schedules
rosters
news
standings
tickets
vucommodores link by sport
forum
FTB_LINK__LINK__LINK__LINK__LINK__LINK__LINK_
MBB_LINK__LINK__LINK__LINK__LINK__LINK__LINK_
WBB_LINK__LINK__LINK__LINK__LINK__LINK__LINK_
BAS_LINK__LINK__LINK__LINK__LINK__LINK__LINK_

Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

For non-Vanderbilt sports discussion including but not limited to politics, science, the arts, travel, technology, entertainment, food & drink and more.

Moderators: Vandyman74, roanoke, VandyWhit, kerrigjl, BrentVU, jfgogold, NateSY, KarenYates

vebiltdervan
Posts: 19547
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2016 5:31 pm
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby vebiltdervan » Wed Jun 13, 2018 12:33 pm

Matheta wrote:...Jebezz, you get so silly with your nit picking!
I was in no way disagreeing or disputing with, or being critical of, you. In such cases, you are cordially invited not to read a post of mine you find "nit picking".

I do want take this opportunity though to thank you for your post about the sermon. It gives me the heartiest laugh at this point for its entire appropriateness, though not evidently in the manner/direction you believed.



Matheta
Posts: 6723
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 10:46 am
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby Matheta » Wed Jun 13, 2018 1:59 pm

vebiltdervan wrote:
Matheta wrote:...Jebezz, you get so silly with your nit picking!
I was in no way disagreeing or disputing with, or being critical of, you. In such cases, you are cordially invited not to read a post of mine you find "nit picking".

I do want take this opportunity though to thank you for your post about the sermon. It gives me the heartiest laugh at this point for its entire appropriateness, though not evidently in the manner/direction you believed.


".. . though not evidently in the manner/direction you believed."

I find this statement by our esteemed frequent contributor to actually be quite humorous. Tell me 'dervan, who frequently called me before the throne of judgment for "claiming" to know the minds of posters, to now claim that for himself.

alathIN
Posts: 412
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 11:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby alathIN » Wed Jun 13, 2018 2:37 pm

ChattaDore wrote:
In all seriousness, regardless of your political leaning, this is a huge historical meeting and no matter what any news outlet says we have no idea the outcome or the results and won’t for a while.
My hope is that NK opens its borders for tourism, adopts a Republic Constitution and frees all it’s people. Would that be a failure or what?!?


Kim got 1) legitimacy for his rule - the prestige of meeting with a POTUS has been a priority for his family since I started studying Soviet/Communist regimes as a VU undergrad in 1983. 2) a promise that the US will end joint military exercises with SK. Another win for Kim.

The US got a vague promise that NK will work towards demilitarization of the Korean peninsula, which means NK vs SK with the US out of the game, without any specifics or concessions or timeline.

Any POTUS in the past 50 years could have had a summit with NK on these terms. Until now, nobody has thought that would be a good trade.

Be honest: if Obama had met with NK and gave away these concessions for free, you'd have been up in arms.

I'd like to see the outcome you're describing, but I don't see how this gets us any closer.

vebiltdervan
Posts: 19547
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2016 5:31 pm
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby vebiltdervan » Wed Jun 13, 2018 5:17 pm

Trump tweeted that "There is no longer a Nuclear Threat from North Korea."

Presumably then, all of NK's ballistic missiles and enriched uranium & plutonium stockpiles were brought back on Air Force One, in Trump's ditty bag.

Seriously, this tells any sane person everything he/she needs to know about the level of unreality & self-delusion we're dealing with at the top of our "negotiating team". There are no actual "Summit Results", not if you're looking for concessions from the other side. Instead, it's all just Fake Hyped News for the Base to consume.

AtrumEtAureum
Posts: 2735
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2016 7:20 am
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby AtrumEtAureum » Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:29 pm

alathIN wrote:
ChattaDore wrote:
In all seriousness, regardless of your political leaning, this is a huge historical meeting and no matter what any news outlet says we have no idea the outcome or the results and won’t for a while.
My hope is that NK opens its borders for tourism, adopts a Republic Constitution and frees all it’s people. Would that be a failure or what?!?


Kim got 1) legitimacy for his rule - the prestige of meeting with a POTUS has been a priority for his family since I started studying Soviet/Communist regimes as a VU undergrad in 1983. 2) a promise that the US will end joint military exercises with SK. Another win for Kim.

The US got a vague promise that NK will work towards demilitarization of the Korean peninsula, which means NK vs SK with the US out of the game, without any specifics or concessions or timeline.

Any POTUS in the past 50 years could have had a summit with NK on these terms. Until now, nobody has thought that would be a good trade.

Be honest: if Obama had met with NK and gave away these concessions for free, you'd have been up in arms.

I'd like to see the outcome you're describing, but I don't see how this gets us any closer.


What advantage does one gain from an air of legitimacy provided by meeting with a head of state? What has Cuba done with the legitimacy provided to it by Obama? I, for one, applaud Obama's meeting with Cuba and attempts at normalizing relations. Should we simply ignore that the Kims are the de facto state in North Korea? Or does "legitimizing" the Kims simply offend antiquated Westphalian values and little else?

Also, was the agreement not to "suspend" military exercises, which suggests a temporary nature contingent on North Korea's performance of its correlative obligations?


alathIN
Posts: 412
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 11:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby alathIN » Thu Jun 14, 2018 7:28 am

AtrumEtAureum wrote:
alathIN wrote:
ChattaDore wrote:
In all seriousness, regardless of your political leaning, this is a huge historical meeting and no matter what any news outlet says we have no idea the outcome or the results and won’t for a while.
My hope is that NK opens its borders for tourism, adopts a Republic Constitution and frees all it’s people. Would that be a failure or what?!?


Kim got 1) legitimacy for his rule - the prestige of meeting with a POTUS has been a priority for his family since I started studying Soviet/Communist regimes as a VU undergrad in 1983. 2) a promise that the US will end joint military exercises with SK. Another win for Kim.

The US got a vague promise that NK will work towards demilitarization of the Korean peninsula, which means NK vs SK with the US out of the game, without any specifics or concessions or timeline.

Any POTUS in the past 50 years could have had a summit with NK on these terms. Until now, nobody has thought that would be a good trade.

Be honest: if Obama had met with NK and gave away these concessions for free, you'd have been up in arms.

I'd like to see the outcome you're describing, but I don't see how this gets us any closer.


What advantage does one gain from an air of legitimacy provided by meeting with a head of state? What has Cuba done with the legitimacy provided to it by Obama? I, for one, applaud Obama's meeting with Cuba and attempts at normalizing relations. Should we simply ignore that the Kims are the de facto state in North Korea? Or does "legitimizing" the Kims simply offend antiquated Westphalian values and little else?

Also, was the agreement not to "suspend" military exercises, which suggests a temporary nature contingent on North Korea's performance of its correlative obligations?


It's all about optics.

If the POTUS has a summit with a foreign leader, he's recognizing this person and his regime. World leaders have frequently withheld such recognition for various reasons. You're effectively saying "This person is the legitimate leader of his country and he's important enough for me to meet with him."
The importance of this is not obvious to a US citizen, but for a small country that has been regarded as a pariah or "rogue state" it is a huge propaganda win.

The concession about military exercises is also about optics. It is not a good look for Kim when his opponents can play war games in his front yard with impunity. That's 99% of why we do it.
Of course we can "unsuspend" whenever we want, but then Kim gets to say - to a regional audience in particular - look, Warlike Imperialist Aggressor US is threatening us again, distrubing the peace!

Of course none of this is substantive yet. It's all posturing and propaganda, to influence the opinions of other parties, potential allies, etc.
Which is not to say it doesn't matter. For example, in South Korea, there are different opinions about how closely they should align with US interests versus draw closer to normal relations with the North. Those questions play in South Korean elections. Many South Koreans have relatives on the other side of the border, and cherish hopes of reunification. There are also mixed feelings about having such a large US military presence in South Korea. If Kim can create the appearance that he is being reasonable and we are out of line, you might get a new administration in South Korea that's more friendly to him than to us.
That's just one example, but it illustrates the point that propaganda wars can have real consequences.

vebiltdervan
Posts: 19547
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2016 5:31 pm
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby vebiltdervan » Thu Jun 14, 2018 11:26 am

AtrumEtAureum wrote:What advantage does one gain from an air of legitimacy provided by meeting with a head of state? What has Cuba done with the legitimacy provided to it by Obama? I, for one, applaud Obama's meeting with Cuba and attempts at normalizing relations. Should we simply ignore that the Kims are the de facto state in North Korea? Or does "legitimizing" the Kims simply offend antiquated Westphalian values and little else?...
I believe the advantages are pretty straightforward, although they differ between the Cuba & North Korea cases.

I think it's fair to say that in the case of Obama's attempted normalization of relations with Cuba, from Havana's point of view bestowing "legitimacy" took a distant back seat to the contemplated end of the 70-year U.S. economic embargo, from which Cuba stood to make a major leap forward in their tourist industry.

As for potential "legitimacy"-related PR advantages, I would argue that it was the U.S. that stood to gain more, as the rest of the world had for several decades increasingly condemned the U.S.' unilateral embargo, and it also rankled our direct & OAS relations with the other nations of South & Central America:

"The UN General Assembly has, since 1992, passed a resolution every year condemning the ongoing impact of the embargo and declaring it to be in violation of the Charter of the United Nations and international law. In 2014, out of the 193-nation assembly, 188 countries voted for the non-binding resolution, the United States and Israel voted against and the Pacific island nations Palau, Marshall Islands and Micronesia abstained."

In the case of North Korea, certainly they are interested in the advantage that ending the current economic sanctions represents. But the "legitimacy" thing in Pyongyang's should not be cavalierly dismissed, and certainly not by a non-equivalent comparison to Cuba. As far as the rest of the world's nations are concerned, the two are very dissimilar. Unlike Cuba, the North Korean gov't—due to their human rights violations, nuclear weapons development, & severely authoritarian government—has long resulted in their being viewed and treated by most nations of the world as a pariah state. Various U.S. economic sanctions have therefore achieved widespread agreement. That is why several generations of the Kim family dictators have greatly desired—arguably above anything else, aside from the acquisition of nuclear weapons—the recognition & implied acceptance that a U.S.-NK face-to-face summit would represent.

Because that has been the case for several decades, up until this week, it's an extremely valuable bargaining chip, which an American president who actually understands the art of dealmaking, could & should have used to (help) extract valuable concessions from NK. Trump had zero recognition of this, & just like giving away (for no concessions in return) the joint US-South Korean joint military exercises, he simply tossed that carefully-hoarded bargaining chip away for all time.

geeznotagain
Posts: 6501
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 4:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby geeznotagain » Thu Jun 14, 2018 12:08 pm

vebiltdervan wrote:
Because that has been the case for several decades, up until this week, it's an extremely valuable bargaining chip, which an American president who actually understands the art of dealmaking, could & should have used to (help) extract valuable concessions from NK. Trump had zero recognition of this, & just like giving away (for no concessions in return) the joint US-South Korean joint military exercises, he simply tossed that carefully-hoarded bargaining chip away for all time.


While it's likely that we will have no substantial gain from this "summit", I'm waiting before I denounce it as a complete and total failure. I think that's fair. And while I agree that Trump may not have complete and sufficient recognition of the "bargaining chip" he has tossed into the wishing well, I think saying that he had "zero recognition" of this is hyperbolic.

vebiltdervan
Posts: 19547
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2016 5:31 pm
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby vebiltdervan » Thu Jun 14, 2018 12:21 pm

geeznotagain wrote:...while I agree that Trump may not have complete and sufficient recognition of the "bargaining chip"...I think saying that he had "zero recognition" of this is hyperbolic.
Careful now: "hyperbole" is Trump-speak for a lie.

But how about this then: Trump considered that tossing away that bargaining chip for nothing in return took a distant second place to his calculation that he would get loads & loads of ego-inflating personal press coverage? That work for you?

geeznotagain
Posts: 6501
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 4:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby geeznotagain » Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:23 pm

vebiltdervan wrote:
geeznotagain wrote:...while I agree that Trump may not have complete and sufficient recognition of the "bargaining chip"...I think saying that he had "zero recognition" of this is hyperbolic.
Careful now: "hyperbole" is Trump-speak for a lie.

But how about this then: Trump considered that tossing away that bargaining chip for nothing in return took a distant second place to his calculation that he would get loads & loads of ego-inflating personal press coverage? That work for you?


Better, but (1) I'm not yet willing to say that he got nothing in return, and (2) although I'll stipulate that Trump's ego is way larger than most presidents', I think all presidents' desire for press coverage unduly influences what they do, what they say, where they go, etc.

vebiltdervan
Posts: 19547
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2016 5:31 pm
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby vebiltdervan » Thu Jun 14, 2018 5:43 pm

Image

alathIN
Posts: 412
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 11:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby alathIN » Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:29 pm

vebiltdervan wrote:Image


That's a little overstated the other direction. Didn't really give it 'all' away.
But he definitely did give away two things they've been wanting for 50 plus years without seeming to get anything in return

User avatar
cjdore
Posts: 8452
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 10:13 am
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby cjdore » Fri Jun 15, 2018 7:04 am

vebiltdervan wrote:
AtrumEtAureum wrote:What advantage does one gain from an air of legitimacy provided by meeting with a head of state? What has Cuba done with the legitimacy provided to it by Obama? I, for one, applaud Obama's meeting with Cuba and attempts at normalizing relations. Should we simply ignore that the Kims are the de facto state in North Korea? Or does "legitimizing" the Kims simply offend antiquated Westphalian values and little else?...
I believe the advantages are pretty straightforward, although they differ between the Cuba & North Korea cases.

I think it's fair to say that in the case of Obama's attempted normalization of relations with Cuba, from Havana's point of view bestowing "legitimacy" took a distant back seat to the contemplated end of the 70-year U.S. economic embargo, from which Cuba stood to make a major leap forward in their tourist industry.

As for potential "legitimacy"-related PR advantages, I would argue that it was the U.S. that stood to gain more, as the rest of the world had for several decades increasingly condemned the U.S.' unilateral embargo, and it also rankled our direct & OAS relations with the other nations of South & Central America:

"The UN General Assembly has, since 1992, passed a resolution every year condemning the ongoing impact of the embargo and declaring it to be in violation of the Charter of the United Nations and international law. In 2014, out of the 193-nation assembly, 188 countries voted for the non-binding resolution, the United States and Israel voted against and the Pacific island nations Palau, Marshall Islands and Micronesia abstained."

In the case of North Korea, certainly they are interested in the advantage that ending the current economic sanctions represents. But the "legitimacy" thing in Pyongyang's should not be cavalierly dismissed, and certainly not by a non-equivalent comparison to Cuba. As far as the rest of the world's nations are concerned, the two are very dissimilar. Unlike Cuba, the North Korean gov't—due to their human rights violations, nuclear weapons development, & severely authoritarian government—has long resulted in their being viewed and treated by most nations of the world as a pariah state. Various U.S. economic sanctions have therefore achieved widespread agreement. That is why several generations of the Kim family dictators have greatly desired—arguably above anything else, aside from the acquisition of nuclear weapons—the recognition & implied acceptance that a U.S.-NK face-to-face summit would represent.

Because that has been the case for several decades, up until this week, it's an extremely valuable bargaining chip, which an American president who actually understands the art of dealmaking, could & should have used to (help) extract valuable concessions from NK. Trump had zero recognition of this, & just like giving away (for no concessions in return) the joint US-South Korean joint military exercises, he simply tossed that carefully-hoarded bargaining chip away for all time.

You war hawk dems are a piece of work to be studied. Most Dems have voted to decimate our military during the BO years and yet you are so angry that we offer to stop War games in S. Korea. I should not even have to remind you that gift of "giving away (for no concessions in return) the joint US-S. Korea joint military exercises, is not a gift at all. In fact as Commander in Chief, President Donald Trump (never get tired of stating that) can and will reinstitute joint exercises if Kim renigs on his denuclearization pledge.

vebiltdervan
Posts: 19547
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2016 5:31 pm
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby vebiltdervan » Fri Jun 15, 2018 11:11 pm

cjdore wrote:You war hawk dems are a piece of work to be studied. Most Dems have voted to decimate our military during the BO years and yet you are so angry that we offer to stop War games in S. Korea...
Where to start? The reductions to the military budget that happened during the Obama years were never a democratic move. Since you have forgotten what actually happened (& replaced it in your mind with partisan BS), I will remind you. The Congress, republican & democratic, could not agree on a budget, & so they jointly came up with the "brilliant idea" of the Sequester. The Sequester was a budget that cut into programs that neither the democrats nor the republicans wanted, ESPECIALLY THE MILITARY BUDGET, & they set that up so that unless a budgetary compromise was reached by such-&-such date, then the Sequester would kick in. This would force them to compromise reasonably. Guess what?—they were unable to compromise reasonably, & consequently the Sequester kicked in. It was the fault of both parties (though I would apportion the blame, not surprisingly close to 180°differently from the way you do). But at least I remember what happened, instead of just substituting political slogans.

cjdore wrote:...I should not even have to remind you that gift of "giving away (for no concessions in return) the joint US-S. Korea joint military exercises, is not a gift at all. In fact as Commander in Chief, President Donald Trump (never get tired of stating that) can and will reinstitute joint exercises if Kim renigs[ouch what a SIC} on his denuclearization pledge.
That would require that Prince Pompadoodle Donald "Her Majesty" Trump be perspicacious. If left to him, it will not happen.

I asked earlier, What concessions did Trump gain in return for consenting the Summit, & for cancelling future US-SK joint military exercises. The silence is deafening. You can talk all you want about his being able to chance his mind: the point still stands, the self-anointed Great Dealer got zilch, nada in return for giving away half or more of the bargaining chips in our possession.

User avatar
WestCoastDore
Posts: 2128
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby WestCoastDore » Sat Jun 16, 2018 7:59 am

vebiltdervan wrote:
I asked earlier, What concessions did Trump gain in return for consenting the Summit, & for cancelling future US-SK joint military exercises. The silence is deafening. You can talk all you want about his being able to chance his mind: the point still stands, the self-anointed Great Dealer got zilch, nada in return for giving away half or more of the bargaining chips in our possession.



Hopefully, It has ended the constant rhetoric from the other side about how Trump was going to get us into a nuclear war with NK.

That "half or more of the bargaining chips" pales in comparison with the sanctions still in place against NK. Seems like rather small chips to give up to any reasonable person..

But okay, no instant gratification for those with unreasonable expectations

vebiltdervan
Posts: 19547
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2016 5:31 pm
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby vebiltdervan » Sat Jun 16, 2018 2:51 pm

WestCoastDore wrote:...That "half or more of the bargaining chips" pales in comparison with the sanctions still in place against NK. Seems like rather small chips to give up to any reasonable person...

As I recall, my question was NOT whether the concessions that Trump gave away were large or small chips, but what he received in return. I take your post as yet another example of posting something distracting while avoiding giving the straightforward honest answer, Nothing.

[Edit: Sorry, I forgot to mention that WCD's immediate response was that, At least he (WCD) would no longer have to listen to the constant rhetoric of those saying that Trump would get us into a nuclear war with NK. Obviously, whether or not there is any validity to this claim, it is clearly not a concession that Trump received from Kim Jung-Un in exchange for his granting the favor of a Summit-between-equals and no more joint US-SK military exercises.]

User avatar
WestCoastDore
Posts: 2128
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby WestCoastDore » Sat Jun 16, 2018 4:06 pm

vebiltdervan wrote:
WestCoastDore wrote:...That "half or more of the bargaining chips" pales in comparison with the sanctions still in place against NK. Seems like rather small chips to give up to any reasonable person...

As I recall, my question was NOT whether the concessions that Trump gave away were large or small chips, but what he received in return. I take your post as yet another example of posting something distracting while avoiding giving the straightforward honest answer, Nothing.

Rather than continue an absurdity about "half or more of the bargaining chips" should be based on the number of chips or the size of the chips, and as this negotiation is still ongoing "zilch, nada" in return being as equally absurd, if, as a result of these negotiation NK agrees to total denuclearization, would you agree the "bargaining chips" Trump gave up were worth the risk ?

vebiltdervan
Posts: 19547
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2016 5:31 pm
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby vebiltdervan » Sat Jun 16, 2018 5:27 pm

WestCoastDore wrote:...if, as a result of these negotiation NK agrees to total denuclearization, would you agree the "bargaining chips" Trump gave up were worth the risk ?
Of course I would. But I rate the likelihood of that happening during the Trump administration as roughly equivalent to the probability that humanity will be obliterated by a massive nuclear exchange during the same time frame. Unlikely positive result that one can hope for; unlikely negative result that one can hope against.

User avatar
cjdore
Posts: 8452
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 10:13 am
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby cjdore » Mon Jun 18, 2018 9:32 am

vebiltdervan wrote:
WestCoastDore wrote:...if, as a result of these negotiation NK agrees to total denuclearization, would you agree the "bargaining chips" Trump gave up were worth the risk ?
Of course I would. But I rate the likelihood of that happening during the Trump administration as roughly equivalent to the probability that humanity will be obliterated by a massive nuclear exchange during the same time frame. Unlikely positive result that one can hope for; unlikely negative result that one can hope against.


Dr Rock when you are so prejudiced against President Trump, your vision and reasoning ability are completely construed. This is the very early stages of negotiation but do you find no solace in the fact that NK did the following:

1) Released 3 imprisoned Americans
2) Destroyed their nuclear testing site
3) Agreed to return the remains of thousands of remains from the Korean war which will give a sense of closure for thousands.
4) Agreed in concept to denuclearize.

Trump has kept sanctions in place and only offered up a rescindable offer to cancel SK War Games

vebiltdervan
Posts: 19547
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2016 5:31 pm
Contact:

Re: Anxiously Awaiting the Summit Results

Postby vebiltdervan » Mon Jun 18, 2018 10:43 am

cjdore wrote:Dr Rock when you are so prejudiced against President Trump, your vision and reasoning ability are completely construed..
"Construed" does not mean what you apparently think it means. Whatever you think (or are able to semi-communicate), my reasoning ability is perfectly fine, thank you.

How about we settle down & await the verdict of future events as they unfold (or fail to unfold), to determine which of us has a prejudiced, "construed"(LOL) vision? Otherwise, you are simply personally insulting me based on your own prejudices, with zero factual basis for doing so.



Return to “Black and Gold Coffee Shop”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 3rdFloorDyer, dorepleganger, EllistonVU, Matheta, VandyWhit, vebiltdervan and 51 guests