North Korea 'really angry' at US as tensions rise

jee I guess now its "We're in no rush. We're in no hurry", just few month back Trump said he will get rid of NK nuke in a year. I haven't seen a single IAEA agent step on NK yet.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/07/politics/north-korea-trump-pompeo-tensions/index.html

 

If nk is angry that means they are not getting as many gifts from our side as they expected

 

@s002wjh,

Since CNN makes up a lot of news, could you do a TL;DR version of that snippet? I can only stand to read so much of their reports.

 

better than fox

 

nope, just point out Trump keep saying denuclearize NK since 2017, haven't seen it happen yet. Not even an IAEA, so when its gonna be.

 

Russia and China asked for a closed door UN Security Council meeting on N. Korea. This is from the Russian delegation:

At the meeting, the Russian Mission to the UN released a statement referring to “serious humanitarian problems” resulting from the current American-championed sanctions. The statement claims the restrictions are interfering with the ability of nonprofits and humanitarian aid organizations to work in North Korea – even though they’re not directly subject to the sanctions regime.

It urges the council “to examine as soon as possible the options to rectify the situation using the entire tool set available to the UNSC.”

​

This is from US Ambassador Haley:

Russia is trying “to lift banking restrictions” against North Korea, an option which she says is off the table: “So now we know what their agenda is, we know exactly why they’re trying to do it and we’re not going to let it happen.”

​

Looks like the Aid organizations can't get their funds from the banks. Oh well if the people starve, let them starve. We're doing it for their own good, it's called: Democracy at work.

​

 

Kim should just watch the video trump gave him again :0)

 

So you're ok with the progress from the last 70 years, but you'd like Trump to get it done this week.

 

Sorry, but it's not our fault that Kim murders and starves his people while Trump makes nicey-nice with him. Also, you really should link your sources. Here is one of them:
https://www.rt.com/news/443500-haley-nkorea-sanctions-russia/

Anyway, if that's what Haley said, she was right. Russia is making up nonsense about humanitarian aid just to get banking restrictions lifted. Putin doesn't give a lick about human rights, or he wouldn't be supporting Assad in Syria.

 

In other words if the people starve because the US will not allow banking transactions, it's not the US that's killing them, it's Kim. Strange logic there!

Yeah she's right! If Russia cared for the people in Syria they would support ISIS and Al Nusra like us.

Anyway it was brought to the UN by Russia and China so they would do something about the situation. This bullying and blackmail is why Russia and China are attacking the American dollar and forming their own banking system.

 

Trump is so full of hot air.

 

Trump's hands are tied. Every time he tries to make a move for peace he's attacked by the war mongers and the Deep State as 'Putin's' man. Haley works for them not for Trump, making some wonder if she's planning on running for president and needs their support and money.

 

Does it make you nervous that Kim is weewee angwy? They should hope that the US President doesn't get weewee angwy.

 

I don't know what's going on and what the deal is with the US. What I do know is that Russia and China gave Kim a plan on how to denuclearize and not end up like Ghadaffy - I mean come on, he'd be stupid to trust Washington.

I think the plan was for Kim to gradually denuclearize while the US withdraws its troops from S. Korea. Moscow also gave N. Korea a strong guarantee that they will defend them should the US decide to turn it into a second Libya. Russia has no choice but to defend N. Korea, since Vladisvostok is less than 100 miles from their border.

Kim said that Trump is not living up to his side of the bargain, and I believe it - not because Kim said it, but because I know that Washington is controlled by war mongers.

 

If we just pull out of NK half the problem will be solved. SK has more people and way more money. There is literally no reason for us to be there in the first place. Just tell SK that they have 8 years to build up their military and train the troops that they need and then we pull out everything.

The ONLY part we should play is that if NK uses nukes we will nuke their entire country. Outside of that SK can take care of themselves.

 

Anyone would be stupid to trust Washington for a few decades
of good behavior.

I try to convince Aussies they are just as likely to receive aid/support
from when they are violently invaded regardless of defense treaties
or trade deals vs absolute Australian neutrality ala India. Not to wus out like Switzerland.
What do you think @Jeannette
Are Aussies too trusting of because we have "deals"?



Moi

​

 

So basically the simple fact is that like the presidents before him Trump has made no progress in the effort to stem the progess of North Korea in developing and improving the countries nuclear weapons capabilities.

 

Well, then that must be why Trump is embarrassing us in Europe right now too, throwing little fits in meetings with foreign leaders.

 

The US, Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand are called the 5 eyes. Why they're referred to as the 5 eyes I don't know, but what I do know is that they trust one another because of language and culture - and even lie for one another as you have noticed? So maybe we would go to war for Australia - unless of course it's a direct war with China. Then we'd be idiots to get involved.

 

So
POINT: Would we go to War any more Trustworthy
with a mutual defense system as opposed to Australian neutrality threatened.
Speak clearly into the microphone, please.

 

If we have bases in Australia and our forces are training with them, then we have to defend them in case of war.

Take care Moi with all those fires breaking out. Dutchsense feels they're coming from inside the earth - which is worrisome.

 

You feel the world would not suffer any major changes if the Chinese took over Australia? Or New Zealand? How many other countries are you prepared to sacrifice to the Chinese in order to not 'get involved'?

 

I support the Island of California freed from bolstering the Midwestern plateau.



Something like this.
It is a matter of who is splitting from who and which becomes ocean bottom.

Or did I totally miss your signals?



I maintain is as likely to defend Australia
from a military invasion whether or not we share military stuff.
Because interests are in a FREE or minimally UnFree
Island Continent English speaking nation.
If only Australia would cut the cord.

And that willingness to come to Australia's military defense would
not be different over deals, treaties, understandings.
Australia should "rent" space used by the military & fancy communications stuff
and charge extra for creating targets!

 

In America even liberals are entitled to your opinion