• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Russia Uses Veto To Block UN Statement Seeking Further North Korean Sanctions

This behavior by Russia was long foreseeable - we'd been antagonizing Russia for quite some time, so now they're hitting back.

It just goes to show how unbeneficial and contrary to US national interest it is to fruitlessly pursue confrontation with Russia, when we need them in order to deal with vital problems.

All Dems/Libs care about is saying "AHA! RUSSIA!"
But what we're seeing Russia doing today would not be happening if we'd taken a different course with them. Now we're simply reaping what we've sown.

Which lying son of trump released the emails before the NYT printed them ?
 
And before that Bush-43 for 8 years? And before that Clinton for 8 years? And before that Reagan/Bush-41 for 12 years, especially 1989? And before that Carter for 4 years? And before that Nixon/Ford for 8 years? And before that JFK/LBJ for 8 years? And before that Ike for 8 years, especially starting in 1956; too bad NK doesn't have administrative overlap, they could be like U.S.

In other words, nothing new.
 
What did trump do about NK at the G19 + one ****up?

How about Russia cooperating with trump on their UN veto ?

And, pray tell, would you like him to do on both issues?
 
And, pray tell, would you like him to do on both issues?

NK is a complex and perhaps intractable problem.

Russia? At the very least to not ignore or consider rewarding (returning Russian compounds) aggressive Russian behavior.
 
No, I didn't miss it. It wasn't the focus of your post, and I responded to the focus of your post.

Very well, then.

The focus of my commentary here has been to point out how our #45 POTUS has been out-maneuvered by his #1 geo-political rival (who many believe is his :censored). Instead of coming before the U.N. with concrete, irrefutable evidence that NKor has conducted an ICBM test capable of carrying a nuclear warhead and launched against the U.S. and/or it's allies, he came with a proposal to impose broader economic sanctions against them with the intention on garnering multi-lateral support. But Russia blocked his efforts. Putin basically said, "Show me proof or you've got nothing." And Pres. Trump backed down. This despite all his bluster about taking a hardline against NKor if they launched another such missile test directed at the U.S.

Now, I understand your criticism despite your incorrect characterization of me not being concerned about the potential outbreak of war between NKor and the U.S. and its allies (SKor and Japan being the potential targets for a short-range assault). Your wrong on that point entirely! Still, I feel compelled to remind you that when it was Obama in the White House and Syria allegedly crossed his red line it was Putin who challenged him then as well. Moreover, there were concerns about the potential outbreak of war then, too, only it was Republicans who largely called Obama out for being outplayed by Putin. So, I suppose this is your tit-for-tat moment.

You could say Obama, like Trump, blundered on the world stage. The difference, however, is Obama's came via media reports to which the world came to know of it piece-meal, whereas, Trump got outmaneuvered on the world stage by world leaders. Neither handed their respective situations very well initially, but at least Obama (via his Sec of State, Kerry) was able to work with the Russian (and Syrian) government(s) to find a solution to their mutual problem. Only time will tell if Trump can find his.
 
I like how the proposition of war is less important to you than the failure of the US Government and President Trump.

Clearly, you also missed this part of my post:

Objective Voice said:
If I didn't fear what the immediate future might hold for our country and the world...

Reading comprehension, folks.
 
We've got to this point because Obama did nothing for eight years.

Let me ask you something...

When did North Korea really become so antagonistic towards the U.S.? Did it just happen during Obama's presidency or did it begin several years (and, thus, 2 or 3 Presidents) before?

When you figure that out, let me know. Meanwhile, you can stop blaming Obama any day now. This is now Pres. Trump's problem to resolve. Let's see how he handles it.
 
OTOH pushing a tiger into a corner with increased sanctions may actually backfire. We cut Japan off of their oil supplies and ended up with Pearl Harbor.

I say let him have his nukes but counter that with two things:

1. Assure him he will become a glass parking lot if he fires one off at us.

2. Continue to work on our antiballistic missiles to make them 100 % accurate. We can do it.

There really is no other option beside all out war and 20 million casualties in SK in the first hour.

I believe he wants nukes to protect himself from us even though he's not justified and paranoid. Historicially it's hands off to countries with nukes.

I'm inclined to agree. Essentially, we hype of the NRA's favorite tagline about private gun ownership only on a much larger scale...

The only way to stop a bad leader with nukes is a good leader with nukes.

I'd hate for that to happen, though. Still, nukes have acted as a deterrent to other nations who may either be trigger happy or are at risk of going rouge. Nonetheless, an alternative to firing back and going nuke-for-nuke is to put in place an effective nuclear defense system.
 
NK is a complex and perhaps intractable problem.

Russia? At the very least to not ignore or consider rewarding (returning Russian compounds) aggressive Russian behavior.

So, you admit that there isn't much anyone can really do about North Korea so there's no need to criticize Trump over it. Do you really believe that keeping the Russian compounds will stop Russia from meddling in elections?
 
Very well, then.

The focus of my commentary here has been to point out how our #45 POTUS has been out-maneuvered by his #1 geo-political rival (who many believe is his :censored). Instead of coming before the U.N. with concrete, irrefutable evidence that NKor has conducted an ICBM test capable of carrying a nuclear warhead and launched against the U.S. and/or it's allies, he came with a proposal to impose broader economic sanctions against them with the intention on garnering multi-lateral support. But Russia blocked his efforts. Putin basically said, "Show me proof or you've got nothing." And Pres. Trump backed down. This despite all his bluster about taking a hardline against NKor if they launched another such missile test directed at the U.S.
The above paragraph is one of the most well thought out and intellectually honest posts I've read of yours. This is the type post we need more of on DP. I do not disagree with the point you make above.

Now, I understand your criticism despite your incorrect characterization of me not being concerned about the potential outbreak of war between NKor and the U.S. and its allies (SKor and Japan being the potential targets for a short-range assault). Your wrong on that point entirely!
Based on the previous paragraph, and your honest concern to not be thought of that way, I agree that I was wrong. However, since we're being honest here, I would hope you can see why I would have gotten that impression from the level of snark and crassness of your OP. All I had to go off of was your own words and the impression they portrayed - written words lack emotion and cannot portray sarcasm.
Still, I feel compelled to remind you that when it was Obama in the White House and Syria allegedly crossed his red line it was Putin who challenged him then as well. Moreover, there were concerns about the potential outbreak of war then, too, only it was Republicans who largely called Obama out for being outplayed by Putin. So, I suppose this is your tit-for-tat moment.
Bush and Obama were played by Putin, and now Trump appears to be as well. Putin's actions over the last 17 years in Georgia, the Crimea, eastern Ukraine, and other areas are almost identical to the northern, southern, and western areas of Czechoslovakia (Sudetenland) which were inhabited primarily by ethnic German speakers and the entire nation of Austria (Anschluss) in 1938/1939.

You could say Obama, like Trump, blundered on the world stage. The difference, however, is Obama's came via media reports to which the world came to know of it piece-meal,
Obama wasn't blindsided, he was just blind, as was demonstrated when he made the smartass/dumbass comment to Romney in the debate when Romney said Russia is the most dangerous geo-political threat to the US and Obama said the '80's called and wanted their foreign policy back.
whereas, Trump got outmaneuvered on the world stage by world leaders.
Yup.
Neither handed their respective situations very well initially, but at least Obama (via his Sec of State, Kerry) was able to work with the Russian (and Syrian) government(s) to find a solution to their mutual problem.
Kerry got his pecker handed to him by the Russians, the Iranians, and succeeded in alienating the only democratic ME country to where they hated Kerry and Obama. Clinton, with ALL of her IR screw-ups, all-in-all, did a great job as SecState compared to Kerry.
Only time will tell if Trump can find his.
I don't hold much hope of that, but if he allows his IR cabinet members (SecState, SecDef, SecComm, etc.) to guide him, the US can not only survive his Presidency, but may be able turn some things around. We have a cease-fire in parts of Syria that has held for 5 days so far - something that hasn't succeeded before now. I have great hopes, but I'm not going to lay any bets right now either way.

BTW, thanks for a respectable and good conversation.
 
Let me ask you something...

When did North Korea really become so antagonistic towards the U.S.? Did it just happen during Obama's presidency or did it begin several years (and, thus, 2 or 3 Presidents) before?

When you figure that out, let me know. Meanwhile, you can stop blaming Obama any day now. This is now Pres. Trump's problem to resolve. Let's see how he handles it.

If Obama can blame Bush for 8 years, why can't Trump blame Obama?

I am asking seriously. Why does blame jump over Obamas 8 years here?
 
How about when you guys held Obama totally blameless?

Not I! I called him out when I thought he was wrong.

* I thought he was wrong on Libyia.
* I thought he was wrong on his "red line" against Syria when he had no proof of who really launched chemical weapons.
* I thought he was arrogant in not seeing Putin's play in Ukraine as the forceful push for regional control.
* I didn't necessarily like him pulling out of Iraq the way he did, but I couldn't blame him for doing so when it was our government who put Maliki in power after our disastrous efforts at "regime change" didn't go as smoothly as we had hoped.

There were several things I disagreed with former Pres. Obama on, but most were on principle not implementation of strategy.
 
If Obama can blame Bush for 8 years, why can't Trump blame Obama?

I am asking seriously. Why does blame jump over Obamas 8 years here?

I'm not saying one should hold him blameless. However, what I am saying is our problems with North Korea didn't start with Obama's presidency. So, people should stop acting is if they did.

That said, what you're seeing (or should begin to realize) is Trump won't take any heavier hand against NKor than Obama did against them. He'll quickly discover that unless he can garner multi-lateral support (mostly from China, Japan, SKor and maybe Russia), he'll do nothing militarily against them. This is why he's "reached out" to China in an attempt to get them to put pressure on NKor. He knows like Obama came to realize that short of a global or regional boycott of shipments in or out of the country OR all out war, economic sanctions is the only play he has. However, he won't even go that route unless he can get other nations besides SKor on his side and China won't stick their neck out for us. You can forget that.

I don't expect Pres. Trump to fair any better against NKor by trying to squeeze them further. His only other recourse is one the U.S. hasn't tried yet and that is to give alittle. But like Israel won't yield to hostile aggression from the Muslim world, the U.S will not yield to NKor as long as it continues its threats against us. Stalemate! Whose willing to give alittle first?
 
The above paragraph is one of the most well thought out and intellectually honest posts I've read of yours. This is the type post we need more of on DP. I do not disagree with the point you make above.

Based on the previous paragraph, and your honest concern to not be thought of that way, I agree that I was wrong. However, since we're being honest here, I would hope you can see why I would have gotten that impression from the level of snark and crassness of your OP. All I had to go off of was your own words and the impression they portrayed - written words lack emotion and cannot portray sarcasm. Bush and Obama were played by Putin, and now Trump appears to be as well. Putin's actions over the last 17 years in Georgia, the Crimea, eastern Ukraine, and other areas are almost identical to the northern, southern, and western areas of Czechoslovakia (Sudetenland) which were inhabited primarily by ethnic German speakers and the entire nation of Austria (Anschluss) in 1938/1939.

Obama wasn't blindsided, he was just blind, as was demonstrated when he made the smartass/dumbass comment to Romney in the debate when Romney said Russia is the most dangerous geo-political threat to the US and Obama said the '80's called and wanted their foreign policy back. Yup. Kerry got his pecker handed to him by the Russians, the Iranians, and succeeded in alienating the only democratic ME country to where they hated Kerry and Obama. Clinton, with ALL of her IR screw-ups, all-in-all, did a great job as SecState compared to Kerry. I don't hold much hope of that, but if he allows his IR cabinet members (SecState, SecDef, SecComm, etc.) to guide him, the US can not only survive his Presidency, but may be able turn some things around. We have a cease-fire in parts of Syria that has held for 5 days so far - something that hasn't succeeded before now. I have great hopes, but I'm not going to lay any bets right now either way.

BTW, thanks for a respectable and good conversation.

Not a problem. I can certainly see how you'd view my OP as going all-out against Pres. Trump w/o considering the possible implications of war. I'm glad, however, you saw that despite it all that is a concern of mine and remains so.

As for discussions here, I'm more than willing to have open and honest dialog with anyone on any topic ias long as others are willing to do the same. Furthermore, as I've often said I'm not afraid to admit when I'm wrong. As much as it my be difficult for some people to believe, I try not to wear partisan blinders. But I will call thins as I see them no matter which side of the political divide you're on.

Both Obama and Trump got out-maneuvered by Putin. The question now for Trump is how will he counter? (If he does so at all?)
 
Last edited:
I'm not saying one should hold him blameless. However, what I am saying is our problems with North Korea didn't start with Obama's presidency. So, people should stop acting is if they did.

That said, what you're seeing (or should begin to realize) is Trump won't take any heavier hand against NKor than Obama did against them. He'll quickly discover that unless he can garner multi-lateral support (mostly from China, Japan, SKor and maybe Russia), he'll do nothing militarily against them. This is why he's "reached out" to China in an attempt to get them to put pressure on NKor. He knows like Obama came to realize that short of a global or regional boycott of shipments in or out of the country OR all out war, economic sanctions is the only play he has. However, he won't even go that route unless he can get other nations besides SKor on his side and China won't stick their neck out for us. You can forget that.

I don't expect Pres. Trump to fair any better against NKor by trying to squeeze them further. His only other recourse is one the U.S. hasn't tried yet and that is to give alittle. But like Israel won't yield to hostile aggression from the Muslim world, the U.S will not yield to NKor as long as it continues its threats against us. Stalemate! Whose willing to give alittle first?

Why is it that every left leaning person now can see the future?

Why don't you wait for something to happen in order to comment on it rather than tell us what you think will happen in the future?
 
[h=1]RE Russia Uses Veto To Block UN Statement Seeking Further North Korean Sanctions
※→ et al,[/h]
The blame game and finger pointing doesn't work on the question of US Global Influence, and the US relationship with the ROK, the DPRK, PRC, Japan, and the Russian Federation. In fact, at the opening of the 21st Century, the US was already a declining world power. Yes, the US still has probably the best Strategic Nuclear Deterrent Force (SNDF), but at the end of the day, if it wants anything done, the US either has to either plead and beg, buy the necessary political capital, or do it alone.

The old concept of the US having the influence of a Super Power; and when it speaks, the world listens, is fading fast.

The US has no real means to influence Nuclear Policy Changes in the DPRK any more than it can change Nuclear Policy in Iran. In fact, it has even less influence in the case of the DPRK. And for the most part, the US is trying to impose a restriction that has no basis in international law. Where as Japan Ranks 17th on the Human Development Index (HDI), and the ROK Ranks 18th, the Russian Federation Ranks 49th, and with Main Land PRC Ranked 90th [Hong Kong, China (SAR) Ranking 12th], the DPRK did not even make the ratings; having no significant development. That means that the factors that are important to the North Korean is very different from that of the Developed Nations. So, the DPRKs shabby little quasi-ICBM Program (KN-14 & KN-08) can actually make much more of an impact in hitting Beijing, Tokyo, Seoul, or Moscow --- than any of the Western Allies can in a retaliation strike on any major target in the DPRK.

Most Western Policies and Strategies (diplomatic, militarily, and economically) are based on the the idea that the opponents in the conflict can inflict similar levels of damage on the other. That is not the case with the DPRK. If the DPRK managed to hit (with a small warhead) any significant target outside their normal influence (say: Hong Kong, Pearl Harbor, Kyoto, Deagu, or Novgorod), the damage inflected would be many times more than would be the total destruction of Pyongyang. And it is that simple fact that gives a leader like Kim Jong-un such a strong hand. The entire population of the DPRK is something like 26 Million (at most). The population of Seoul Korea is almost 10 Million. A proportional response by the Allied Powers would be to burn half the DPRK to the ground.

In 21st Century diplomacy - we must to find something that means as much to the DPRK as much as major cities mean to the Allied Powers (+ PRC).

As far as sanctions go, how much more can we take from the DPRK before they determine that they have nothing to lose. An opponent with nothing to lose is a very dangerous opponent. The Russians know this --- even if the Americans do not. That is why the Russian exercised their VETO power.

Like I've said before, the US just does not have the knowledge skills and abilities to address the diplomatic challenges of the 21st Century; and the rest of the world knows it. We are no longer the leader of the free world.


Most Respectfully,
R
 
Last edited:
So... when does the master deal making begin?
 
From WorldNews.com:



Source: https://article.wn.com/view/2017/07/06/Russia_Uses_Veto_To_Block_UN_Statement_Seeking_Further_North/

I only have three things to say about this:

1. Russia has all but boxed the U.S. into a corner effectively tying our hands on dealing with NKor in a bilateral way via the U.N. General Assembly. In short, Putin (Russia) at best has punked Trump (U.S.) and at least just made him his b...:censored.

2. Remember all that tough talk Trump did before he became POTUS where he claimed that the economic sanctions former President's Clinton and Obama imposed on NKor in their efforts to stop them from testing long-range ballistic missiles or getting a nuclear weapon amounted to nothing more than a slap on the risk? Well, look whose trying to impose more economic sanctions on NKor? For all his "Mr. Tough-Guy" bravado, Pres. Trump is trying to do the exact same thing he blasted his Democratic predecessors for doing. Even worse, he's sought the assistance from two other major players on the world stage, i.e., China and Japan, to help put NKor in check.

3. What makes things even worse is Russia and China via the U.N. Security Counsel are now calling on a freeze for NKor to stop all missile testing and for the U.S. and SKor to halt all military drills. (Source: https://article.wn.com/view/2017/07/04/Russia_China_call_for_freeze_on_North_Korea_missile_tests_US/)

Talk about entering the U.N. General Assembly from a weak position! If I didn't fear what the immediate future might hold for our country and the world, I'd be :2rofll: :2funny:.

The funny thing is that we won't hear a peep about this matter from Trump. He's like a puppy dog with Putin and his followers are going right along with him. Now they will find some way to blame Hillary or Obama for it. It is like a mass rejection of their "oath of citizenship" and it won't end well for them. They need to read "Man without a Country" again.
 
Why is it that every left leaning person now can see the future?

Why don't you wait for something to happen in order to comment on it rather than tell us what you think will happen in the future?

I think I'm entitled to my opinion same as everyone else. My opinion on what I think Pres. Trump will do next against NKor is based on the steps he has taken to date against NKor or at least in an attempt to bring them to heal. Based on those actions, it's clear that unless something significant happens, there's nothing more he will do that any U.S. President before him hasn't done, to which, seek multi-lateral condemnation and/or more sanctions either unilaterally or bilaterally.

So,yeah. I think it's fairly easy to predict what Pres. Trump will do next which won't be anything more than what his predecessors did before him. :shrug:
 
Back
Top Bottom