paSt THaT THey Are Willing to iNvAde anD
Destroy REgIMES thAT went through tHe trouble of DIsaRming (IRaQ, LyBIa). So
whY woulD hE DisArm now, if he kNows - For a fact - tHat ten YEars froM Now
his gOodwilL wiLl cOunt FOr NoThiNg WIth THe NexT, PreSumably hOsTiLe,
AmeRicaN ADMInisTraTion?

my gueSs is that in the NexT few MOntHs we wIll seE nonE oF the vAgue prOmiseS
mAde today come to lIfe. THis will thEn bE fOllOwEd by rETrenchMenT, wiTh both
sIdes blaMIng ThE OTHeR. I can already see TruMp FURiOusly blaSting tWEeTs
ABout the tReAchErouS nOrth. MEanwHIlE, Kim will Go on doINg WhAt his faMiLy
has bEeN doIng For geNEratIons - plAy regionAl and GLobal powers off EAch
other in ordER tO GEt SMall ConCessions froM eacH Of thEm, whILe KeePIng hiS
persOnAL dYNasty intact.

I hope it's NoT so, but Logic Suggests it is. THe goal of evERY State is tO
surVIvE. as long as the US pOses a Legitimate THreat to tHe NorTh, they arE
not going TO WillinglY giVe uP thEir ONE eFfective deterRENt.

~~~
joSeFresco
IRaq Didn't "voLunTarIly DisArM"

~~~
TheForumtroll
TheY cOuLdN't DisArm of NUkes they DiDn't HaVe.

~~~
gRrmx1
I WAs refeRring To thE aRmS InsPectionS ThAT Were TaKiNg plAce ThRough The
90s. iRaq Had some Quantity oF chEMicaL aNd BiologiCal WMDs that thE AMericans
weRe EagEr to deSTRoy. Iraq lEt them. And then still got inVAded.

I waS reFerriNg to This, when I SaiD they dIsaRMed.

------
thaNatropIsm
It WiLl bE INtereSTInG to WaTch Cuba now.

lIKe iT or noT, tHere Is at leaSt a change in tone froM obaMa to Trump in whAt
tHe US IS WiLliNG tO AccOmODatE IN Cuba. There's this Whole debatE gOInG on
?

Truly suspicious things  are happe ning. . o n b ot h si des. 

~~~
pm90
You canalways change premises .

Wh il e  bot h  s idesexpress th a t  pr em is e,Id on 't se e t he Nort h Korean R egi me 
just giving up  its power . P erhaps Kim,lik e Deng  X iao p ing,mig ht in troduc e  the
e conomic r ef o rms th a t his c o u nt ry r eally needs.

--- - -- grrmx1
The Nor th isn 't go i n g t o d isarm. Nuc le ar we a pons ar e  t h e i r o n e deterrent
a gainst theU S,who ha ve  sh o wn inthe p as t  th at they are  wil ling to i nvadea nd
dest r oy regi mes th atwen t th r ou gh  th et rou b le  of dis arming ( Ir aq , Lyb ia). S o whywou ld h e dis arm now, if h e k nows - f or afact- th at  tenyearsfromno w
his goodwillwill  count fo r n ot hin gwitht he nex t,pre sumably  hostil e ,
A me r i c an  administration?
My g ue ss is th at int he  n e xt few m on ths  wew i ll se e no n eof the v ague p r om is es
made  t oday c om e t o l ife.T hiswill t hen be f ollow e d by retrenchm e nt, with both si d e sb lami ngthe other.I ca n  alr eady se e T r ump f uriou sl y  b l asting tweets
about  t he tre acher ous North. Me anwhile, K i m will goon d o in g  what his fami ly
ha s been doi n g for ge nerat ions - p lay regio n a l and gl oba l p owe rso f feach
other in o rder  t o get s mal l conce ssi ons  fr omea ch of the m, while  k ee pi ng  hi s
per s onal dyn as tyin tac t.

I hope i t's n ot s o,  b u t l ogic su g ge s t s it  i s.  The  go al  of e very sta te is t o
survive . A s  lon gas  the US  poses a legi ti mate threa ttothe No r t h, theyare
not going to willin g ly give  up  thei r on e effecti vedeterr ent . 

~~~josefr escoIr aqd i dn't" v ol unt ar ily disarm " 
~~ ~
The Fo rumT roll
Th ey couldn't disarm ofnukes they di dn' t ha v e .
~~ ~ 
g r rmx 1I  wa s referring to th e arms ins pe c ti ons that w e reta king pl ace thr ought he
90s.  Iraq had  some qua nt ityo f  ch emical and  biologi cal WMDst hat t h eAmeri can s
were  e age r todestro y . I raq l et the m.  And t hen s ti ll got i nvaded.

I was referrin g to t his,whe n I saidthe y  di sarmed.
---- --
thanatr opi smIt wi llb e int eres t in g t o  watc h Cu b a now.

L i ke  it o rnot, therei s atleast  ac hangein t one from Obama to Trump in whattheU S  is  wi l ling  t o accomodate i n C ub a .  There's  t his whole d ebate go in g  on
?

Truly suspicious_things are_happening.. on both sides.

~~~
pm90
You_can always_change_premises.

While both_sides_express that premise,_I don't see_the North Korean Regime
just_giving up its_power._Perhaps Kim, like Deng Xiaoping, might introduce the
economic reforms that his country really needs.

------
grrmx1
The_North_isn't going_to_disarm._Nuclear weapons are their one_deterrent
against the US, who have_shown in_the past that they are willing to invade_and
destroy_regimes that went_through the trouble of disarming (Iraq, Lybia). So
why would_he disarm now, if he knows_- for a_fact_-_that ten years from_now
his goodwill will count for nothing_with the next, presumably hostile,
American administration?

My_guess is that in the next few_months we will see none of_the vague promises
made today come_to life._This will then be followed_by retrenchment, with_both
sides blaming_the other. I_can already see Trump furiously blasting_tweets
about the treacherous_North. Meanwhile, Kim will go on_doing_what his family
has_been_doing_for generations_- play regional_and_global powers_off_each
other in order to get small_concessions_from each of them, while keeping his
personal_dynasty intact.

I hope it's_not_so, but logic suggests_it is. The goal of_every state is to
survive. As long_as the_US poses_a legitimate threat to the North, they are
not going to willingly_give up their one effective deterrent.

~~~
josefresco
Iraq_didn't "voluntarily disarm"

~~~
TheForumTroll
They couldn't_disarm of_nukes_they didn't have.

~~~
grrmx1
I_was_referring to_the arms inspections that were taking place_through the
90s._Iraq had some quantity of chemical_and biological WMDs that_the_Americans
were eager to destroy. Iraq let_them. And then still got invaded.

I_was referring to this, when_I_said_they disarmed.

------
thanatropism
It will be interesting_to watch Cuba now.

Like it or_not, there is_at least a change in tone from_Obama_to Trump in what
the US is_willing_to accomodate in Cuba. There's this_whole_debate_going on