- 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
Is Kim Jong Un supposed to take Trump's threat literally or figuratively?-CNN
Posted on 8/9/17 at 9:54 am
Posted on 8/9/17 at 9:54 am
11
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:02 am to jimbeam
quote:
Is Kim Jong Un supposed to take Trump's threat literally or figuratively?-
Yes
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:07 am to jimbeam
Yeah, I just looked at the Internet news, and basically every article is negative Trump type, as usual. Even in the face of this, they're still siding against him.
The media is the opposition party and an enemy of the state and our best interests.
The media is the opposition party and an enemy of the state and our best interests.
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:13 am to Deuces
quote:
Yeah, I just looked at the Internet news, and basically every article is negative Trump type, as usual. Even in the face of this, they're still siding against him.
Remember in the Gulf War when all objective reporting went out the window in favor of "USA! USA!"?
How did that work out?
Trump's statement was idiotic. It is what it is.
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:13 am to jimbeam
quote:Actually I think they have a point. Kim makes these types of threats regularly, so I think we have to take it literally (plan for worse) knowing it's probably a bluff.
Shouldn't the question be the other way around?
Trump, or any president, on the other hand, doesn't usually make such threats. So it's interesting to consider the specific purpose. It's not a negative necessarily either way.
It's trying to figure out Trump's chess game.
This post was edited on 8/9/17 at 10:15 am
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:14 am to a want
I'm guessing you think he should have drawn a red line...
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:15 am to jimbeam
CNN actually supports the communist dictator like most progressives.
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:15 am to JGTiger
He did draw a red line, fool.
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:15 am to jimbeam
Trump wants little Kim to think he's bluffing for some reason but he's not really bluffing. I'm trying to figure out the end game and it doesn't look good no matter what I come up with.
Korea is used to rattling it's saber, being bought off and being quiet for a little while. That isn't happening this time. I don't see a way that this ends well.
Korea is used to rattling it's saber, being bought off and being quiet for a little while. That isn't happening this time. I don't see a way that this ends well.
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:15 am to jimbeam
same as the American people
When God Emperor Mae Phat Trump's tweet is good for Trump its literal, when his tweet like the majority of them its fiqurative
When God Emperor Mae Phat Trump's tweet is good for Trump its literal, when his tweet like the majority of them its fiqurative
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:18 am to a want
quote:
Trump's statement was idiotic.
No it wasn't you just hate Trump. You are also a fool.
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:21 am to JGTiger
He already did that too.
Remember when he said if you threaten us again their will be fire and fury?
Then North Korea threatened Guam?
Remember when he said if you threaten us again their will be fire and fury?
Then North Korea threatened Guam?
Posted on 8/9/17 at 10:22 am to jimbeam
The political arena is so frickin petty at this point. This is purely a semantical, shallow, intellectually dishonest issue. With plenty of historical ignorance sprinkled in.
There are legitimate things to criticize the president on. This is once again just not one of them. There is no "inflaming" the North Koreans. Trumps tweet is completely immaterial in the scope of the broader issue of US-NK relations. It's akin to throwing a lit match into a bonfire. Sure you added flame but that shite was already raging. They have acted erratically and with zero regard for our response or rhetoric constantly for 70 years.
When you parse every single word he says of course you will find something "problematic". You could do this with every single statement made by any public figure. Ever. It's simply petty. And quite frankly lazy. If you can dismiss everything as "problematic" you convienently never have to discuss substance or policy. This obsession of semantics over substance/policy is absurd and is grinding government to a standstill.
Of course he says silly/off the cuff things on Twitter. But it's fricking twitter. Instead of being dishonest and densely insisting that twitter is important, why don't you just dismiss it like all the other adults do. His rhetoric is aimed with a political purpose. It's not always literal and it's usually meant to enrage and encourage an emotional response. That's what politicians do. That type of speech has always been a part of politics. I didn't even vote for the guy. But why on earth do we suddenly take politician's (especially campaign) statements/words as literal fact?
There are legitimate things to criticize the president on. This is once again just not one of them. There is no "inflaming" the North Koreans. Trumps tweet is completely immaterial in the scope of the broader issue of US-NK relations. It's akin to throwing a lit match into a bonfire. Sure you added flame but that shite was already raging. They have acted erratically and with zero regard for our response or rhetoric constantly for 70 years.
When you parse every single word he says of course you will find something "problematic". You could do this with every single statement made by any public figure. Ever. It's simply petty. And quite frankly lazy. If you can dismiss everything as "problematic" you convienently never have to discuss substance or policy. This obsession of semantics over substance/policy is absurd and is grinding government to a standstill.
Of course he says silly/off the cuff things on Twitter. But it's fricking twitter. Instead of being dishonest and densely insisting that twitter is important, why don't you just dismiss it like all the other adults do. His rhetoric is aimed with a political purpose. It's not always literal and it's usually meant to enrage and encourage an emotional response. That's what politicians do. That type of speech has always been a part of politics. I didn't even vote for the guy. But why on earth do we suddenly take politician's (especially campaign) statements/words as literal fact?
This post was edited on 8/9/17 at 10:28 am
Posted on 8/9/17 at 11:00 am to ILeaveAtHalftime
The best defense against getting criticized for saying stupid shite on twitter, is to just stop saying stupid shite on twitter.
It's real simple.
It's real simple.
Posted on 8/9/17 at 11:12 am to bonhoeffer45
quote:
The best defense against getting criticized for saying stupid shite on twitter, is to just stop saying stupid shite on twitter
Could you be more specific? What tweet are you talking about? Are you saying that he should stop tweeting altogether?
Posted on 8/9/17 at 11:14 am to a want
Do you really believe this? 
Posted on 8/9/17 at 11:15 am to buckeye_vol
quote:
Trump, or any president, on the other hand, doesn't usually make such threats. So it's interesting to consider the specific purpose. It's not a negative necessarily either way.
Yeah, a firs I thought his comments were over the top....impolitic but the more I read into this , I'm thinking getting a little bombastic with him might not be the worst thing. He reminds me of a defiant teenager...sometimes you just have to lay out the realities
Posted on 8/9/17 at 11:24 am to buckeye_vol
quote:
It's trying to figure out Trump's chess game.
I don't think he has one.
Posted on 8/9/17 at 11:57 am to bonhoeffer45
quote:
He already did that too.
Remember when he said if you threaten us again their will be fire and fury?
Then North Korea threatened Guam?
Posted on 8/9/17 at 11:59 am to Gusoline
Guam is a territory of the U.S. and the people who live there are U.S. citizens. Then there's the U.S. naval base there. Nah, it's not "us". Not at all. 
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News