• 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!

Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough enough

Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

I don't like it, either but people would be cheering if he did the same with Russia. There's no consistency in the criticism

We would be cheering if Trump threatened "fire and fury," at Russia? Is this a thing you believe?
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

If Trump starts a process that ends in the deaths of millions of people, in strictly utilitarian terms, where would that leave the U.S.? We would be universally hated for leading the world into a regional apocalypse. This would be a great way for the world to unite against us ever being the leader of the world again.

Actually, an honest assessment would put most of the blame at the feet of China. They are the ones that have enabled the NK regime for decades. China needs to pull their heads out of their 4th point of contact before things get out of control.
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

I don't like it, either but people would be cheering if he did the same with Russia. There's no consistency in the criticism

I disagree. I don't care what initial in parentheses is attatched to a politician's name tag. Just some decent reasonable leadership. Not going to happen until the money in politics issue addressed. But Russia, c'mon, man! There is some thing going on there. DJT is the only one rowing in the other direction.
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

We would be cheering if Trump threatened "fire and fury," at Russia? Is this a thing you believe?

Yes, I think that's what would happen. McCain would probably pop an unassisted by Viagra hard on.
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

After watching Trump addressing the press just moments ago, he very much sounds like a man that wants to go to war.

Maybe that is exactly what he wants Kim to think.
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

I disagree. I don't care what initial in parentheses is attatched to a politician's name tag. Just some decent reasonable leadership. Not going to happen until the money in politics issue addressed. But Russia, c'mon, man! There is some thing going on there. DJT is the only one rowing in the other direction.

There are plenty that aren't rowing in the opposite direction, the electorate that put him into office for one. If I had been forced to vote for the two candidates put before us I'd have voted for Trump and that would have been a significant variable that would've done it. He also had talked in a very non-interventionist manner but that seems to be going by the wayside.
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

Yes, I think that's what would happen. McCain would probably pop an unassisted by Viagra hard on.

I don't know how to verbalize or quantify just how far outside the realm of reality that belief is. The road you traveled to arrive at that conclusion is so long and perilous that I wouldn't even know how to begin guiding you back.
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

And that is why Kim is threatening Guam.

You act like Kim just came to power yesterday. This crap has been going on for years. Kim is not going to attack Guam or anywhere else because he now knows if he does, he gets his ass kicked
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

I believe the response by the president of "if you threaten us again we'll nuke you" is the problem. Within hours KJU threatened us again. So Trump created a nuclear red line, it was crossed, and now he's threatening more. How does this move the situation forward in a positive direction?

If Trump starts a process that ends in the deaths of millions of people, in strictly utilitarian terms, where would that leave the U.S.? We would be universally hated for leading the world into a regional apocalypse. This would be a great way for the world to unite against us ever being the leader of the world again.

N. Korea started the process-- by directly threatening to nuke the USA.
How should Trump responded? By calm measured words? Maybe. But that is how it has been done for years and we still have the problem.
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

Not really. The North Korea thing is worse but you wring your hands over strong rhetoric there but also complain about weak rhetoric against Russia for way less.

It's not really strong rhetoric. It's a schoolyard taunt. It's not well thought out and credible. I keep expecting Trump and Kim to unzip and compare equipment.
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

I don't like it, either but people would be cheering if he did the same with Russia. There's no consistency in the criticism

Who would be cheering if Trump said things that stupid and mixed-up, to Russia?

- Trump promised basically an attack on NK if they continued threats
- Trump used childish language
- Trumps administration is all saying different things

He promised fire and fury if they threatened. They threatened. Trump tones down the warning to tell NK to "clean up their act". or some such.
- This makes Trump look weak, in that he drew a stupid red line stupidly, then when it was crossed, he immediately walked BACK his threat.
Trump threatens
NK threatens back
Trump backs up

That's what happened Fishking. This has nothing to to do with Trump hatred, it's what WORDS ****ING MEAN.

And of course the language was like that of a 5 year old, even the people Fox trotted out to defend Trump balked on supporting the word choice!
And lastly, the cherry on top this pile of steaming **** of a president......His administration like always, is saying different things to different people in the same disorganized cluster **** it always does.

And this is on the single largest nuclear threat to the U.S. today. Trump is an utter failure and a danger to the world. Still.
 
Last edited:
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

Maybe that is exactly what he wants Kim to think.
Who knows?

But I think trying to out-crazy KJU is at best futile, and at worst possibly dangerous. We shall see.
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

It's not really strong rhetoric. It's a schoolyard taunt. It's not well thought out and credible. I keep expecting Trump and Kim to unzip and compare equipment.

Both are endowed with small hands!
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

Actually, an honest assessment would put most of the blame at the feet of China. They are the ones that have enabled the NK regime for decades. China needs to pull their heads out of their 4th point of contact before things get out of control.

If Trump pre-emptively strikes NK and triggers a response nobody is going to care about China's role in this. Yes they've played a major role enabling NK but we've also played a role by instilling Democracy on their continent. It's a struggle, what else would we expect? Bringing the situation to a head is not the answer.
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

N. Korea started the process-- by directly threatening to nuke the USA.
How should Trump responded? By calm measured words? Maybe. But that is how it has been done for years and we still have the problem.

Years of hardly anyone dying being replaced with millions of deaths is not progress.
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

Oh, he and McMasters must get along fabulously.

Technically he works for McMasters as Deputy National Security Advisor and he's a Special Assistant to the President as well. I seriously doubt that they've ever had a conversation that ended very well.
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno


Hardly anyone dying in war between countries. There have been skirmishes between NK and SK where a dozen get taken out, or somebody gets kidnapped, etc. but nothing major.

NK starving citizens is horrible but should SK and Japan lose millions to stop that and institute a new catastrophe?
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

Hardly anyone dying in war between countries. There have been skirmishes between NK and SK where a dozen get taken out, or somebody gets kidnapped, etc. but nothing major.

NK starving citizens is horrible but should SK and Japan lose millions to stop that and institute a new catastrophe?

The DPRK and the danger they present to the world goes further than what I'm sure are heartfelt but simplistic what if's. Being realistic in our discussions is not the same as advocating for war or the deaths of millions.
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

Trump on his 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough enough. - ABC News

That's it. That's the whole article. Well, I guess you can't accuse the Associated Press of being too verbose.

You have Trump screaming about fire and fury, Rex Tillerson saying that we can all sleep at night because we're using diplomacy, Seb Gorka* is saying “the idea that Secretary Tillerson is going to discuss military matters is simply nonsensical,” and Mattis is warning North Korea not to "invite destruction onto its people."

It's really great to see cooler heads prevailing in the White House and that they're all on the same page.




*Seriously, who the hell is Seb Gorka?

A nutjob and I am being kind.
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

Not really. The North Korea thing is worse but you wring your hands over strong rhetoric there but also complain about weak rhetoric against Russia for way less.

Any particular reason why we shouldn't, you know, judge each case on its own merits and avoid silly comparisons of situations that are in fact ENTIRELY different in pretty much every conceivable way?
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

Years of hardly anyone dying being replaced with millions of deaths is not progress.

Years of appeasement will inevitably lead to the deaths of millions.
 
Re: Trump on 'fire and fury' warning to North Korea: Maybe statement wasn't tough eno

Any particular reason why we shouldn't, you know, judge each case on its own merits and avoid silly comparisons of situations that are in fact ENTIRELY different in pretty much every conceivable way?

Why not save yourself some trouble and just admit that, no matter what, you're going to side against President Trump?
 
Back
Top Bottom