North Korea will ceremonially blow up blown up thing to bring in the money

pauldun170

Diamond Member
Sep 26, 2011
9,133
5,072
136
North Korea promises to invite world leaders to ceremonial destruction of destroyed, already abandoned, can't really use it anymore, we were only using Russian devices as part of a larger plan push the US into talks with the goal of getting the US out of South Korea so that China can start chipping away, mountain.

Trump will then accept this gift and make a speech saying he is responsible for North Korea giving up Nuclear weapons and perhaps get a second term. Leading to more stupid moves that will open up opportunities for further Chinese expansion on world markets.

Situated in mountainous terrain in the north-east, the Punggye-ri site is thought to be the North's main nuclear facility.

Nuclear tests have taken place in a system of tunnels dug below Mount Mantap, near the Punggye-ri site.

Six nuclear tests have been carried out there since 2006.

After the most recent test, which took place in September 2017, a series of aftershocks hit the site, which seismologists believe collapsed part of the mountain's interior.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-44094740

FYI: The destruction is ceremonial.
They still have stuff. Ready to rapidly spin back up when needed for the next part of the chess game. The long game.

But only after the US foots the bill for some stuff
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-44091279
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
They don't need an underground test site anymore. It served its purpose, sorting out the technical difficulties. They have a reactor capable of producing plutonium & the means to fashion it into weapons.
 

FIVR

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2016
3,753
911
106
Analysis I saw last said he has something like 60-100 warheads already. He has more than necessary to completely destroy his closest neighbors and seriously damage the US. He won't give that up, at all. What he will do, is negotiate to cease all tests and pretend to end the program.


The way I predict this plays out, is North Korea will claim to have destroyed all its weapons, then either the US will conduct a sham inspection for the world media where they declare North Korea "de-nuked" or they will simply say their infallible intelligence agencies have determined that North Korea has destroyed their warheads so "we don't need to trust them, we know".


Kim would have to be a total idiot to actually give up the only weapons that protect him and the only reason anybody gives a F*** about his tiny country anyway. I think we can all agree that he is not an idiot, whatever his moral constitution.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,425
7,485
136
Kim won. We lost. Get used to it.

If all parties come to the table to ensure peaceful relations, please explain how someone loses?

You seem to have this idea, explaining to us what will happen. But why is it a bad thing?
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
21,163
19,637
136
Trump is cutting all sorts of funding here but is going to 'help' NK with it's economy aka tons of foreign aid? The right would go apeshit for that and now they will eat it up with a spoon if it comes to fruition.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,425
7,485
136
Trump is cutting all sorts of funding here but is going to 'help' NK with it's economy aka tons of foreign aid? The right would go apeshit for that and now they will eat it up with a spoon if it comes to fruition.

You assume China isn't going to pay for it? :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrSquished

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Trump is cutting all sorts of funding here but is going to 'help' NK with it's economy aka tons of foreign aid? The right would go apeshit for that and now they will eat it up with a spoon if it comes to fruition.

Nah. He'll just give 'em American jobs, obviously. For the MAGA.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
20,356
5,110
136
I would have thought you fellows would have said that Obama had laid all the ground work and that Trump was capitalizing on his work, or Hillary had planed all this out while she was secstate. Those would have been better vehicles for this bandwagon.
It's going to be tough to sell this as a failure. Pretty much everyone with a room temperature IQ is going to think that NK coming to the table is a good thing, convincing them otherwise is going to take one hell of a lot of spin.
 

deathBOB

Senior member
Dec 2, 2007
566
228
116
I would have thought you fellows would have said that Obama had laid all the ground work and that Trump was capitalizing on his work, or Hillary had planed all this out while she was secstate. Those would have been better vehicles for this bandwagon.
It's going to be tough to sell this as a failure. Pretty much everyone with a room temperature IQ is going to think that NK coming to the table is a good thing, convincing them otherwise is going to take one hell of a lot of spin.

So how did you feel about the negotiations with Iran and the nuclear deal?

And coming to the table means very little since we haven’t established any preconditions. It’s a pure win for NK. It’s not clear to me what the US gets out of this.

Further, previous administrations deserved the benefit of the doubt because they were filled with knowledgeable professionals who understood foreign policy and had a pretty mainstream view of America’s role in the world (although the Bush admin was pretty out there with regard to Iraq). Trump’s administration is filled with incompetents or hardliners like Bolton, and Trump himself has been uninformed or wishy washy on foreign politicy.

I don’t think Trump or his admistration has earned the benefit of the doubt, and we should be skeptical about the NK deal.
 
Last edited:

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,296
28,493
136
I would have thought you fellows would have said that Obama had laid all the ground work and that Trump was capitalizing on his work, or Hillary had planed all this out while she was secstate. Those would have been better vehicles for this bandwagon.
It's going to be tough to sell this as a failure. Pretty much everyone with a room temperature IQ is going to think that NK coming to the table is a good thing, convincing them otherwise is going to take one hell of a lot of spin.
Nice projection. If this was happening under Obama's watch, Trump and all you conservatives would be chirping about how we shouldn't be negotiating with dictators/terrorists/etc. Whatever deal comes about would be labeled as the new "worst deal ever." Right up there with all the other "worst deals ever" like NAFTA, Paris and the Iran deal he just blew up for no fucking reason other than he hates Obama.

If we get peace and a stable peninsula or better, Dems will be happy about it but won't be giving Trump credit unless it can be demonstrated exactly what he did to contribute to it. Somehow I doubt calling Kim "little rocket man" led to him changing his policy. We all know the main event driving this change of heart was the fact that he blew up his own test facility.
 

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
6,461
7,635
136
Mike Pompeo: "I think Chairman Kim [Jong Un] shares the objectives of the American people, I am convinced of that".

It's a weird thing for a US Secretary of State to say - a brutal dictator shares the objectives of the American people?!. Maybe he genuinely believe that authoritarian rule is the finest possible form of government.

Imagine the reaction from Republicans and Fox News if Obama or anyone in his administration had spoken about Kim the way Trump and his people do. Especially if Obama did it while wearing a tan suit!.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dank69

alien42

Lifer
Nov 28, 2004
12,636
3,032
136
I would have thought you fellows would have said that Obama had laid all the ground work and that Trump was capitalizing on his work, or Hillary had planed all this out while she was secstate. Those would have been better vehicles for this bandwagon.
It's going to be tough to sell this as a failure. Pretty much everyone with a room temperature IQ is going to think that NK coming to the table is a good thing, convincing them otherwise is going to take one hell of a lot of spin.

NK has stated that they no longer need to test nukes because they have already achieved their goal of nuclearization. acknowledging their achievement empowers KJU and doesn't benefit the US in any way. have you already forgotten that at the beginning of his presidency trump tweeted "North Korea just stated that it is in the final stages of developing a nuclear weapon capable of reaching parts of the U.S. It won't happen!"

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/816057920223846400?lang=en

NK did exactly what trump said wouldn't happen and now he is going to reward them for it by meeting with KJU one on one and giving them the recognition they have wanted for decades.

reality is that NK has agreed to nothing relating to denuclearization and they are playing trump like a fiddle, while achieving exactly what benefits them and KJU directly.

i would tell you to stop being so dense and ignorant but just like trump, you continue to prove that isn't going to happen.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,951
47,840
136
I would have thought you fellows would have said that Obama had laid all the ground work and that Trump was capitalizing on his work, or Hillary had planed all this out while she was secstate. Those would have been better vehicles for this bandwagon.
It's going to be tough to sell this as a failure. Pretty much everyone with a room temperature IQ is going to think that NK coming to the table is a good thing, convincing them otherwise is going to take one hell of a lot of spin.

North Korea has been willing to come to the table for several decades now but the US refused until North Korea stopped all the shit it was pulling. Trump then capitulated to their demand and got nothing for it.

I’m personally fine with Trump talking to him as it’s not like our previous policy was working great but the constant attempt by the right to say that Trump forced Kim to the table is exactly backwards. We capitulated to their demands, not the other way around.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
36,040
27,768
136
Mike Pompeo: "I think Chairman Kim [Jong Un] shares the objectives of the American people, I am convinced of that".

It's a weird thing for a US Secretary of State to say - a brutal dictator shares the objectives of the American people?!. Maybe he genuinely believe that authoritarian rule is the finest possible form of government.

Imagine the reaction from Republicans and Fox News if Obama or anyone in his administration had spoken about Kim the way Trump and his people do. Especially if Obama did it while wearing a tan suit!.
We don't have to imagine...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/24/AR2007072401534_pf.html
 
  • Like
Reactions: pauldun170

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
26,067
23,935
136
Mike Pompeo: "I think Chairman Kim [Jong Un] shares the objectives of the American people, I am convinced of that".

It's a weird thing for a US Secretary of State to say - a brutal dictator shares the objectives of the American people?!. Maybe he genuinely believe that authoritarian rule is the finest possible form of government.

Imagine the reaction from Republicans and Fox News if Obama or anyone in his administration had spoken about Kim the way Trump and his people do. Especially if Obama did it while wearing a tan suit!.

He gazed into his eyes and saw his soul.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meghan54