But with the Trumpster there is good reason to be suspicious - he makes exaggerated claims about voter fraud, Muslims, number of floors on his buildings, Mexicans, crowd sizes, etc. He has been a huckster of a fraudulent "University" and filed bankruptcies multiple times.
If hypothetically he would release his returns and they were all like that then I'd be like why were you so afraid and hiding it this whole time? But I think there's close to no chance that's the case.
Speaking of the rest of the world. I'm fairly concerned about what is happening in North Korea right now. Anybody have any ideas on what can/should be done about the situation? I'm curious about what you all feel that Trump should do or not do. Doing nothing is an option, but what other options are there?
There's a lot to cover, both the history and the future. More than I can say myself.
Scroll down to Future Possibilities and What Trump Can Do if you're not big on history.
North Korea's Nuclear Deterrent War is one option. But North Korea has been very wary of another war; their history books say it was the U.S. that started the Korean War (the historical record proves it was actually Kim Il-sung's idea, with Stalin and Mao's agreement). North Korea has taken steps to deterring a U.S. attack. Part of that is its increasingly strong nuclear deterrent, currently capable of reaching South Korea and Japan, and they're working on being able to launch an attack against the continental United States.
Seoul's Vulnerability The other part of their deterrent is a set of chemical weapons that can reach the South Korean capital, Seoul. As a densely populated city with an extremely important role in the Korean and global economy that unfortunately is only a few miles away from the border with North Korea, Seoul is an easy place for the DPRK (Democratic People's Republic of Korea, North Korea's official name) to inflict massive civilian casualties.
We Can't Save Seoul Bombing Pyongyang would not stop this from happening. North Korea has a pretty solid bunker for Kim Jong-un and his cronies; they and their nuclear arsenal would survive an American pre-emptive attack.
The Cost of a War The last estimate, some years back, found that if war were to break out between North Korea and the U.S., there would be 3 million Korean deaths and 30,000 American deaths within the first 24 hours. That kind of shut down any talk of war with North Korea, but we're still very close to a war. It only takes one warmonger to start a war, and both of us have plenty.
North Korea's Primary Fear North Korea sincerely believes the U.S. is hell-bent on taking down their regime. We kind of are; it's one of the most corrupt and violent dictatorships on the planet. We just don't plan on invading it; we're hoping it will collapse of its own weight. But they actually hate the Japanese far more than we do. Japan occupied and later annexed Korea during its imperial period and tried to stomp out Korean culture and the Korean language (this was actually an intentional policy), and even South Korea still mistrusts Japan for sometimes denying parts of their history together.
North Korea's Logic But mostly the North Koreans are trying to deter the U.S., not Japan. They believe that a strong nuclear deterrent is the only way to keep the U.S. from invading. They don't rely on the Chinese to protect them (even though the Chinese did bail them out during the Korean War, when General MacArthur foolishly tried to take down the Chinese military rather than consolidate his gains in Korea), nor do the North Koreans rely on their conventional military, which, although it's massive in terms of numbers of soldiers, is still horribly underfunded, weak, and, like most people in North Korea, hungry.
That's why the North Koreans have broken every agreement they've ever made with us on nuclear issues.
Nuclear Agreements Have Always Failed with North Korea (not that we could have known that at the time) Under the Clinton administration, the Bush administration, and the Obama administration, the North Koreans refused to slow down their program. They don't like the massive sanctions we've laid on them, but they're not willing to trade their nuclear weapons for economic gains. They believe their nukes are the only thing keeping them safe, and they are simply not willing to compromise on it. Instead, they pretend to play along while secretly continuing their activities.
We've been assuming that we can purchase peace on the nuclear peninsula. That's simply not how North Korea sees things. In their minds, the top priority overriding all others is deterring an American attack.
China Wants to Maintain the Status Quo (even though they don't like it) We've tried to pressure the Chinese into pressuring the North Koreans, but the Chinese don't trust us much either. The Chinese are the primary reason the North Korean regime has managed to survive--they're the source of much of the DPRK's money and resources--but the Chinese are afraid of letting the Kim regime fail. If North Korea collapses, China foresees
1. A massive influx of Korean refugees into China, which they don't want to deal with (they have enough Koreans fleeing to China as it is)
2. A takeover of North Korea by South Korea, which is strongly allied with the United States.
3. Instability in general, which is one of the PRC's (People's Republic of China, China's official name) biggest fears
4. Most importantly, American military forces on China's border.
China already thinks the U.S. is trying to encircle and contain them; we have military bases on nearly every side of China. They don't want us to be on their border with Korea, too. Our military encirclement actually isn't exactly there to contain or threaten China; it's just that we have bases everywhere, and China won't host our bases. It's a bit like being suspicious of grass because it encircles your house. But that's how they feel.
It's not like China is happy with North Korea. They hate the DPRK's inflammatory nonsense and aggressive rhetoric and nuclear weapons. China wants North Korea to play nice, keep the peace, and build their economy. But China is not willing to apply pressure to North Korea because they're afraid of losing influence and they're afraid that a North Korean collapse will hurt their interests.
So China just tells everyone to calm down, but doesn't do much to actually change anything. The Chinese usually prefer to be very cautious. For all their nationalistic rhetoric, they don't like shaking things up. The South China Sea is a notable exception, but generally they're not big on invading places. They'll throw their weight around in the South China Sea and punish people they don't like with economic moves, but they don't annex Crimea or invade Kuwait like Putin or Saddam.
Future Possibilities
1. Nothing changes. North Korea's nuclear power grows, they continue to be stagnant and backward and repressive, China is worried, Japan is worried, South Korea is worried, and the U.S. is worried, but nobody throws a match on the gasoline.
2. A warmonger in China, North Korea, the U.S., or South Korea decides to start a war. North Korea wipes out Seoul, America bombs North Korea, and lots of people die. 2a. China decides to stay out of the conflict for the most part, preferring not to fight the U.S., in which case the U.S. crushes North Korea. North Korea then enters the control of the U.S., the U.N., or most likely South Korea, reunifying the now-shattered peninsula. With the Kim regime gone, Korea would rebuild itself, a long but fruitful task. 2b. China decides to stop the U.S. from taking over North Korea, and succeeds. This is where things get really, really sticky, because we don't know what China would want to do with North Korea if the Kims aren't in charge. 2ba. China puts North Korea under control of a regency of some sort (maybe the U.N., maybe a Chinese-influenced or -controlled entity. 2bb. China all but annexes North Korea, claiming it's been a part of China for over 9,000 years. North Korea wouldn't like it, but they wouldn't have the power to stop China from doing it. North Korea would become China's poorest province. It would be rebuilt, but it wouldn't have democracy and it would probably remain as a miserable sweatshop for many years. 2bc. China strikes an agreement with the U.S. to hand over North Korea in exchange for a bunch of conditions. That is, they let South Korea absorb North Korea on the condition that no American or Korean military bases can be built on North Korean soil, that all of Korea has to be demilitarized, that the U.S. hands over Taiwan, that the U.S. stops its alleged scheming and plotting against China, and/or a bunch of other, smaller things the Chinese might want from us. 2c. China gets involved in the war to stop the U.S. from taking over North Korea, but fails. The endgame would look like 2a, but the U.S. and China would suffer massive deaths and lose a lot of money fighting the war before the U.S. won, compared to if China simply stayed out of the conflict.
3. We make a peace agreement with North Korea. They've been asking for a peace treaty for a long time, since the Korean War is technically still on (we had an armistice but not a peace treaty). This would decrease the chance of war, but not really eliminate. There'd still be lots of mistrust, and a peace treaty would likely not include much demilitarization--at least, not enough to make either side think the matter was really settled. 3a. North Korea maintains its nuclear arsenal anyway, because it doesn't really think the peace treaty will be enough. 3b. If there's no war for a few decades, maybe North Korea would stop being afraid and the chance of war would steadily drop.
4. North Korea collapses. The Kim regime falls. 4a. The U.S. or South Korea rushes in to take over. 4b. China rushes in to take over. 4c. Somebody else in North Korea fills in the void. As far as we know, the new government could be democratic or just like the old government or something completely different. And as far as we know, the new government could be pro-Chinese or pro-South Korean or even pro-American (but definitely not pro-Japanese). Everything about the situation could change. We just don't know; we have very little information about North Korea, especially the people who might take over if the Kim regime somehow dies.
What Trump Can Do Very little. He is unlikely to be re-elected and Democrats will oppose his efforts pretty much regardless of what he does (there are no good solutions here). There are ways to get to points 2a, 2ba, 2bc, 2c, 3b, and 4a, but with the situation at home as chaotic as it is, and with most Americans rather suspicious of foreign entanglements after the Iraq War, there isn't going to be a big political push for a change.
But I don't think he or his staff have any ideas on how to fix the situation anyway. I'm not sure it's even on their radar; I doubt it's a priority for this administration.
I'd predict another 2-4 years of hostility, increasing North Korean nuclear power, and no strong action by either China or the U.S. That's usually the safe bet.
It's nice to see Trump taking time out of his busy schedule today to honor a genocidal butcher like Andrew Jackson. Nothing says pure, unadulterared American exceptionalism like slaughtering an indigenous population.
Hey, we could hook up a windmill to the oval office. There's enough hot air coming out of there to power a small city! Hook another one up at the Capitol building, 50 more (one for each state) at state capitols and throw in a few thousand for county and large city governments and we'd probably have enough energy to run the entire country. Every time they lied it'd be powering our refrigerators!
@deltago : Would your opinion change if all of his returns were released and they were similar to this one? If he then said he didn't release them because he felt they weren't anyone's business but his own, would you be at all sympathetic? This is hypothetical of course but the way my mind operates I'm far more private in my own dealings than many younger people are today. Barring some law requiring it I doubt I would have released my returns either. I know, apples to oranges, but I at least understand that way of thinking.
No, because people aren't asking for all of his returns. What do candidates usually release; their last one? That is what I wouls expect.
Releasing something that is over a decade old just raises my suspisions up more than not releasing anything at all.
I do get the privacy part of it, and I do get, that as a business owner, releasing the records could compromise current and future dealings. If he came out with that excuse first, I think a lot of people would have laid off him about it.
Technically he didn't 'release' it. At least not officially. In my case I'd be more worried that I made a mistake on it and would be crucified for it. I did my own taxes back in '05!
Technically he didn't 'release' it. At least not officially. In my case I'd be more worried that I made a mistake on it and would be crucified for it. I did my own taxes back in '05!
Most plausible explanation is he found the best year he possibly could, and sent a nearly meaningless 1040 form for that year to this reporter. Even this one year would probably have 100s of pages of itemizations. Now he can (I guess) say 3 things: a.) my taxes have now been released (not true) b.) the media broke the law and stole my information (also not true) and c.) a distraction from the shit show everything else his administration is involved with.
But the USA has the last laugh we're going to invest in coal and uncooperation with other countries.
Only $1 billion euro? That sounds like the lowest bidder to me. Those windmills are expensive. I also wonder if they factored in the lawsuits over endangering some rare species of sandpiper.
Shame the 'scrutiny' over taxes wasn't equal and fair across all candidates.
The whole discussion of 'fair share' seems to miss the angle of, should those who pay more taxes be acknowledged for contributing more to society?
Regardless, its obvious that the whole 'tax returns' is a partisan political issue, Trump critics won't really ever be satisfied even if every tax returns shows he paid alot of taxes.
Well unless their incomes were all roughly the same, direct comparisons of percentages aren't all that relevant. Do you have the data in total tax dollars paid? That would be more interesting to me than a percentage of income.
I used to follow it briefly but can't remember the exact amounts off the top of my head, all i do remember is that everyone goes ham on deductibles as much as possible.
Anyone following the Dutch?
It looks like Rutte will come first then Geert Wilders party second.
I used to follow it briefly but can't remember the exact amounts off the top of my head, all i do remember is that everyone goes ham on deductibles as much as possible.
Anyone following the Dutch?
It looks like Rutte will come first then Geert Wilders party second.
I personally think that if you don't take advantage of all of your tax deductions that would make you an idiot. If you really want to make your money count for charity you can donate to the cause of your choice and write that off too. Of course if you don't do your research there are plenty of charitable organizations that would be more than happy to take advantage of you so you have to do your 'due diligence' there too...
On North Korea: one potential future destabilising element may be if Japan's population becomes unnerved enough by NK and loses faith in the US nuclear umbrella. (To a lesser extent, this goes for SK too.) If Japan then decides to adopt a local nuclear deterrent then conflict will become more likely. There is plenty of emnity in Japan towards NK due to incidents such as kidnappings of Japanese citizens during the cold war, which makes it hard to build trust.
The NK regime basically boils down to a ruling clique with some money and comforts that is terrified of revolution in my opinion. If it were feasible to pension them off and promise them immunity then the NK problem might actually have been solvable.
Shame the 'scrutiny' over taxes wasn't equal and fair across all candidates.
The whole discussion of 'fair share' seems to miss the angle of, should those who pay more taxes be acknowledged for contributing more to society?
Regardless, its obvious that the whole 'tax returns' is a partisan political issue, Trump critics won't really ever be satisfied even if every tax returns shows he paid alot of taxes.
Most of us don't care how much he paid. We're interested in what it reveals about his financial dealings and ties. And the fact that every single President since (wait for it).....Nixon has released them going back up to 20 years to assure the public they aren't beholden to outisde interests because of direct financial entanglements. The mere fact that Trump will not release them suggests that, far more likely than not, he is hiding something in them.
Some of NK's hostility towards Japan is justifiable. The WW2 belligerents got off pretty easy due to the threat of the Soviet Union in my opinion.
Well the Korean War was an immense boost to the Japanese economy, although rather confusing for the Japanese ruling class. No sooner had they promulgated a pacifist constitution than the Americans are requesting the manufacture of an arsenal of weapons and maybe some troops too!
Given that WW2 partly stemmed from an overly harsh WW1 settlement I'm not overly bothered by the leniency, much of Japan was a smoking wreck with a lot of malnourished people by the end.
That chart needs a revison for a number of reasons. Is it all available returns? If so then 25% one year 0% the other year so he averages out to the bottom. Is it just last years returns? Then who the hell knows because Trump's ashamed and hid his returns.
Who leaked that tax return that makes Trump look good? Was it John Barron?
That chart needs a revison for a number of reasons. Is it all available returns? If so then 25% one year 0% the other year so he averages out to the bottom. Is it just last years returns? Then who the hell knows because Trump's ashamed and hid his returns.
Who leaked that tax return that makes Trump look good? Was it John Barron?
I think Trump released it to show both a year he paid a decent amount of taxes AND the only year in recent history he could show that kind of influx in wealth. Let me put it this way: what BILLIONAIRE starts hawking frozen steaks and running a scam University??
Most of us don't care how much he paid. We're interested in what it reveals about his financial dealings and ties. And the fact that every single President since (wait for it).....Nixon has released them going back up to 20 years to assure the public they aren't beholden to outisde interests because of direct financial entanglements. The mere fact that Trump will not release them suggests that, far more likely than not, he is hiding something in them.
What was in Trump's financial papers? And yes, 'most of us' did care how much he paid, since that was the political angle against Trump and took up pages of discussion on rich/middle-class payment to taxes here itself.
Shifting the argument because it so happens Trump seems to have paid a huge amount comparatively to the other Political candidates doesn't inspire confidence in this discussion.
Some of NK's hostility towards Japan is justifiable. The WW2 belligerents got off pretty easy due to the threat of the Soviet Union in my opinion.
Well the Korean War was an immense boost to the Japanese economy, although rather confusing for the Japanese ruling class. No sooner had they promulgated a pacifist constitution than the Americans are requesting the manufacture of an arsenal of weapons and maybe some troops too!
Given that WW2 partly stemmed from an overly harsh WW1 settlement I'm not overly bothered by the leniency, much of Japan was a smoking wreck with a lot of malnourished people by the end.
That might be true for Germany but it's certainly not true for Japan. The only thing they might have been pissed about was not getting enough out of WW1. Considering they were only on the periphery and merely took out some German islands and one poorly defended base in China, I hardly think that the Great War was any provocation for their expansionism!
Most of us don't care how much he paid. We're interested in what it reveals about his financial dealings and ties. And the fact that every single President since (wait for it).....Nixon has released them going back up to 20 years to assure the public they aren't beholden to outisde interests because of direct financial entanglements. The mere fact that Trump will not release them suggests that, far more likely than not, he is hiding something in them.
What was in Trump's financial papers? And yes, 'most of us' did care how much he paid, since that was the political angle against Trump and took up pages of discussion on rich/middle-class payment to taxes here itself.
Shifting the argument because it so happens Trump seems to have paid a huge amount comparatively to the other Political candidates doesn't inspire confidence in this discussion.
Since I didn't even participate in that string of posts I'm not sure how I'm "shifting" anything.
Some of NK's hostility towards Japan is justifiable. The WW2 belligerents got off pretty easy due to the threat of the Soviet Union in my opinion.
Well the Korean War was an immense boost to the Japanese economy, although rather confusing for the Japanese ruling class. No sooner had they promulgated a pacifist constitution than the Americans are requesting the manufacture of an arsenal of weapons and maybe some troops too!
Given that WW2 partly stemmed from an overly harsh WW1 settlement I'm not overly bothered by the leniency, much of Japan was a smoking wreck with a lot of malnourished people by the end.
That might be true for Germany but it's certainly not true for Japan. The only thing they might have been pissed about was not getting enough out of WW1. Considering they were only on the periphery and merely took out some German islands and one poorly defended base in China, I hardly think that the Great War was any provocation for their expansionism!
I would agree. Japan was slightly annoyed about the rejection of a racial equality clause in the treaty of Versailles, but WWI actually made them a creditor nation temporarily. However the example of Germany post-WWI among other historical examples gives me the impression that we have to be careful about being punitive toward entire countries, as opposed to individuals. A number of political figures on the right in Japan and other countries were quickly absolved of any wartime misdeeds in order to stem the tide against communism. Similarly scientists were also co-opted of course, from fields like rocketry in Germany and chemical warfare in Japan. The story of Unit 731 is a particularly horrible example. The secrecy which surrounded those sorts of bargains has helped to contribute to Japan's partial failure, in comparison to Germany, to face up to its past.
The waste from the Fukushima area has been buried in small quantities all over the country, plenty more of that to look forward to... Six years later and only a few nuclear power stations are online in Japan- the courts blocked several reactors from restarting. Now there's an industry that got so far into bed with the government that it's hard to disentangle them... Interesting to compare Germany's decision to decommision although Japan is of course a country which is relatively sparse in natural resources and so has trouble with finding a baseline fuel (geothermal has some potential though...).
All in all, it probably isn't the best time to try doing the Olympics, even if that's just an excuse for more public works based corruption... (FIFA & the Olympics have lost a lot of their shine in recent years...)
I think the problem was that she said it, then she backed down. She should have stuck with it. Trump certainly doesn't back down on anything even when the truth is obvious in his face and to an extent that is good not to back down. Sure he takes it too far and has to win every single battle even over the dumb stuff and the stuff that objective reality shows that he is clearly wrong about.
Hillary should have said I meant what I said. Like Steve King or Trump. She should have said it's true there are a lot of deplorables who are Trump supporters - there are David Duke, Milo, etc. Anyway, water under the bridge she lost the election it is over. It's Trump mess that he's lying in.
Hopefully the Democrats learn something from the election because there is a great opportunity going forward to reshape the party. With Trump's historic unpopularity and the general floundering of the Republican party it should be clear to voters that GOP has no idea how to lead. They are great at complaining about Government but now that they are in charge they excel at bumbling and infighting and generally running things into the ground. For example, it was all well and good to vote to repeal Obamacare when there was no chance that it would actually happen. So easy to claim that it was a disaster and saying they'd repeal it on day one. They had 7 years to make a replacement and we're seeing the results, a buncha morons with no clue.
Comments
If hypothetically he would release his returns and they were all like that then I'd be like why were you so afraid and hiding it this whole time? But I think there's close to no chance that's the case.
Scroll down to Future Possibilities and What Trump Can Do if you're not big on history.
North Korea's Nuclear Deterrent
War is one option. But North Korea has been very wary of another war; their history books say it was the U.S. that started the Korean War (the historical record proves it was actually Kim Il-sung's idea, with Stalin and Mao's agreement). North Korea has taken steps to deterring a U.S. attack. Part of that is its increasingly strong nuclear deterrent, currently capable of reaching South Korea and Japan, and they're working on being able to launch an attack against the continental United States.
Seoul's Vulnerability
The other part of their deterrent is a set of chemical weapons that can reach the South Korean capital, Seoul. As a densely populated city with an extremely important role in the Korean and global economy that unfortunately is only a few miles away from the border with North Korea, Seoul is an easy place for the DPRK (Democratic People's Republic of Korea, North Korea's official name) to inflict massive civilian casualties.
We Can't Save Seoul
Bombing Pyongyang would not stop this from happening. North Korea has a pretty solid bunker for Kim Jong-un and his cronies; they and their nuclear arsenal would survive an American pre-emptive attack.
The Cost of a War
The last estimate, some years back, found that if war were to break out between North Korea and the U.S., there would be 3 million Korean deaths and 30,000 American deaths within the first 24 hours. That kind of shut down any talk of war with North Korea, but we're still very close to a war. It only takes one warmonger to start a war, and both of us have plenty.
North Korea's Primary Fear
North Korea sincerely believes the U.S. is hell-bent on taking down their regime. We kind of are; it's one of the most corrupt and violent dictatorships on the planet. We just don't plan on invading it; we're hoping it will collapse of its own weight. But they actually hate the Japanese far more than we do. Japan occupied and later annexed Korea during its imperial period and tried to stomp out Korean culture and the Korean language (this was actually an intentional policy), and even South Korea still mistrusts Japan for sometimes denying parts of their history together.
North Korea's Logic
But mostly the North Koreans are trying to deter the U.S., not Japan. They believe that a strong nuclear deterrent is the only way to keep the U.S. from invading. They don't rely on the Chinese to protect them (even though the Chinese did bail them out during the Korean War, when General MacArthur foolishly tried to take down the Chinese military rather than consolidate his gains in Korea), nor do the North Koreans rely on their conventional military, which, although it's massive in terms of numbers of soldiers, is still horribly underfunded, weak, and, like most people in North Korea, hungry.
That's why the North Koreans have broken every agreement they've ever made with us on nuclear issues.
Nuclear Agreements Have Always Failed with North Korea (not that we could have known that at the time)
Under the Clinton administration, the Bush administration, and the Obama administration, the North Koreans refused to slow down their program. They don't like the massive sanctions we've laid on them, but they're not willing to trade their nuclear weapons for economic gains. They believe their nukes are the only thing keeping them safe, and they are simply not willing to compromise on it. Instead, they pretend to play along while secretly continuing their activities.
We've been assuming that we can purchase peace on the nuclear peninsula. That's simply not how North Korea sees things. In their minds, the top priority overriding all others is deterring an American attack.
China Wants to Maintain the Status Quo (even though they don't like it)
We've tried to pressure the Chinese into pressuring the North Koreans, but the Chinese don't trust us much either. The Chinese are the primary reason the North Korean regime has managed to survive--they're the source of much of the DPRK's money and resources--but the Chinese are afraid of letting the Kim regime fail. If North Korea collapses, China foresees
1. A massive influx of Korean refugees into China, which they don't want to deal with (they have enough Koreans fleeing to China as it is)
2. A takeover of North Korea by South Korea, which is strongly allied with the United States.
3. Instability in general, which is one of the PRC's (People's Republic of China, China's official name) biggest fears
4. Most importantly, American military forces on China's border.
China already thinks the U.S. is trying to encircle and contain them; we have military bases on nearly every side of China. They don't want us to be on their border with Korea, too. Our military encirclement actually isn't exactly there to contain or threaten China; it's just that we have bases everywhere, and China won't host our bases. It's a bit like being suspicious of grass because it encircles your house. But that's how they feel.
It's not like China is happy with North Korea. They hate the DPRK's inflammatory nonsense and aggressive rhetoric and nuclear weapons. China wants North Korea to play nice, keep the peace, and build their economy. But China is not willing to apply pressure to North Korea because they're afraid of losing influence and they're afraid that a North Korean collapse will hurt their interests.
So China just tells everyone to calm down, but doesn't do much to actually change anything. The Chinese usually prefer to be very cautious. For all their nationalistic rhetoric, they don't like shaking things up. The South China Sea is a notable exception, but generally they're not big on invading places. They'll throw their weight around in the South China Sea and punish people they don't like with economic moves, but they don't annex Crimea or invade Kuwait like Putin or Saddam.
Future Possibilities
1. Nothing changes. North Korea's nuclear power grows, they continue to be stagnant and backward and repressive, China is worried, Japan is worried, South Korea is worried, and the U.S. is worried, but nobody throws a match on the gasoline.
2. A warmonger in China, North Korea, the U.S., or South Korea decides to start a war. North Korea wipes out Seoul, America bombs North Korea, and lots of people die.
2a. China decides to stay out of the conflict for the most part, preferring not to fight the U.S., in which case the U.S. crushes North Korea. North Korea then enters the control of the U.S., the U.N., or most likely South Korea, reunifying the now-shattered peninsula. With the Kim regime gone, Korea would rebuild itself, a long but fruitful task.
2b. China decides to stop the U.S. from taking over North Korea, and succeeds. This is where things get really, really sticky, because we don't know what China would want to do with North Korea if the Kims aren't in charge.
2ba. China puts North Korea under control of a regency of some sort (maybe the U.N., maybe a Chinese-influenced or -controlled entity.
2bb. China all but annexes North Korea, claiming it's been a part of China for over 9,000 years. North Korea wouldn't like it, but they wouldn't have the power to stop China from doing it. North Korea would become China's poorest province. It would be rebuilt, but it wouldn't have democracy and it would probably remain as a miserable sweatshop for many years.
2bc. China strikes an agreement with the U.S. to hand over North Korea in exchange for a bunch of conditions. That is, they let South Korea absorb North Korea on the condition that no American or Korean military bases can be built on North Korean soil, that all of Korea has to be demilitarized, that the U.S. hands over Taiwan, that the U.S. stops its alleged scheming and plotting against China, and/or a bunch of other, smaller things the Chinese might want from us.
2c. China gets involved in the war to stop the U.S. from taking over North Korea, but fails. The endgame would look like 2a, but the U.S. and China would suffer massive deaths and lose a lot of money fighting the war before the U.S. won, compared to if China simply stayed out of the conflict.
3. We make a peace agreement with North Korea. They've been asking for a peace treaty for a long time, since the Korean War is technically still on (we had an armistice but not a peace treaty). This would decrease the chance of war, but not really eliminate. There'd still be lots of mistrust, and a peace treaty would likely not include much demilitarization--at least, not enough to make either side think the matter was really settled.
3a. North Korea maintains its nuclear arsenal anyway, because it doesn't really think the peace treaty will be enough.
3b. If there's no war for a few decades, maybe North Korea would stop being afraid and the chance of war would steadily drop.
4. North Korea collapses. The Kim regime falls.
4a. The U.S. or South Korea rushes in to take over.
4b. China rushes in to take over.
4c. Somebody else in North Korea fills in the void. As far as we know, the new government could be democratic or just like the old government or something completely different. And as far as we know, the new government could be pro-Chinese or pro-South Korean or even pro-American (but definitely not pro-Japanese). Everything about the situation could change. We just don't know; we have very little information about North Korea, especially the people who might take over if the Kim regime somehow dies.
What Trump Can Do
Very little. He is unlikely to be re-elected and Democrats will oppose his efforts pretty much regardless of what he does (there are no good solutions here). There are ways to get to points 2a, 2ba, 2bc, 2c, 3b, and 4a, but with the situation at home as chaotic as it is, and with most Americans rather suspicious of foreign entanglements after the Iraq War, there isn't going to be a big political push for a change.
But I don't think he or his staff have any ideas on how to fix the situation anyway. I'm not sure it's even on their radar; I doubt it's a priority for this administration.
I'd predict another 2-4 years of hostility, increasing North Korean nuclear power, and no strong action by either China or the U.S. That's usually the safe bet.
But the USA has the last laugh we're going to invest in coal and uncooperation with other countries.
Releasing something that is over a decade old just raises my suspisions up more than not releasing anything at all.
I do get the privacy part of it, and I do get, that as a business owner, releasing the records could compromise current and future dealings. If he came out with that excuse first, I think a lot of people would have laid off him about it.
Shame the 'scrutiny' over taxes wasn't equal and fair across all candidates.
The whole discussion of 'fair share' seems to miss the angle of, should those who pay more taxes be acknowledged for contributing more to society?
Regardless, its obvious that the whole 'tax returns' is a partisan political issue, Trump critics won't really ever be satisfied even if every tax returns shows he paid alot of taxes.
Anyone following the Dutch?
It looks like Rutte will come first then Geert Wilders party second.
The NK regime basically boils down to a ruling clique with some money and comforts that is terrified of revolution in my opinion. If it were feasible to pension them off and promise them immunity then the NK problem might actually have been solvable.
Given that WW2 partly stemmed from an overly harsh WW1 settlement I'm not overly bothered by the leniency, much of Japan was a smoking wreck with a lot of malnourished people by the end.
Who leaked that tax return that makes Trump look good? Was it John Barron?
Or it might be The Reason Donald Trump’s 2005 Tax Return Was So Yuge? Chinese Investors. That describes why 2005 might be the best one that he could have leaked.
And yes, 'most of us' did care how much he paid, since that was the political angle against Trump and took up pages of discussion on rich/middle-class payment to taxes here itself.
Shifting the argument because it so happens Trump seems to have paid a huge amount comparatively to the other Political candidates doesn't inspire confidence in this discussion.
It looks like the trend is again, diminished support for Rutte's party over the last election and increasing support for alternative parties.
Geert Wilders and the Christian Party both earning more Seats and closely tied to the last election.
http://kfor.com/2017/03/14/oklahoma-senator-under-investigation-for-incident-at-motel-with-teen-boy/
Japan's fukushima disaster is still so bad robots can't get through.
Wonder if they'll concrete sarcophagus the whole thing like Chernobyl.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/09/fukushima-nuclear-cleanup-falters-six-years-after-tsunami
All in all, it probably isn't the best time to try doing the Olympics, even if that's just an excuse for more public works based corruption... (FIFA & the Olympics have lost a lot of their shine in recent years...)
Hillary should have said I meant what I said. Like Steve King or Trump. She should have said it's true there are a lot of deplorables who are Trump supporters - there are David Duke, Milo, etc. Anyway, water under the bridge she lost the election it is over. It's Trump mess that he's lying in.
Hopefully the Democrats learn something from the election because there is a great opportunity going forward to reshape the party. With Trump's historic unpopularity and the general floundering of the Republican party it should be clear to voters that GOP has no idea how to lead. They are great at complaining about Government but now that they are in charge they excel at bumbling and infighting and generally running things into the ground. For example, it was all well and good to vote to repeal Obamacare when there was no chance that it would actually happen. So easy to claim that it was a disaster and saying they'd repeal it on day one. They had 7 years to make a replacement and we're seeing the results, a buncha morons with no clue.