North Korean leader Kim Jong Un promises no more nuclear or missile tests
 

https://news.sky.com/story/north-kor...-site-11340053


In 6 days he meets the
South Korean Leader.
Then once a location is agreed
its the USA President to meet him.

Japan does not trust Kim.
USA , China and Russia says its good news


https://e3.365dm.com/18/03/1096x616/...20180312164916

How do we know he's telling the truth?

i hope you are speaking the truth now Kimmy :suspect:

His Nation is bankrupt
His Oil is costing so much , now.

Of course
only time will tell.

Be strange if there is a Kim and USA Trump
new deal
many are saying it could fail, though.

don't trust the fatface rocket man
probably pretending to be a dove of peace to see what he gets in return
if he doesn't get enough he will be back to rockets

Yeah...

https://media.giphy.com/media/26u6c1...sbss/giphy.gif

January: Trumps "nuclear button" tweet will cause Armageddon


April: Pompeo meets Kim Jong-Un, denuclearization promised, South Korea & North Korea look ready to sign peace deal.


Someone deserves the Nobel peace prize, what did Obama get his for again?

some good developments i think


btw welcome back Alf i've missed you :hee:

He's set so many weapons off (like fireworks) i think he is now skint and can't afford to produce any more.

There is always the possibility that they've used up all of their viable fissile material in nuclear testing and can't source more :think:.

Well it’ll be Trump for the Nobel Peace prize if this works out.Obama got it for doing naff all and then killed more people with drones than anyone else.

I think even if his nuke program were top-notch (which it probably isn't), their actual military and defense is probably crap.. they wouldn't be able to withstand an assault from foreign forces, so the nuclear program is really their only card... and so I doubt he'd just get rid of it so simply, but it is expensive to maintain and so maybe they are open to hearing other options in the very least... and for us, it is worth it to continue putting pressure on them, if it means straining their ability to do much more than that, if their resources are very limited as-is.

That's true N.M

Yes possible Nobel Peace prize
that could upset half of USA.

Nobel Prize for Trump? Hold your horses, let's wait what'll come out of this.
Nukes are the only thing that keeps Kim safe, you think he will give it all up because Trump says so? Riiight.

Yes he may not give up his stock
but , just Stop doing any more testing

I am sure I just over heard these 2 in the gatehouse and they were smiling away and it ended on a hand shake.


peace is here. but never kid a kidder ?

But trump wants him to give them up
For US it is about his capability to hit America

If NK leadership truly believes the US wants to get rid of the regime, then it would make no sense for them to give up their nukes... and I guess they have to worry about SK, China as well. Though it looks like they are paving the way for peace with SK... but one of their main issues has been our military presence in SK, granted we are in Japan as well... but barely there, as the public don't really like us being there and constantly protest, because those bases brings more crime.... which is not what they're used to...

It all seems very fishy, North Korea has never even acknowledged South Korea in decades, and all of a sudden they're meeting up? And to put the icing on the cake, Kim suddenly decides to do a complete 180 on his nuclear missiles? Seems a little too perfect, Trump should watch his back going into this meeting, Kim is not to be trusted.

couldn't agree more

That's because we had 8 years of a leader of the free world that showed weakness by being an apologist. We now have a strong leader who they know they can't mess with.

All about leadership and sending out the right message.

You couldn't be more wrong. You don't give summits to countries classed as enemies without getting something first. ANy meeting the US holds with NK, only boosts KJU's standing.

They've given up absolutely nothing for this; the testing site they are talking about was in the process of falling apart and as such wasn't going to be used again, and they already have nuclear weapons, so they don't need to continue the program.

They haven't promised denuclearisation, they've just put their program on hold because it's already produced the results it needed.

You don't reward bad behaviour; all they've done now is sent a signal to the world that if you go nuclear then you get the states to the table.

It's the opposite of strength, it shows desperation and weakness.

I'm totally correct.

Ahhh sorry, my mistake; I thought that providing you with reasons that you were wrong was the correct way to go about things. I should have just said "you're totally not correct" and be done with it.

Just out of interest, who was Obama an apologist for exactly?

It doesn't matter what I say, because you don't want to hear a bad word said about Saint Obama, so here's an article about his top 10 apologies. Make of it whatever you want.


https://www.heritage.org/europe/repo...ted-superpower

Sounds more like wishful thinking, a country like North Korea doesn't magically just do a 180 for no reason, there is more to this than meets the eye.

So you don't have any opinions of your own?

I was actually disappointed by Obamas 2 terms. He was the first candidate for a long time that talked about the issues (wars, tax policy, womens choice, religion) in a way that aligned with modern liberal, progressive values. Unfortunately, he was so concerned with trying to bring people together that he never fought back against the regressive 1950's policies of republicans.

What annoys me the most, is not that you hold this opinion, it's that you are so devoid of any actual ability to formulate your own arguments that you just churn out nonsense in the form of someone else's top 10 lists.

Maybe we can discuss our top 10 favourite ice creams after this, or how about our top 10 favourite crisps?

He apologized for a few things, isn't that the grown ups are supposed to do? Or do you see America as completely faultless for their torture program and for starting wars in the middle east on completely bogus and often made up information.

I've heard this nonsense about Obama and his apology tours on fox for years, and it's all bollocks.

Anyone who reads the headlines in that list knows full well there's nothing there. You said Obama was an apologist - so I'll ask again, who was he an apologist for?

Now I know you probably never expected to be questioned on your initial whimsically nonsensical comment, so I'm guessing you'll either just ignore this post, or claim the fact that I've challenged you on this issue proves how right you were all along (spoiler alert: it doesn't). I'd like if you could answer the question.

The Heritage foundation are a terrible organisation, committed to taking away the rights of the mother to choose whether or not to have an abortion, and killing programs that benefit the poor.

For the USA's history. For Western culture. And Islamic terrorism.

But that's rubbish. He took office in 2009 when the world pretty much hated the US for the post 9/11 insanity that took hold of the country. He just tried to set things right.

Even this post, your accusations are just so vague and meaningless that it's like you get your opinions directly from fox, breitbart, and the daily caller. Obama was a thoroughly decent man who was attacked and smeared from day one.

For the record, there's quite a lot in the US's history that does need to be apologised for, just like in our past, and just like everybody's past. Until you face up to the mistakes you've made, and build bridges with peoples you've hurt, then there will always be resentment. I don't understand how being the bigger person makes you a weak apologist. ONly a fool thinks he/she is right 100% of the time.

I see you've edited in Islamic terrorism, so please explain how he was an apologist for this? He increased drone strikes in the region, ended Iran's nuclearisation (through diplomacy and deal making), and killed Bin Laden. But yes, Mr hannity, please tell us how he was an apologist for terrorism.

I haven't made no mistakes that I need to apologize for. And nobody needs to apologize for me on my behalf.

Every country has done bad things in their history. What's apologising gonna do but show weakness to people who couldn't care less for your apology?

And why wouldn't I read from the organisations that you named, but not only those organisations but others, like CNN, to form my opinions? You say it as if I read a certain news source that that is wrong to do.

Knock yourself out, read whatever you want, but opinions from those places are easily identifiable (hence, I did it easily) because they are based on nothing factual and are spewed out by right wing commentators as opposed to serious journalists.

It's one thing to see the American crazies make up a load of lies about Obama, but it's another thing altogether to see the English crazies buy a ticket to crazy town with them.

And yet again, you've avoided providing any of the specifics I've asked for.

I'm team Candace and Kanye!

Us British crazies told Obama to sod off when he tried handing out a threat to us, by telling us that we'll go to the back of the queue if we left the EU. We said who's this weak piece of sh!t think he's talking too? We don't take threats of week leaders.

I thought this thread was about North Korea?

World Affairs