Kelly thinks he's saving U.S. from disaster, calls Trump 'idiot,' say White House staffers

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
52,571
46,191
136
Is idiot better than moron? I'm not sure.

White House chief of staff John Kelly has eroded morale in the West Wing in recent months with comments to aides that include insulting the president's intelligence and casting himself as the savior of the country, according to eight current and former White House officials.

The officials said Kelly portrays himself to Trump administration aides as the lone bulwark against catastrophe, curbing the erratic urges of a president who has a questionable grasp on policy issues and the functions of government. He has referred to Trump as "an idiot" multiple times to underscore his point, according to four officials who say they've witnessed the comments.

Also WTF:

In one heated exchange between the two men before February's Winter Olympics in South Korea, Kelly strongly — and successfully — dissuaded Trump from ordering the withdrawal of all U.S. troops from the Korean peninsula, according to two officials.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/wh...-he-s-saving-u-s-disaster-calls-trump-n868961
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
52,571
46,191
136
Saving us from the disaster of a peaceful Korean peninsula.

There would be nothing stopping NK from just taking the whole thing if the US unilaterally withdrew.

Except maybe a crash program to build a SK nuke.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
There would be nothing stopping NK from just taking the whole thing if the US unilaterally withdrew.

Except maybe a crash program to build a SK nuke.

That's not true. The ROK military is vastly superior to that of the DPRK. Our presence of 35K troops is largely symbolic.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
52,571
46,191
136
That's not true. The ROK military is vastly superior to that of the DPRK. Our presence of 35K troops is largely symbolic.

In quality but not in size. The US presence is a tripwire force that would bring in the entire might of the US military if NK went hot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nickqt

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,930
55,266
136
That's not true. The ROK military is vastly superior to that of the DPRK. Our presence of 35K troops is largely symbolic.

South Korea does not currently believe that its armed forces could hold off a North Korean invasion by themselves. That's why they recently embarked on a military expansion plan designed to do exactly that. The timetable is many years out though.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
52,571
46,191
136
A dirt poor nation with 25 million people is going to invade a wealthy nation of 51 million people?

All they really have to grab is Seoul and SK would give them whatever. An entirely achievable goal if you don't care how many of your own people die in the process.

Previously SK has indicated they could build some crude nukes in less than 6 months and likely mount them to available missile inventory. They'd be busting their humps to get this done and probably run an atmospheric test to prove they work to everyone prior to a full US pullout and hope NK doesn't roll the dice.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,930
55,266
136
All they really have to grab is Seoul and SK would give them whatever. An entirely achievable goal if you don't care how many of your own people die in the process.

Previously SK has indicated they could build some crude nukes in less than 6 months and likely mount them to available missile inventory. They'd be busting their humps to get this done and probably run an atmospheric test to prove they work to everyone prior to a full US pullout and hope NK doesn't roll the dice.

Yes, it's important to note that Seoul represents about a quarter of South Korea's GDP. That's an irreplaceable city.
 

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
15,995
1,688
126
South Korea does not currently believe that its armed forces could hold off a North Korean invasion by themselves. That's why they recently embarked on a military expansion plan designed to do exactly that. The timetable is many years out though.

All they really have to grab is Seoul and SK would give them whatever. An entirely achievable goal if you don't care how many of your own people die in the process.

Previously SK has indicated they could build some crude nukes in less than 6 months and likely mount them to available missile inventory. They'd be busting their humps to get this done and probably run an atmospheric test to prove they work to everyone prior to a full US pullout and hope NK doesn't roll the dice.

I can't tell you how fucking depressing it is to see you two saying these things. North Korea can't even feed its own people, you think it's in any kind of shape to be invading another country? It's an absurd lie used to justify an American military presence close to China. That's all it is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FIVR and pauldun170

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,930
55,266
136
I can't tell you how fucking depressing it is to see you two saying these things. North Korea can't even feed its own people, you think it's in any kind of shape to be invading another country? It's an absurd lie used to justify an American military presence close to China. That's all it is.

The reason North Korea can't feed its people is primarily that it spends about 25% of its GDP on the military. As for what shape North Korea's military is in you would be a fool to discount the amount of damage it could do. It doesn't need to invade and occupy South Korea, it could simply obliterate and occupy Seoul which would cause the collapse of the South Korean economy.

Don't be duped, North Korea is a highly credible military threat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UberNeuman

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
I can't tell you how fucking depressing it is to see you two saying these things. North Korea can't even feed its own people, you think it's in any kind of shape to be invading another country? It's an absurd lie used to justify an American military presence close to China. That's all it is.

Why does NK have to take over NK to destroy its economic prosperity? SK has no defense to effectively protect Seoul and not one soldier has to cross the border to achieve massive destruction. The artillery is already in place.
 

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
15,995
1,688
126
The reason North Korea can't feed its people is primarily that it spends about 25% of its GDP on the military. As for what shape North Korea's military is in you would be a fool to discount the amount of damage it could do. It doesn't need to invade and occupy South Korea, it could simply obliterate and occupy Seoul which would cause the collapse of the South Korean economy.

Don't be duped, North Korea is a highly credible military threat.

Any attack on South Korea would have to be prefaced by a massive buildup of forces at the border. Such a buildup would not go unnoticed. American airpower could be at the sea of Japan within a few days if not hours.

How would an invasion serve DPRK's interests?
 

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
15,995
1,688
126
Why does NK have to take over NK to destroy its economic prosperity? SK has no defense to effectively protect Seoul and not one soldier has to cross the border to achieve massive destruction. The artillery is already in place.

And why would they do that?
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
26,092
15,547
136
Heh... You know that laugh where you realize you are crying halfway through? Meanwhile Trump to be considered for Nobel peace price.
Yea, it all makes sense now.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,930
55,266
136
Any attack on South Korea would have to be prefaced by a massive buildup of forces at the border. Such a buildup would not go unnoticed. American airpower could be at the sea of Japan within a few days if not hours.

How would an invasion serve DPRK's interests?

About 2/3rds of North Korea’s forces are already deployed in the area immediately abutting the DMZ. No redeployment is required.

I don’t believe an invasion does serve their interests. The threat to South Korea is much more useful than an actual attack. The thing is, maybe I’m wrong. When being wrong would be that catastrophic you have to prepare for it.
 

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,026
2,879
136
I think arguing whether or not US troop withdrawal would instantly trigger invasion is missing the point of this thread.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cytg111

Sunburn74

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2009
5,076
2,635
136
I think arguing whether or not US troop withdrawal would instantly trigger invasion is missing the point of this thread.
I think the main point is being missed. Its not whether or not we should have troops in SK but rather that Kelly thinks and believes his boss to be grossly underqualified for the position. Now Kelly denies it but knowing this organization that just means something to verify it will come out in a couple of days.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
52,571
46,191
136
I see the old man is watching the news...

u7wUUra.png


It's even less coherent than usual.
 

Puffnstuff

Lifer
Mar 9, 2005
16,196
4,881
136
Heh... You know that laugh where you realize you are crying halfway through? Meanwhile Trump to be considered for Nobel peace price.
Yea, it all makes sense now.
Aren't they going to carry it on the Grab Her by the Pussy Report?