President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

A continuation of policy:

Obama's written statement, released by the White House Friday morning, contained some of Obama's most blunt language on the North Korean nuclear program to date. It came hours after the isolated communist regime said it had tested its largest nuclear warhead yet — and designed it to sit atop a ballistic missile.

"To be clear, the United States does not, and never will, accept North Korea as a nuclear state,"

Obama: U.S. will not accept a nuclear North Korea

 

That quote is not remotely the same.

 

Obama drew the line at them simply becoming a nuclear state, with, or without bluster.

They became a nuclear state today.

We have every right to act, based on pre-existing policy.

Trump as pushed back Obama's red line.

 

That's the question the entire world is asking. About both of them.

 

Of course it is, unless you think he meant nothing by it.

It clearly meant that we would use all means necessary, including military means, to prevent them from becoming a nuclear state.

Our intelligence, which said they were years away from being able to arm a missile, now says they can arm a missile.

Any continuation of Obama's policy, would mandate that we take action.

 

You didn't deny Dickie's assertion. In fact, you didn't respond to it at all. Why is that?

 

Go play in traffic. I'm not getting sucked into a discussion with you.

 

No, he's not. And North Korea ain't doing shit, either.

 

Lemme just say I don't take today's intelligence estimates at face value. We heard a month ago that Trump was eyeing North Korea as his chance to wag the dog.

I wanna hear an estimate of their nuclear capabilities from an unbiased source before this turns into Iraq all over again.

 

If that was speaking softly, calm and rationally, I'd hate to hear what he says if he gets wound up.

Diplomat speak exists for a reason. Particular phrases have specific meanings, and everyone knows what the phrases that ramp up a country's expression of anger translate as. "They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen" is nowhere in that lexicon, and no one knows what it really means. It certainly sounds like a threat to go to a preemptive strike, and no one wants that to happen.

 

I didn't ask for a discussion. I asked why you are ducking Dickie's assertion that Trump couldn't do or say anything that you would disagree with on this board. First you tried to change the subject and now you are hiding behind a personal attack against me.

Need a ruling from the SJ.com community. How does "Go play in traffic" stack up with '"Die in a fire?" I think the latter is worse, but the former is still kinda shitty. Thoughts?

 

Wait, so now, the intelligence community, which was out to get Trump, is giving him assessments that he's requested?

JFC. If Trump questions the IC, it's a fucking scandal. Now, he takes their word for it, and it's also a scandal.