TO EVERYONE ARGUING TRUMP SHOULDN'T TALK TO NORTH KOREA: If getting Kim to the table isn't the point of sanctions, and war's a bad idea, what's the strategy? No one capitulates. Ever. But sometimes in talks they give something to get something. If there's no good deal, walk away.
-
-
The other big criticism, mostly from the left, is that Trump's bound to screw it up. Maybe Kim'll flatter him and he'll give away the store. Can't totally rule that out. But Trump's POTUS. We can't put foreign policy on hold for 3 years. Not with NK's capabilities advancing. 6/x
Show this thread -
Yes, previous agreements with North Korea haven't led to success. But holding negotiations doesn't mean one has to accept any deal. If nothing good is on the table, walk away. 7/x
Show this thread -
Refusing to talk declares in advance that no deal is possible. Then what's the strategy? War? Incredibly costly. Sanctions until North Korea capitulates? No chance. 8/x
Show this thread -
NO ONE CAPITULATES At least not without losing a major war (Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan). Thinking that pressure would lead to capitulation is how Saudis etc screwed up Qatar crisis. It's why pre-Iraq War demands didn't work. It's the primary mistake of Iran deal opponents. 9/x
Show this thread -
Pressure leads to negotiations, not capitulation. Forces countries to the table. But if we won't talk to North Korea even after they suspend testing in advance, what's the point of pressure? 10/x
Show this thread -
Another criticism: negotiating shows that North Korea's path brings legitimacy. Hardly. Who would look at North Korea's experience over the last few decades and think it looks appealing? Besides, NK has nukes. And now ICBMs. Pretending otherwise gets us nowhere. 11/x
Show this thread -
Circumstances have changed. North Korea has a demonstrated nuclear capability. And Trump has unsettled North Korea, South Korea, China, and others with his "madman theory" bluster. As I wrote in this article, it's time for out-of-the-box thinking. https://arcdigital.media/three-out-of-the-box-options-for-north-korea-a73975561b02 … 12/x
Show this thread -
I know many disagree. But if you think the US should reject talks, you need to come up with a plan that will successfully deescalate the situation on the Korean peninsula without the United States negotiating with Kim Jong-un's regime. I say it's worth the gamble. (END)
Show this thread -
You say this as if... 1) Meeting with POTUS is a huge deal. Not nothing, but they meet tons of people. 2) North Korea's path looks desirable to others. Endure decades of isolating sanctions and poverty, scratch together a nuke, and all you get is a meetinghttps://twitter.com/jpodhoretz/status/971902061141987330 …
Show this thread -
Here's another one.
@MaxBoot says "Kim will be able to tell his people that the American president is kowtowing to him because he is scared of North Korea’s mighty nuclear arsenal." But he already tells his people stuff like that. And they believe it, because they're so isolated.Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I disagree with this. First and foremost, serious dispute as to whose interests Trump will be negotiating for. Under the current circumstances no telling how the meeting will be perceived by all the little monster autocrats who will be riveted by it. This is a bad idea.
-
This is a variation on the no-confidence-in-Trump criticism. As you know, I'm quite critical of him as well. But I think the effect is much more dependent on the results of the meeting than having the meeting itself (though I share some skepticism that the meeting will succeed).
-
Why would we have confidence in Trump? Trump has gone out of his way to exhibit authoritarian impulses, has consistently failed to protect the US from Russian cyberwarfare tactics and has shown a disinterest in both American interests and those of our allies. Topper-over 2k lies
-
I didn't say we should.
-
So is the no confidence in Trump criticism valid or not?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The people eating dirt and watching their sisters' heads getting popped off with garrotes might be disheartened or something
-
Harsh, but yeah that's basically my point. I don't see how a top-level meeting makes a difference in that regard.
-
I don't either and there's already been at least some proclaimed concessions from Kim. I'm keeping an open mind and don't see how a meeting could make things worse than they already are and have been
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Unless Trump miraculously asks for exactly what Kim is willing to give, than it will fail. And Trump's reputation as being pigheaded will leave the failure on his doorstep. And Kim will come out of the meeting with more international acceptance for agreeing to meet with the US.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.