Trump talks of ‘calm before the storm’

[Lilly]

Just now, Gromdor said:

You have a source for this?   All the reports I have read seem to indicate that he is more concerned about saving his own hide more than anything else.  He seems to think that having nukes is the only reason why he hasn't gone the way of Saddam or Ghaddafi.

A source for my own personal opinion? I will however offer up some thoughts (in defense of my opinion). Remember that little tiff called the Korean War? Kim would love nothing more than a reunification of the peninsula (with him in charge of course). As for the nukes, of course he's trying to use them to secure that he stays in power, but nukes also ensure that he can threaten other nations into behaving in the manner he desires.

 

[Tatetopa]

1 hour ago, Lilly said:

I'd say it's aimed at both China and NK. And, proper diplomacy has also been employed toward China. IMO, the NK commentary is basically a round about way to let China know we will not tolerate such behavior from their satellite regime.

Also, the nation that wants a war is NK not the USA. Kimmy wants to get his hands on SK (among other things) and he doesn't care who has to die to achieve this goal. What the USA wants is to not be held hostage by NK and quite possibly nuked if we refuse to capitulate to them.

Hi Lilly,

I guess we could analyze leaders behavior all day long and not be sure in the end.  I do not think NK really wants a war or South Korea.  I think Kim is a dictator trying to hold on to power and terrified of being executed by his own people or by foreign intervention.  He is like a cornered rattlesnake.  The rattle in this case are the missile tests to let everybody know he can bite.  He is also not insane, he is calculating his personal survival.  That is why if he can escape war he will.   Tillerson and Mattis working with our allies and China can quietly put a stop to him, or arrange necessary action.  If they decide to send in a specialized team, it serves no purpose to warn Kim on Twitter that we are coming.

[acidhead]

2 hours ago, Gromdor said:

He won't.  We actually sent more troops to Afghanistan recently.

This imo is what his statement "the calm before the storm" more than likely is referencing.  Perhaps more than likely Syria..... taking an offensive on the Islamic State.  We've heard Trump say many times during the R's primaries and the presidential election campaign he would concentrate all military effort to eradicate ISIS.  He also has made it clear many times he wouldn't announce when the offensive would occur or where it would happen.... you know, not give ISIS a heads up.  Trump has been consistent in saying the element of surprise would be his approach.

Reading the OP's media article... opinion article... making an outrageous claim the Trump administration would all of a sudden attack Iran or North Korea is ludicrous.

[Tatetopa]

2 hours ago, acidhead said:

He also has made it clear many times he wouldn't announce when the offensive would occur or where it would happen.... you know, not give ISIS a heads up.  Trump has been consistent in saying the element of surprise would be his approach.

Sometimes the best service to the element of surprise can be keeping your mouth shut.

[acidhead]

3 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Sometimes the best service to the element of surprise can be keeping your mouth shut.

Ok

[Farmer77]

13 hours ago, acidhead said:

 Reading the OP's media article... opinion article... making an outrageous claim the Trump administration would all of a sudden attack Iran or North Korea is ludicrous.

Why? 

[Parsec]

On 8/10/2017 at 8:30 AM, preacherman76 said:

Well if this is about North Korea, what's unacceptable about it? They should be told only so much will be tolerated. That if they blow up a WMD in international waters, that they will no longer exist. 

You should have been complaining about acceptable behavior back while we did everything in our power to make sure they got WMD's. 

Indeed. 

IF. 

That's the main word. 

Do we know what all this is about? 

Not yet. 

So that's quite inappropriate, not to mention irresponsible, for the POTUS (or any country representative for that matter) to say something like that. 

[Lilly]

Well, since North Korea has been threatening to use a nuclear bomb to destroy the United States for some time now.

Here are some of North Korea's threats: https://www.google.com/search?q=north+korean+threats+toward+the+US+quotes&tbm=isch&source=iu&pf=m&ictx=1&fir=4gRHYU03kzN6YM%3A%2Cpqx_Afa-_p_QjM%2C_&usg=__cRfyT_MF0jWsQmxsXxQCXElmmTs%3D&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjWzpzD2ubWAhXEy4MKHdBJCU0Q9QEISDAG#imgrc=4gRHYU03kzN6YM

 

[+Hammerclaw]

If you want peace, be prepared for war. If you want to deter an enemy from attacking, you make known, openly, in the clearest and unambiguous terms exactly what the consequences of attacking you will be.

[Farmer77]

The draft dodger has called his generals to the war room to discuss North Korea 

 

 

Edited October 10, 2017 by Farmer77

[+Hammerclaw]

48 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

The draft dodger has called his generals to the war room to discuss North Korea 

 

 

There's a little "Rhodes Scholar" in every man.

[odas]

On 10/6/2017 at 8:22 AM, Farmer77 said:

Trump talks of ‘calm before the storm’ after military meeting 

Ok so just for fun, what do you guys think he's referring to here? 

Not sure if DJ himself knows it.

[Farmer77]

13 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

There's a little "Rhodes Scholar" in every man.

Well done sir. 

[Sir Smoke aLot]

15 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

If you want peace, be prepared for war. If you want to deter an enemy from attacking, you make known, openly, in the clearest and unambiguous terms exactly what the consequences of attacking you will be.

In some of his statements Trump sounds as if he is doing steps to attack North regardless of what North is doing. He should clarify things better or stop using twitter for things which concern the future of the world as whole.

Imagine, we all are told that Kim is mad man, well, ok if we agree on the point of Kim's madness then Trump, who is representative of sane and well civilized people should refrain from making 'Kimmy The Mad' go over the line by insulting him. Is that not the only way to approach lunatic?

That is how man who is leaded by knowledge and reason confronts lunatics. There is a reason why we call some people mad and there is big field in which there are many experts who adress the whole issue of psychological issues. Things are simply illogical here in this all mess with relations with North. Is it too hard of a hit on US budget to have psychologists in presidents team of advisers? 

[+Hammerclaw]

5 hours ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

In some of his statements Trump sounds as if he is doing steps to attack North regardless of what North is doing. He should clarify things better or stop using twitter for things which concern the future of the world as whole.

Imagine, we all are told that Kim is mad man, well, ok if we agree on the point of Kim's madness then Trump, who is representative of sane and well civilized people should refrain from making 'Kimmy The Mad' go over the line by insulting him. Is that not the only way to approach lunatic?

That is how man who is leaded by knowledge and reason confronts lunatics. There is a reason why we call some people mad and there is big field in which there are many experts who adress the whole issue of psychological issues. Things are simply illogical here in this all mess with relations with North. Is it too hard of a hit on US budget to have psychologists in presidents team of advisers? 

The problem is, Kim isn't a madman--he's an absolute monarch behaving like one. That makes for a whole different dynamic to the situation. He knows exactly what he is doing--and what not to do. He's rather cleverly using South Korea as a human shield from behind which to strut and brandish his tiny and strategically ineffectual nuclear arsenal. No other third world country could get away with what he is doing. If it weren't for the effects in terms of damage and human suffering to an ally, we would have neutralized this sort of threat, long ago and it is quite possible we still will, in any event. All eight years of appeasement did was to embolden him. What we want is for the one's responsible for creating and maintaining his nightmare regime to step in and clean up the mess they created and China, more than likely will, if the alternative is the spread of South Korean democracy up to the Yalu River. So, Trump is walking relatively softly, at this point in time, but brandishing a very big stick, openly and often, for all the world to see.

[Parsec]

On 10/10/2017 at 7:43 PM, Lilly said:

Well, since North Korea has been threatening to use a nuclear bomb to destroy the United States for some time now.

Here are some of North Korea's threats: https://www.google.com/search?q=north+korean+threats+toward+the+US+quotes&tbm=isch&source=iu&pf=m&ictx=1&fir=4gRHYU03kzN6YM%3A%2Cpqx_Afa-_p_QjM%2C_&usg=__cRfyT_MF0jWsQmxsXxQCXElmmTs%3D&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjWzpzD2ubWAhXEy4MKHdBJCU0Q9QEISDAG#imgrc=4gRHYU03kzN6YM

 

Were you replying to me? 

If so, like other posters already highlighted, we could say the same for Iran. 

We could also infer he was referencing acting in Syria. 

Or Afghanistan. 

Or Iraq. 

Or Ukraine. 

 

The point is, your deduction is valid, but it is still just a deduction. 

I will repeat myself, but to me as a representative of your country (especially if you are the President of the United States), you can't say something like that and leaving people inferring what you mean. 

It is irresponsible. 

Edited October 11, 2017 by Parsec
Typo

[Parsec]

Anyway, I think I've finally got it: he will announce a new war against hurricanes. 

Those vicious, deadly foes. 

They even dared to thrash his golf club in Florida. 

 

Think about it: they have the world's greatest military leaders, for sure they can come up with a plan to kill hurricanes! 

Possibly with a big big bomb. Very very big. The biggest the world has ever seen! 

And those bad bad hurricanes will be met with fire and fury! 

[Sir Smoke aLot]

3 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

No other third world country could get away with what he is doing. If it weren't for the effects in terms of damage and human suffering to an ally, we would have neutralized this sort of threat, long ago and it is quite possible we still will, in any event.

That is exactly the reason why i support North's sovereignity just the way it is. Even Kim is better for the people than destruction and uncertain future which many people have already felt on their own skin elsewhere, examples are numerous. No one has the right to decide for others.

There was already an all out war in Korea, war that was started in cold war era which kinda marked the begining of proxy wars between USA and Russia. Korean war was started mostly because of overlooked things by officials which Stalin has seen as an green light for North to try and invade South but that is another subject. Rest is history.

After 60 years you can't come and say '' enough of Kim's rule, let's change '' when it's people itself which see USA as an agressor so what you believe would happen after war which let's say America win?

Maybe you picture North Koreans celebrating American victory in Pyong Jang, dropping roses in front of American and South Korean troops? That is pure fantasy, no one has the right to topple governments especially when such process involves party which made mess there ( with Soviets ) at first place.

[+Hammerclaw]

3 hours ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

That is exactly the reason why i support North's sovereignity just the way it is. Even Kim is better for the people than destruction and uncertain future which many people have already felt on their own skin elsewhere, examples are numerous. No one has the right to decide for others.

There was already an all out war in Korea, war that was started in cold war era which kinda marked the begining of proxy wars between USA and Russia. Korean war was started mostly because of overlooked things by officials which Stalin has seen as an green light for North to try and invade South but that is another subject. Rest is history.

After 60 years you can't come and say '' enough of Kim's rule, let's change '' when it's people itself which see USA as an agressor so what you believe would happen after war which let's say America win?

Maybe you picture North Koreans celebrating American victory in Pyong Jang, dropping roses in front of American and South Korean troops? That is pure fantasy, no one has the right to topple governments especially when such process involves party which made mess there ( with Soviets ) at first place.

The bulk of ground operations would fall to the South Koreans; the parades and winning the peace would fall on them. I really am not at all concerned about the moral judgmentalism of pious foreigners crouching snug and secure under our nuclear umbrella. You can't base foreign policy on what others might think.

[AnchorSteam]

On 10/6/2017 at 5:22 AM, Farmer77 said:

Trump talks of ‘calm before the storm’ after military meeting 

Ok so just for fun, what do you guys think he's referring to here? 

“You’ll find out.”

 

It means he isn't blabbing what he knows and/or is planning to a media outlet that will put the most negative possible spin on it before tossing it out there.

And primarily, not giving anything away to the enemy.

The consequences of their actions have already been made known to the N'orks, and you all had a Cow. 

As for what's next, we'll just have to wait and see. Anything else is pure speculation. 

[Sir Smoke aLot]

17 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

The bulk of ground operations would fall to the South Koreans; the parades and winning the peace would fall on them. I really am not at all concerned about the moral judgmentalism of pious foreigners crouching snug and secure under our nuclear umbrella. 

I do not think that they are cappable enough. North has already defeated them and America ( Gen. MacArthur if i remember right ) saved American assets, hence 38th parallel border as made back then in 50s.

17 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

You can't base foreign policy on what others might think.

You base foreign policy with respect to international law. Especially when 'nuclear winter' could fall over many heads.

As Stephen Coldbert say in his show, imagine if Kennedy, in mid of Cuban missile crisis, would Tweet to Soviets '' we are not scared, you crazy commie press the button ''. 

[+Hammerclaw]

2 minutes ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

I do not think that they are cappable enough. North has already defeated them and America ( Gen. MacArthur if i remember right ) saved American assets, hence 38th parallel border as made back then in 50s.

You base foreign policy with respect to international law. Especially when 'nuclear winter' could fall over many heads.

As Stephen Coldbert say in his show, imagine if Kennedy, in mid of Cuban missile crisis, would Tweet to Soviets '' we are not scared, you crazy commie press the button ''. 

Basically, he did. I lived through that. Only last minute backdoor diplomacy averted that disaster precipitated by his idealistic, amateurish mishandling of the entire Cuban debacle. 

MacArthur saved the day? MacArthur wanted to use nukes and was removed from command by President Truman and replaced by General Ridgway. The Eisenhower administration authored and approved the cessation of hostilities under an unsatisfactory armistice and not precisely on the 38th parallel. The North holds some land below it and the South some above it. 

By threatening to attack with nuclear weapons it developed against international law, the North is already in violation. 

[Sir Smoke aLot]

15 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Basically, he did. I lived through that. Only last minute backdoor diplomacy averted that disaster precipitated by his idealistic, amateurish mishandling of the entire Cuban debacle. 

MacArthur saved the day? MacArthur wanted to use nukes and was removed from command by President Truman and replaced by General Ridgway. The Eisenhower administration authored and approved the cessation of hostilities under an unsatisfactory armistice and not precisely on the 38th parallel. The North holds some land below it and the South some above it. 

By threatening to attack with nuclear weapons it developed against international law, the North is already in violation. 

Basically, but not necessarily the same. Actually, officials from that time ( and you do know better from first hand ) were, bmo, much more educated, eloquent and were deserving their position much more than politicians of today.

I mention MacArthur because he was there at start, it was US Army who saved the day for South. Can be used as synonymes in this context, General or the Army.

North might be in violation, as much as USA is but one thing is sure, one statement has it's place in history assured, that is Trump's famous '' totally destroy North Korea ''. North Korean people won't bend and surrender but will use only tool which preserves their society from outside influence, threat of Nukes to American allies in the region. Resonable for me.

[+Hammerclaw]

7 minutes ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

Basically, but not necessarily the same. Actually, officials from that time ( and you do know better from first hand ) were, bmo, much more educated, eloquent and were deserving their position much more than politicians of today.

I mention MacArthur because he was there at start, it was US Army who saved the day for South. Can be used as synonymes in this context, General or the Army.

North might be in violation, as much as USA is but one thing is sure, one statement has it's place in history assured, that is Trump's famous '' totally destroy North Korea ''. North Korean people won't bend and surrender but will use only tool which preserves their society from outside influence, threat of Nukes to American allies in the region. Resonable for me.

I can picture you on the tarmac, cheering, when Chamberlain arrived back from Germany waving his scrap of paper declaring "Peace In Our Time" Right now, were suffering the consequences of previous generations with that same mindset, in regards to Korea, when all they had to deal with is a nonnuclear threat. They kicked the can further down the road for other generations to deal with. It's our baby, now and we can deal with it, now, or push an even greater threat onto the generations that follow us.

[Sir Smoke aLot]

29 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

I can picture you on the tarmac, cheering, when Chamberlain arrived back from Germany waving his scrap of paper declaring "Peace In Our Time" Right now, were suffering the consequences of previous generations with that same mindset, in regards to Korea, when all they had to deal with is a nonnuclear threat. They kicked the can further down the road for other generations to deal with. It's our baby, now and we can deal with it, now, or push an even greater threat onto the generations that follow us.

Imagination is wonderful indeed, things are not so dangerous as one might percieve i believe. America has to have external enemy and since isis is almost done with Korea is taking it's place, that is my assumption. For Korean problem in it's essence, both USA and Soviets bare responsibility but since 1990s things are a bit different. 

All in all there has to be mutual effort from USA and North and right now we can't say that either party is doing steps to ensure stability of the region but what actually happens is that both Kim and Trump are strenghtening their administration or family rule in Kim's case.