CNN Ratings Hit 20-Year Low...

I am all for giving diplomacy a chance to work in Korea. We already know that war won't settle the issue.

George Washington spoke of the perils of foreign entanglements in his farewell address. It was true then, and it is true today. If the wars in Viet Nam and Iraq proved anything, they proved how useless our involvement in those wars was. In the end, the people of a nation always end up with the government they choose. Any government installed by a foreign power lasts only as long as that foreign power stays engaged with an occupying force. As soon as that occupying force is removed, things will resort back to whatever the people allow. For this reason I, for one, never want to see American troops fighting on the Korean peninsula ever again. If North Korea and South Korea ever reunite, it will be through the efforts of diplomacy or war between those two. Either way, it is the WILL of the Korean people that will determine their fate. Diplomacy is worth a try with North Korea, but a ground war should NEVER be an option that we consider. No more American lives should ever be lost over Korea's fate. We'll see if President Trump can make diplomacy work for a lasting peace in that region, but our occupying force needs to be removed no matter what.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

Well, if we consider deal making and restoring diplomatic relations with dictator-led countries wins, Obama did both with Iran and Cuba.

There was also the finding and killing of all Al Qaeda and most of Isis leadership.

---

All Obozo did was kiss their asses!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 70TECHGRAD

All Obozo did was kiss their asses!!!

---

So far that is all Trump has done with NKorea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

So far that is all Trump has done with NKorea.

---

President Trump is trying a new approach with North Korea. Nothing any president before Trump did worked worth a crap with the them. Why not see if the president's new approach works? What have we got to lose? North Korea has already got nuclear weapons and inter-continental missiles, it's not like the guy can get become much more of a threat.

A de-nuclearized Korean peninsula sounds like a pretty good idea to most of us. You shouldn't allow your Trump Hate Derangement Syndrome to close your mind to such possibility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brtransplant

President Trump is trying a new approach with North Korea. Nothing any president before Trump did worked worth a crap with the them. Why not see if the president's new approach works? What have we got to lose? North Korea has already got nuclear weapons and inter-continental missiles, it's not like the guy can get become much more of a threat.

---

I'm not against the diplomacy efforts. Guiss has indicated he isn't either. I think what's funny in all of this is the hypocrisy of the right. Can you imagine the reaction if Obama had said this about Ahmadinejad?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FOX News Report

"Hey, he's the head of a country, and I mean, he's the strong head, don't let anyone think anything different," Trump told Fox News' Steve Doocy. "He speaks and his people sit up at attention. I want my people to do the same."

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

I'm not against the diplomacy efforts. Guiss has indicated he isn't either. I think what's funny in all of this is the hypocrisy of the right. Can you imagine the reaction if Obama had said this about Ahmadinejad?

---

But as we all knew then and been proven since, Obama couldn't be trusted and couldn't negotiate. Obama always stood up for the evil and wrong side IMHO and therefore gave them all they wanted and more without Congressional approval (Executive Order).
And again this is why Trump can so easily destroy the anti-American portions of the "Obama Legacy".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

But as we all knew then and been proven since, Obama couldn't be trusted and couldn't negotiate. Obama always stood up for the evil and wrong side IMHO and therefore gave them all they wanted and more without Congressional approval (Executive Order).
And again this is why Trump can so easily destroy the anti-American portions of the "Obama Legacy".

---

That is revisionism and not what the right wing media was arguing at the time. They (particularly FoxNews) were saying that talking to dictators who violate human rights was improper in the base case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

That is revisionism and not what the right wing media was arguing at the time. They (particularly FoxNews) were saying that talking to dictators who violate human rights was improper in the base case.

---

Yep, some, like Sean Hannity did take a "broad brush" stance on that issue, and he and they were wrong. THEY WERE WRONG! THEY WERE WRONG!

Although, actually, what they really meant was OBUMMER CAN'T BE TRUSTED TO TALK TO DICTATORS. That's the REAL TRUTH of Hannity's position then. And, you know that to be true as well. But, that is NOT what they said. So, again, Hannity was wrong for simply saying it was improper to talk to dictators. Hannity probably thought he'd catch more grief for singling out obummer, so he painted with a broad brush and said it was improper for any POTUS to talk to evil dictators.

But, looking strictly at what he actually said, he was wrong then. It's always a good idea to talk. Talking is better than allowing tensions to worsen that might lead to the start of a war. When tensions are high and both sides' militaries are on heightened alert an event, even an honest "oops," could lead to a shooting war.

Okay...so we agree, Sean Hannity was wrong on that particular issue. Let's find some agreement on the many, many, many times the lamestream media has been wrong. We can start with Fast & Furious, Benghazi, Syria, Krooked Killary's felonies, heck! let's go back to 2004 and the real cause of the mortgage crisis that led to the 2008 collapse of the economy. But, you won't, will ya?

That's okay. I know your real self.

Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

But as we all knew then and been proven since, Obama couldn't be trusted and couldn't negotiate. Obama always stood up for the evil and wrong side IMHO and therefore gave them all they wanted and more without Congressional approval (Executive Order).
And again this is why Trump can so easily destroy the anti-American portions of the "Obama Legacy".

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

That is revisionism and not what the right wing media was arguing at the time. They (particularly FoxNews) were saying that talking to dictators who violate human rights was improper in the base case.

---

Trump's was to take a quickly growing Nuke power (NK) totally off the table and to establish peace in that region. And I think he just might do it. Little Rocketman hasn't dared push the button in what 6 months since Trump put our great US Navy on his doorstep and slapped huge sanctions on them vs. Bill Clinton that gave N.K. billions$$ instead. Democrats always try to solve problems with money (education, the poor, dictator nations). Obama went in "dealing" with Iran with no such thoughts. In fact there was zero dealing or negotiating with Hillary and Kerry as his go to Sec. of State's (what a joke). All three Dems. loved throwing our taxpayer money toward crap like these.

And also thanks for bringing up the 2008 collapse. The lessons we learned from that one only lasted 10 years and now Trump, with the help of Congressional Republicans, have rolled back a few of the safeguards.

”Midsized” regional banks (those with capital assets between 50B and 250B) will no longer have to hold as much capital to cover losses on their balance sheets. They will not be required to have plans in place to be safely dismantled if they failed. And they will have to take the Fed's bank health test only periodically, not once a year.

The legislation also loosened regulations for mortgage lenders and change the rules for student loan defaults.

Community banks with less than $10 billion in assets will no longer have to comply with the Volcker Rule, which bars financial institutions from making risky bets with money that is insured by taxpayers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

Trump's was to take a quickly growing Nuke power (NK) totally off the table and to establish peace in that region.And he just might do it. Little Rocketman hasn't dared push the button in what 6 months since Trump put our great navy on his doorstep and slapped huge sanctions on them vs. Bill Clinton that gave N.K. billions$$ instead. Democrats always try to solve problems with money (education, the poor, dictator nations). Obama went in "dealing" with Iran with no such thoughts. In fact there was zero dealing or negotiating with Hillary and Kerry as his go to Sec. of State's (what a joke). All three Dems. loved throwing our taxpayer money toward crap like these.

---

That is completely wrong. The Iran deal was all about preventing Iran from getting nuclear weapons and provided us with a mechanism to make sure they were complying with their side of the deal. Before we exited the deal our experts said that Iran was complying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

And also thanks for bringing up the 2008 collapse.

---

Nope the "2008 collapse" was due to Dem's Pelosi and Dirty Harry Reid hammering on a weak President Bush to spend, spend, spend in 2006. Bush the Rhino caved to socialist liberal policies! And the country felt the wrath. In fact it was Bush and Condi hammering on Israel/Arial Sharon to move out of certain territories in 2006 which Israelites had owned and settled for 50+ years or more. That is what actually sealed America's fate. God's wrath and judgement on Bush and our country was quick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

Nope the "2008 collapse" was due to Dem's Pelosi and Dirty Harry Reid hammering on a weak President Bush to spend, spend, spend in 2006. Bush the Rhino caved to socialist liberal policies! And the country felt the wrath. In fact it was Bush and Condi hammering on Israel/Arial Sharon to move out of certain territories in 2006 which Israelites had owned and settled for 50+ years or more. That is what actually sealed America's fate. God's wrath and judgement on Bush and our country was quick.

---

That revisionism is not even close. 2008 was a banking collapse, not a government spending collapse.

Btw, revisionism is the 9 o’clock position, so thanks for the opportunity to remind you of your unwitting participation in the neo right wing propaganda cycle.

https://images.google.com/imgres?img...ce=sh%2Fx%2Fim

:icon_roll::laugh: