- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Is anyone else laughing about this "red line" media creation?
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:38 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:38 am to SlowFlowPro
I thought it was what Trump said on camera not on twitter? "North Korea best not make anymore threats to the United States.....they will be met with fire and fury, and frankly power the world has never seen before."
A few hours later North Korea threatened a preemptive strike on Guam, a U.S. Territory with a strategic U.S. Air Base.
A few hours later North Korea threatened a preemptive strike on Guam, a U.S. Territory with a strategic U.S. Air Base.
This post was edited on 8/9/17 at 10:41 am
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:39 am to Salmon
quote:
I mean...did Trump's statement not imply a certain "line" to cross?
again, the only reason Obama was associated with "red line" was because he literally said "red line"
Trump does stupid macho bullshite (last example was that stupidity in Long Island with the cops). it doesn't mean anything other than political pandering to his base. he's not laying out diplomatic-military policy with statements like these
now if the media wanted to call this a threat? OK. that works
but using the term "Red line" is literally nothing more than a way to link this to Obama's red line. i hope you can agree with that
then the question is why the anti-Trump media is creating this association out of thin air? the talking point has a purpose
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:40 am to Old Hellen Yeller
quote:
That's an embarrassing argument, even for a Trumpkin
i'm not a Trumpkin
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:40 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Trump sent a typical macho-Trump tweet.
It wasn't a tweet. He stated the following on camera yesterday:
"North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen... he has been very threatening beyond a normal state. They will be met with fire, fury and frankly power the likes of which this world has never seen before."
I have no idea if any media is talking about "red lines," but if they are, it's perfectly clear why they would be. "Threats" is unambiguous. NK has only ever made "threats." @real promised "fire and fury" if there were any more threats. Well, an unusually specific threat came a few hours later. What now?
This post was edited on 8/9/17 at 10:58 am
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:40 am to ChewyDante
quote:
I grant that there is room for criticism on the language used t
i can agree with this
calling it a threat? fine
calling it a "red line"? clear association with Obama
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:41 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
but using the term "Red line" is literally nothing more than a way to link this to Obama's red line. i hope you can agree with that
oh they are absolutely comparing the 2 statements
quote:
then the question is why the anti-Trump media is creating this association out of thin air? the talking point has a purpose
it's a "gotcha" for all the people that hated on the Obama statement
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:41 am to smash williams
quote:
I thought it was what Trump said on camera not on twitter? "North Korea best not make anymore threats to the United States.....they will be met with fire and fury, and frankly power the world has never seen before
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say he was implying if something is actually done by NK.
This post was edited on 8/9/17 at 10:42 am
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:41 am to Spock's Eyebrow
quote:
It wasn't a tweet
i get it
it was such a nothing burger i didn't even care to clarify the method of the communication. it was not a tweet it was a statement
that's irrelevant, but i admit the mistake
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:44 am to Salmon
quote:
it's a "gotcha" for all the people that hated on the Obama statement
yeah but they didn't even give time for Trump to possibly respond to NK
are they expecting Trump to launch nukes within 12 hours of NK issuing a press release? c'mon
either they want Trump to initiate military action with NK or they're trying to muddy any positives if he can resolve this situation without military action. what other option is there for their motivation for this weak association b/w the 2? i don't think the media wants Trump to actually attack NK
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:48 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:quote:
If you threaten to do something in response to a specific action, what would you call that?
in this case, a tweet
It's a generic question. What would you call it?
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:48 am to Deuces
quote:
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say he was implying if something is actually done by NK.
It could also be Trump setting the basis for preemptive strikes on North Korea though, under the justification that North Korean threats can no longer go left unheeded on account that they are now potentially armed with nuclear tipped ICBM's. So I certainly recignize that the language could mean exactly what Trump said. The problem is that it's unclear.
It wouldn't be an illogical argument. When North Korea had no nukes, we could afford to sit idle on North Korean threats and military posturing that indicated preparations for an attack. Now that they are on the cusp of actually possessing nuclear missiles to follow through on those threats, the U.S. position is very different.
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:49 am to mmcgrath
quote:
It's a generic question. What would you call it?
a threat
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:50 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i get it
it was such a nothing burger i didn't even care to clarify the method of the communication. it was not a tweet it was a statement
that's irrelevant, but i admit the mistake
It takes a big man to admit the least of his mistakes.
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:50 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:He was literally asked what would be a "red line". Odd how the reporter could ask him that when Obama hadn't used the words yet. According to your logic we must have crossed a strange time warp.
again, the only reason Obama was associated with "red line" was because he literally said "red line"
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:51 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
what other option is there for their motivation for this weak association b/w the 2? i don't think the media wants Trump to actually attack NK
I think they are assuming, like most people, that this is mostly a war of words
I don't really like this narrative of Trump being weak right now because I don't trust him that much. I 100% believe that he is insecure enough to retaliate just based off this narrative.
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:51 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
“North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States,” “They will be met with fire and the fury like the world has never seen.”
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:53 am to SlowFlowPro
It's not just that Trump never said "red line" and that Obama clearly did. That is significant but that's not all. Trump's statement -- which I don't find helpful -- is also vague and blustery about what the issue is. What would cause "fire and fury" to rain down on NK? Trump didn't say. Obama was very clear that the "red line" was the use of chemical weapons, such that it was clear when the line was crossed. As far as I can tell, Trump just blustered away and to the extent he said anything, it was that NK is courting disaster if they attack the US. Who doesn't know that!?
Now, I just wish Trump would shut up and let Tillerson handle this.
(Edited as I don't know if there was a tweet; all I saw was a statement)
Now, I just wish Trump would shut up and let Tillerson handle this.
(Edited as I don't know if there was a tweet; all I saw was a statement)
This post was edited on 8/9/17 at 10:58 am
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:53 am to SlowFlowPro
Not to mention one was a "red line" pertaining to an actual reprehensible action, the use of chemical weapons. In which they did.
Trumps was a statement regarding their use of words, or "threatening".
It's obvious one would dictate more action vs the other.
It's like me saying, if you punch my mom I'll destroy you. Then subsequently doing nothing when they punch my mom.
Vs.
If you call me a meanie head one more time I'll destroy you. Then doing nothing once they call me a meanie head.
They're trying to make the two instances equivalent, when they are far from.
That being said, Trump needs to learn to shut his trap every once in a while.
Trumps was a statement regarding their use of words, or "threatening".
It's obvious one would dictate more action vs the other.
It's like me saying, if you punch my mom I'll destroy you. Then subsequently doing nothing when they punch my mom.
Vs.
If you call me a meanie head one more time I'll destroy you. Then doing nothing once they call me a meanie head.
They're trying to make the two instances equivalent, when they are far from.
That being said, Trump needs to learn to shut his trap every once in a while.
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:54 am to Salmon
quote:
I think they are assuming, like most people, that this is mostly a war of words
i agree. that's why they're preemptively declaring Trump to be the same as Obama for not attacking when the "Red line" was crossed
that's the entire narrative, and they've created it before Trump has the option not to do anything
quote:
I 100% believe that he is insecure enough to retaliate just based off this narrative.
i think the actions in the UN and Trump's past actions with NK should lessen your fear
it's clear Trump is trying to work out a diplomatic solution and is working with China (and now SK, again) to get there
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:54 am to Deuces
quote:
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say he was implying if something is actually done by NK. This post was edited on 8/9 at 10:42 am
He specifically stated if they make anymore threats. How much clearer could he be?
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News