Both responses are right. First, you don’t want a war in either Korea because the number of dead and injured (including Americans stationed there) would be horrific, China doesn’t want hundreds of thousands (estimated) refugees pouring over its borders, the crippling of a regional (if not global) economic power and Japan fears collateral damage.
In the second panel response, Trump stands a good chance of being played by Kim into legitimizing, if not possibly endorsing, him on the world stage, the nuclear weapons and accompanying program will never be abandoned as they are viewed as vital to Kim survival and Trump is a terrible negotiator in diplomacy.
Trump is just being an ass and his promise of a meeting is already being walked back.
It’s not that; it’s that Trump’s a loon, whose actions cross the spectrum within 24-hour periods. Please make sure you have the mea culpa cartoon, when this idiot crushes that other nutcase with a month. God, this cartoon has gone pure suck.
So what you’re telling us, Mr. Kelley, is that you think Mr. Trump’s foreign policy is well considered, well thought out and well implemented?
Is that what you’re trying to say here? Because if it is, well, dude, I’m not buying it.
However, you do make a good point. So far Mr. Trump has done nothing that we can brag about, no matter what he tries he does manage to make the wrong decision. If that’s your point you are SPOT on, Sir.
By saying the goal of these talks is “the de-nuclearization of the Korean peninsula,” whether President Trump realizes it or not, he has already eliminated the presance of U.S. nuclear subs and warships from Korean waters. Also, since we have seen how much the president gives up in face-to-face meetings (on DACA, and the gun discussions), what else will he give up in his meeting with Kim Jong Un?
I think this meeting is fraught with risk and danger. And the likelihood that Trump will give up the farm, and then have to walk it all back will bring shame and humiliation on this country.
Before we give Trump any credit, remember that it is he that is doing the traveling, thus putting him in an inferior position. Then let’s see how badly Trump muffs the talks.
Before we give Trump any credit, remember that it is he that is doing the traveling, thus putting him in an inferior position. Then let’s see how badly Trump muffs the talks.
Trump issued an extraordinary ultimatum to North Korea not to make any more threats against the US or they would “fire and fury like the world has never seen” Recently fired Tillerson even said we are not going to negotiate our way to the negotiating table due to the preconditions.
Now Tillerson is out and Trump has agreed to meet with NK leader Kim Jong Un, setting the scene for an unprecedented encounter between two nations which was threatening to wipe each other out. Trump was elected because he is willing to take approaches very different from past approaches and past presidents. That couldn’t be better exemplified in his NK policy. Trump made his reputation on making deals and Kim is the one person who is able to make decisions under their authoritarian system.
Sean Hannity, 2018: “Huge breaking news tonight: President Trump scoring a big win and possibly averting a major global nuclear crisis tonight with North Korea. [The] “one consistent thing that we see as we look through history is that capitulation and appeasement never works. Peace through strength — it’s not just a slogan; it is a philosophy. And the only way to get respect is to stand strong in the face of tyranny.”
Sean Hannity, 2008: “After the Nazis invaded Poland, before we were at war with them, is it fair to ask the question, ‘Would you have met with Hitler in 1939?’ Would that be fair in this campaign to get a perspective of where he’s coming from, with the Obama doctrine?… one of the most disturbing displays of Obama’s lack of foreign policy expertise.”
Sean Hannity, 2018: “Huge breaking news tonight: President Trump scoring a big win and possibly averting a major global nuclear crisis tonight with North Korea. [The] “one consistent thing that we see as we look through history is that capitulation and appeasement never works. Peace through strength — it’s not just a slogan; it is a philosophy. And the only way to get respect is to stand strong in the face of tyranny.”
Sean Hannity, 2008: “After the Nazis invaded Poland, before we were at war with them, is it fair to ask the question, ‘Would you have met with Hitler in 1939?’ Would that be fair in this campaign to get a perspective of where he’s coming from, with the Obama doctrine?… one of the most disturbing displays of Obama’s lack of foreign policy expertise.”
Ontman about 6 years ago
Mr. Kelley, this isn’t very creative for a member of the Creators Syndicate.
Theodore E. Lind Premium Member about 6 years ago
Bouncing off the walls is not an intelligent approach to a serous situation.
Darsan54 Premium Member about 6 years ago
Both responses are right. First, you don’t want a war in either Korea because the number of dead and injured (including Americans stationed there) would be horrific, China doesn’t want hundreds of thousands (estimated) refugees pouring over its borders, the crippling of a regional (if not global) economic power and Japan fears collateral damage.
In the second panel response, Trump stands a good chance of being played by Kim into legitimizing, if not possibly endorsing, him on the world stage, the nuclear weapons and accompanying program will never be abandoned as they are viewed as vital to Kim survival and Trump is a terrible negotiator in diplomacy.
Trump is just being an ass and his promise of a meeting is already being walked back.
rossevrymn about 6 years ago
It’s not that; it’s that Trump’s a loon, whose actions cross the spectrum within 24-hour periods. Please make sure you have the mea culpa cartoon, when this idiot crushes that other nutcase with a month. God, this cartoon has gone pure suck.
Durak Premium Member about 6 years ago
So what you’re telling us, Mr. Kelley, is that you think Mr. Trump’s foreign policy is well considered, well thought out and well implemented?
Is that what you’re trying to say here? Because if it is, well, dude, I’m not buying it.
However, you do make a good point. So far Mr. Trump has done nothing that we can brag about, no matter what he tries he does manage to make the wrong decision. If that’s your point you are SPOT on, Sir.
gigagrouch about 6 years ago
The Fire (& fury) has befallen Rex Tillerson this AM. We no longer have a coherent foreign policy- actually haven’t had it since January 2017.
pat gorse about 6 years ago
By saying the goal of these talks is “the de-nuclearization of the Korean peninsula,” whether President Trump realizes it or not, he has already eliminated the presance of U.S. nuclear subs and warships from Korean waters. Also, since we have seen how much the president gives up in face-to-face meetings (on DACA, and the gun discussions), what else will he give up in his meeting with Kim Jong Un?
I think this meeting is fraught with risk and danger. And the likelihood that Trump will give up the farm, and then have to walk it all back will bring shame and humiliation on this country.
Radish the wordsmith about 6 years ago
We don’t even have a Secretary of State or an Ambassador to South Korea.
Incompetent Trump admin is destroying America.
wirepunchr about 6 years ago
CDHPC2 has an optorectal problem.
tauyen about 6 years ago
Before we give Trump any credit, remember that it is he that is doing the traveling, thus putting him in an inferior position. Then let’s see how badly Trump muffs the talks.
tauyen about 6 years ago
Before we give Trump any credit, remember that it is he that is doing the traveling, thus putting him in an inferior position. Then let’s see how badly Trump muffs the talks.
Mr. Blawt about 6 years ago
Trump issued an extraordinary ultimatum to North Korea not to make any more threats against the US or they would “fire and fury like the world has never seen” Recently fired Tillerson even said we are not going to negotiate our way to the negotiating table due to the preconditions.
Now Tillerson is out and Trump has agreed to meet with NK leader Kim Jong Un, setting the scene for an unprecedented encounter between two nations which was threatening to wipe each other out. Trump was elected because he is willing to take approaches very different from past approaches and past presidents. That couldn’t be better exemplified in his NK policy. Trump made his reputation on making deals and Kim is the one person who is able to make decisions under their authoritarian system.
NeoconMan about 6 years ago
The cartoon exactly represents the categorical thinking skills on the Right: Black – White – Nothing in between.
janiceg Premium Member about 6 years ago
You want hypocrisy? Here you go:
Sean Hannity, 2018: “Huge breaking news tonight: President Trump scoring a big win and possibly averting a major global nuclear crisis tonight with North Korea. [The] “one consistent thing that we see as we look through history is that capitulation and appeasement never works. Peace through strength — it’s not just a slogan; it is a philosophy. And the only way to get respect is to stand strong in the face of tyranny.”
Sean Hannity, 2008: “After the Nazis invaded Poland, before we were at war with them, is it fair to ask the question, ‘Would you have met with Hitler in 1939?’ Would that be fair in this campaign to get a perspective of where he’s coming from, with the Obama doctrine?… one of the most disturbing displays of Obama’s lack of foreign policy expertise.”
janiceg Premium Member about 6 years ago
You want hypocrisy? Here you go:
Sean Hannity, 2018: “Huge breaking news tonight: President Trump scoring a big win and possibly averting a major global nuclear crisis tonight with North Korea. [The] “one consistent thing that we see as we look through history is that capitulation and appeasement never works. Peace through strength — it’s not just a slogan; it is a philosophy. And the only way to get respect is to stand strong in the face of tyranny.”
Sean Hannity, 2008: “After the Nazis invaded Poland, before we were at war with them, is it fair to ask the question, ‘Would you have met with Hitler in 1939?’ Would that be fair in this campaign to get a perspective of where he’s coming from, with the Obama doctrine?… one of the most disturbing displays of Obama’s lack of foreign policy expertise.”