I told Rex Tillerson, our wonderful Secretary of State, that he is wasting his time trying to negotiate with Little Rocket Man...
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 1, 2017
...Save your energy Rex, we'll do what has to be done!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 1, 2017
ADDED: Poll results:
Posts
110 comments:
Reagan's Star Wars scared the hell out of the Soviets. They thought he was crazy.
But it was a bluff. Scientists had told Reagan that none of the ideas were viable. So did he announce the failure? Hell no, continue with the bluff.
Trump can do more than just take military action. Maybe Trump is thinking of putting pressure on China. Without Chinese support NK couldn't' survive.
And yet, missile defenses now exist, despite the fact that they were impossible.
And Tillerson is telling Kim that he can't predict or control that wild man Trump, so Kim better take the deal before this gets ugly.
One drives the prey toward the other.
Right now Rex is telling the North Koreans.."You can deal with me, or you can try to deal with him..."
This is about getting China to wet their knickers and think twice.
I wouldn't dig in if I were you. I have no idea where it's going
Trump plays by different rules. This destabilizes certain folks. So far, most of the destabilized folks are Leftists or GOPe.
"But it was a bluff. Scientists had told Reagan that none of the ideas were viable."
The ideas were viable and the Soviets knew it. They also knew that their economy could not afford to keep up.
What is hard to understand is why we fail to build a viable anti-missile defense for our own country,
It's a pretty transparent routine. Only a batshit Commie totalitarian or an American Leftist, but I repeat myself, could fail to see what's going on.
The only deal the NK s would be offered is to give up their nukes peacefully and they cannot accept that unless they turn over their political leaders and the military cuts a deal.
I don't know what they are talking about unless it is an attempt to affect a coup.
Is it really some kind of mystery? Any decent team of parents knows good cop/bad cop.
Missle defenses raise cost, complexity and uncertainty for an attacker, which is their actual aim, but don't work 100%.
Rocket Man should play his own "good cop/bad cop" routine... with Alec Baldwin.
"Do something Alec Baldwin... you are worthless Alec Baldwin!"
No coincidence right before kickoff of 1PM EST games.
I agree. Not only does he know which buttons to push, but he seems to know when to push them.
I think Trump & team are trying to ratchet up the pressure so that China & the NK military will know that, from the viewpoint of the US & its Asian allies, this has reached a crisis point.
No one believes that either China or the NK military will affect any regime change unless they are staring down the barrel of a gun. Everyone knew Obama didn't have the chutzpah to pull off a bluff like this. Trump, Trump, he sooo crazee, he just might launch a nuke or two out of spite.
Just imagine how Kim Jong Un feels right now. He knows that SK, Japanese, Chinese, & American intelligence agencies are trying to offer his senior military bribes & other inducements to kill him. But, he can't launch a purge of the military right now, because he needs them to fight for him at a moments notice. Kim has to put his trust in the people most likely to kill him.
I watched night after night, as Patriot missiles missed SCUD missiles. The SCUD was as low tech as you get (pure ballistic).
To be fair, the Patriot was never designed for ballistic missiles, and was a last minute kludge. But there's some viability for you :-)
Fascinating that, at this point, there are 12 people who responded to the poll who took Trump's tweet literally. That's some weapons grade dumbass.
ABM was treaty designed to keep countries from emptying their treasury.
Missle defenses raise cost, complexity and uncertainty for an attacker, which is their actual aim, but don't work 100%.
Don't try to confuse us with logic!!! I mean what looney bin dictator wants to launch an attack that is certain to draw massive retaliation, when he doesn't know for sure if it will even get through, even though it might?
Look at what uncertainty is doing to Rocket Man.
ABM was treaty designed to keep countries from emptying their treasury.
Well, one country anyway. Didn't work.
If it goes awry, Trump is gonna eat some serious crow.
Never play chicken with a guy who has way more lug nuts.
I never liked Tillerson, Trump is a genius playing 3D chess
I don't think any "deal" is possible with North Korea, but Trump may be encouraging the Chinese to think about the possibilities of a deal with the U.S. and South Korea.
He knows that SK, Japanese, Chinese, & American intelligence agencies are trying to offer his senior military bribes & other inducements to kill him.
This goes to whether the theory that NK is a warlord state is still operational. I read that when Kim's father was ruler.
These guys are living lives of luxury when 95% of the population is starving., At least the 95% who are not in the army.
They won't give up the nukes. Hillary insured that.
They might give up Kim.
BTW, you cons who are voting the POV that this is some sorta DJT negotiation plan are in fact proving that he's a terrible negotiator.
Unless, you selected the first option (or the last), you're, in fact, claiming that you can see that DJT's bluster is purposeful BS. Hence, it doesn't work. Almost nobody selected the first (or last) option. Almost everybody claims to know that DJT's jabber is BS that's meant to scare NK into compliance, but almost everybody says DJT is talking shit = not scary.
Sheesh.
If you're going to do a poll about Trump, with a "What's going on?" question, there should always be one of the answers choice of --
○ Winning
I voted for option #4 (deviously bolstering) instead of #3 (good cop-bad cop) even though I think a variation of good cop-bad cop is precisely what I think is going on because IMO good cop-bad cop is a proper subset of #4.
What I especially like about Trump is that he takes no options off the table. Democrat presidents going back to Truman make that mistake time and time again.
GoodPerson, are you certain that Trump isn't dealing with a proverbial Sicilian when death is on the line?
Shiloh is the current expert on NK.
Has Tillerson called you for advice yet ?
"Trump can do more than just take military action. Maybe Trump is thinking of putting pressure on China. Without Chinese support NK couldn't' survive."
The second option should be viewed as including that. I wish I'd written it to make that more apparently, like: He's done talking, but he won't do anything military (unless NK makes a first strike).
It's hard to compress the answers to make them short enough.
Missile defense has been shown to work, there has been a lot of advances since the first Gulf war. Patriot has gone through a lot of upgrades and is working well against Yemen Scuds fired into Saudi Arabia.
The huge game changer in proof of concept has been Israeli efforts, you don't hear much about Hamas missiles and Israeli dead anymore.
And North Korea is forcing more missile defense by the US. Only question now is how much and how fast.
I went with 4, but you could have left off the "with NK." and it could include China.
Trump doesn't want people to think "Oh, the North Koreans are talking with Tillerson so everything is calming back down". This isn't the time for NK to think it's there to see what goodies it can get, and it isn't the time for the Chinese to weaken their resolve in driving NK to disarm.
As we've learned over several administrations, nothing happens to push NK if they believe the US is afraid to go to war. Trump's job is to continually let Rocket Man know he's ready for the game to commence at any time.
Trump is negotiating and putting more pressure on NK and China. Not business as usual. And how Trump is dealing with NK seems to be getting better results than previous Presidents.
If it goes awry, Trump is gonna eat some serious crow.
Yeah. I would say. But you know what? We don't get to live in a world where we dictate every move leaders of hostile states make. Kim was going to launch a missile and land it within thirty miles of Guam. Tweets are worse, right? Kim has been on this path for decades.
You cant do public diplomacy without being public.
So the good cop/bad cop thing is only viable with public pronouncements. These aren't people dealing in private here. This is not your usual business negotiation.
Which means also that your messages have to take into account all the interpretive frames of your listeners. What you say will mean something subtly or grossly different to different people. Its near-impossible, as we have seen, to say something with an unambiguous meaning to even an audience with a high degree of cultural unity.
Public statements also force the leadership of the other sides (even neutrals) guessing as to the effect of this on their own public, and to wonder if the private messages they are getting from the US are correct; it adds stress and doubt.
NK has been on this path for decades.
In other words, there is no way to tell, whether a message is public or private, that it is sincere or not. International diplomacy is full of private lies and layers of dissimulation.
A publicly hostile policy is often combined with back channel assurances that its all PR and not to stress; but these back channels are even more likely routes of deception than public statements.
The outcome here would make the template for Iran and a lesson for Israel vs PLO.
One would think that by now the media would understand the nature of Trump's Tweets.
But, as Ben Rhodes said, they literally know nothing.
I am constrained here by the lack of a whiteboard.
The number of audiences and the filters with which they process US government messaging makes for immensely complex situation.
Tillerson is saying publically he's talking to the North Koreans, but what if he actually isn't?
Rocket man would have to wonder, 'Who is Teerason talking to? He's not talk to me. Is he talking to somebody or is he rying? Is Teerason the Mararyn Manson and I am Jenna Jameson? What is happen?'
I've had enough of the Nazi Trump, time to impeach!
Blogger Alex said...
I've had enough of the Nazi Trump, time to impeach!
Hilarious ! You and Maxine.
I went with good cop / bad cop.
"Missle defenses raise cost, complexity and uncertainty for an attacker, which is their actual aim, but don't work 100%.".
Thing is, is that the only real way to take advantage of that, from the point of view of the aggressor, is to saturate our defenses. Which really means just Russia right now, but maybe China in the foreseeable future. With NK launching nuclear misses at us, we just launch multiple counter missles at theirs, increasing the chances of taking them out, and making sure that they know that we would massively retaliate with our far larger and more sophisticated nuclear arsenal. Think about it from their point of view - is it worth it to launch a handful of missles with 1940s technology nuclear technology, with most of them likely shot down, when the US, under Trump, has promised massive retaliation using possibly hundreds of modern thermonuclear weapons, coming in from any possible direction (except directly over China), and launched by any or all of the legs of our nuclear triad. Some of which are designed specifically and optimized for digging out recalcitrant dictators from underground bunkers. They might get through one or two of their warheads. We would get hundreds through, and ours would be precisely aimed and delivered, while theirs won't be.
Trump is 100% right. Nothing stops a North Korean except a total military defeat that kills all of the North Koreans. Anyone who has studied the history of the Korean war and Amistice understands that. And that was OK until the H-Bomb and ICBM was added to the mix.
My boss doesn't want me to make the deal, but I do. Now, what can we do to get you into the NPT club?
"Unless, you selected the first option (or the last), you're, in fact, claiming that you can see that DJT's bluster is purposeful BS. Hence, it doesn't work. Almost nobody selected the first (or last) option. Almost everybody claims to know that DJT's jabber is BS that's meant to scare NK into compliance, but almost everybody says DJT is talking shit = not scary."
That'd be true if he was negotiating some mutually beneficial contract instead of, effectively, North Korea's surrender regarding nuclear weapons and ICBMs. Of course, as has been noted above, exactly who he's negotiating with is unknown to us.
There's a Monty Hall joke in here somewhere.
Fake Crack MC,
What you wrote is senseless, by definition.
You're suggesting that it is okay for almost everyone to know that DJT's threats are flim flam because he's using this known flim flam to negotiate NK's surrender.
There is literally no negotiating situation where it's a good thing for most everyone to know that you're bluffing. This is especially true if you're expecting your known-BS to result in total capitulation, i.e. surrender, as if your known-BS wasn't know-BS. The point of bluffing is that folks don't know that you're bluffing. They need to think that you represent a true threat. When most everyone knows that you're bluffing (as Althouse's poll shows here) you lose. It's important to setup a bluff so that it's believed. If most everyone is sure that you're full of shit w/ your bluff = loser.
FTR, it is mucho grande cool that you chose to argue that it's good when someone's bluff is known to be BS. Thank you.
Meanwhile North Korea retains the first-strike option. Which tells me that Japan, Guam, and Hawaii are pretty much expendable. Unless, of course, Kim is sane and I'm crazy.
But you dont know if its a bluff, for certain, if you are the Chinese or NK leadership, or for that matter the SK or Japanese leadership. All have to consider it isn't. Everyone has their own set of values, perspective and fears with which to process this.
Everybody in this mess processes messages their own way.
Our defenses are much less effective than most people assume.
Buw,
I'm referring to the paradox of all-y'all who answered Althouse's poll, w/o understanding the self-defeat associated w/ that vote.
You're suggesting that only you Althosue readers/poll-takers are smart enough to know that DJT is full of shit (but only here (re Asians), y'all don't think that he'd feed BS to y-all). Your argument is that Asians are too stoooopid, compared to ya.
I agree, that's an out. Only y'all genius Alt-pol takers can see that DJT is full of shit, no idiot Asians can come to that conclusion, according to you. Go w/ that.
No one seems concerned at all that the President cannot just unilaterally start a war, and he cannot invade or bomb another country that has not attacked us.
Well, Trump already bombed Syria without cause, so he broke that seal and joined the war criminals' club in his first months in office. However, aren't the right, who allegedly adhere to the Constitution and to originalist thinking, who fear the power of a monarchial president, supposed to be objecting to their guy acting like a king and violating the constitution?
No, because the right is lying; they just want to vent their anger and hatred, and if hundreds of thousands or millions of North Koreans are killed, well, they're not Americans, so why care? The right is as authoritarian as any claims of same they throw at the left.
No, because the right is lying...
Repellant and insipid at once. That's an achievement of sorts, Cookie. Congrats.
He's humiliating Tillerson. Rex will likely be gone next.
"No one seems concerned at all that the President cannot just unilaterally start a war, and he cannot invade or bomb another country that has not attacked us."
If you're relying on the War Powers Act (Resolution), it's been violated more times than Linda Lovelace. Essentially because it is itself a constitutional violation as regards the separation of powers.
Bill Clinton proved via bombing Kosovo that the resolution is unenforceable, and therefore moot. Or at best, a suggestion, and a mere suggestion at that.
Which means, of course, that President Trump can pull the trigger any time he damn well pleases.
One would think that by now the media would understand the nature of Trump's Tweets.
But, as Ben Rhodes said, they literally know nothing.
Divide, distract, demean. Please, everyone knows the nature of Trump's tweets, except his dwindling base.
"everyone knows the nature of Trump's tweets, except his dwindling base."
In your dreams, sweetie.
Do the lefties work in shifts ?
Now, we have Cookie and Brookie and shiloh.
Shiloh at least showed up early.
I think Ritmo may wait until sundown.
Don't call me sweetie again, Trumpista. Not with your metrosexual avatar.
"...except his dwindling base."
Ah yes, the ever diminishing base, the ever sinking polls, etc.
If only 1% of these claims made by the lefties over the last year were correct, Trump would be at a negative 35%.
And if any group had proven just how adept they are at accurate polling in the last year it's the lefties and their lifelong republican allies.
"Please, everyone knows the nature of Trump's .."
Ben Rhodes disagrees with you. And since Ben Rhodes worked for Obama, that makes you a straight up racist per Dem Rules
Cracker.
Next stop, "fat little rocket man".
What are you gonna do about it Brookie?
Etienne said...
Reagan's Star Wars scared the hell out of the Soviets. They thought he was crazy.
But it was a bluff. Scientists had told Reagan that none of the ideas were viable. So did he announce the failure? Hell no, continue with the bluff.
Some scientists, no all. The ones who got all the MSM publicity as the MSM attempted to bring down Reagan. (Sound familiar?)
Funny thing about that. We're currently hitting missiles with missiles. Which those scientists said was IMPOSSIBLE. Israel's Iron Dome is shooting down missiles with missiles, which those scientists said was IMPOSSIBLE. The U.S. Navy is currently working on deploying kinetic energy kill weapons, which those scientists said was IMPOSSIBLE. And it's also working on laser weaponry to destroy incoming missiles and projectiles, which those scientists said was IMPOSSIBLE.
There were two sides in Reagan's Star Wars deployment. The side that wanted to leave us defenseless and prepare for the inevitable takeover of the world by the Communist future, and our side. People like Edward Teller, Jerry Pournelle, and others like them. One side was right, and the other side is still insisting the future belongs to Communism, which they now call socialism, pretending they aren't the same.
PB&J,
Who is to say these various Asians aren't smarter than Althouse poll-takers?
I would put money on the Asians being right, whatever it is they think. And even if the various Asians come to different conclusions.
They have much more immediately at risk and arguably more at stake, and are not swayed by US cultural politics.
"Bill Clinton proved via bombing Kosovo that the resolution is unenforceable, and therefore moot. Or at best, a suggestion, and a mere suggestion at that.
"Which means, of course, that President Trump can pull the trigger any time he damn well pleases."
In other words, once the law (the Constitution) has been broken, every other president is free to break it, and no one objects.
I'm not relying on the War Powers Act. I'm relying on the Constitution, which assigns the power to declare war to Congress, not to the President. The founders did this out of fear of the tyrannical powers that accrue to a President who could unilaterally take us to war...as they had seen with monarchies in their own time.
And, bombing a country or sending in troops is an act of war, so he "declaration of war" is contained within he act. Thus, the president may not initiate military actions against a country that has not attacked us or is not imminently about to attack us, as in so doing he usurps Congress' sole power to declare war. (And, without UN Security Council approval, he violates international law.)
>In other words, once the law (the Constitution) has been broken, every other president is free to break it, and no one objects.
Or, perhaps, Robert Cook doesn't get to tell anyone how the law works.
"Only y'all genius Alt-pol takers can see that DJT is full of shit, no idiot Asians can come to that conclusion, according to you. Go w/ that."
At this point, no less than 70 Leftist geniuses believe that Trump actually means to blow the Norks up. If these bright sparks believe it, why not Kim?
buwaya said...
But you dont know if its a bluff, for certain, if you are the Chinese or NK leadership, or for that matter the SK or Japanese leadership. All have to consider it isn't. Everyone has their own set of values, perspective and fears with which to process this.
The U.S. press and Democrat leaders have been telling the rest of the world Trump is crazy even before the election day that stunned them. Since the election that old truism that politics stops at water's edge has been completely ignored and stomped on by Democrat politicians who travel abroad and proclaim that THEIR President, because he's THEIR President whether they want him or not, is crazy and insane.
Question is- do the leaders of other nations believe them? In some cases it's obvious the answer is yes. What we know is nothing compared to what they think. And we don't know what they think. The state department, the people who man our embassies, are overwhelmingly Democrats. Liberal Democrats. What are they telling their contacts in foreign countries?
"...perhaps, Robert Cook doesn't get to tell anyone how the law works."
We all know how the law works...if the President does it, it's not against the law. The Constitution is a dead letter.
Cook - the Constitution has been a dead letter since LBJ.
We are not at war with NoKo - just the leader and a few family henchmen.
@Cook - North Korea is one of the few places where a declaration of would not be necessary - because there is presumptively one still in force, along with several UN resolutions. Circa maybe 1950 or so, but we have been operating under a cease fire there since the major hostilities ceased in maybe 1952 or so. Which the North Koreans have routinely violated. Which is to say that resumption of hostilities, based on a violation of the cease fire by the NORKS would very likely be completely legal under both US and international law. My memory is that the Soviets skipped the Security Council meeting that authorized UN action, which, I think is considered, in retrospect, to have been a tactical mistake. The ChiComs, of course, were several decades away from getting UN membership, and a seat on the Security Council. Even more clear cut than our resumption of hostilities in Iraq after Saddam Hussein had been caught repeatedly violating that cease fire. Therefore, neither was nor would be a war crime or violation of US law. Keep trying though.
Someone I know who works in the Pentagon in strategic planning thinks 80% chance of war with the Norks. He doesn't blame Trump.
The targets of this are most likely the NORK Generals and the Chinese leadership. Thing is, is that neither knows that Trump is bluffing. He may be. But maybe not. General impression around the world is that he may just be Cra Cra crazy enough to pull the pin. Obama couldn't pull it off (even if had wanted to, which he obviously did not). Maybe not the Bushes. But Reagan? Everyone knew that he was just crazy enough.
A lot of the NORK generals know that they can't afford to go to war with us (again). And if they were to attack us, or probably even our allies in the region, their likelihood of survival would be quite low. Which is why I expect that there would bet a military coup should they be ordered to attack us. And esp with any type of non conventional weapons (e.g. Nukes, EMP, etc). The Chinese leadership faces somewhat similar constraints, though more economic than military. Critical to them with their booming middle class, and being relatively dependent on western firms for much lof their exports. They are far enough the pipeline that they know that they could be replaced as a supplier, if industrial capabilities are compromised by picking the wrong side in this debate.
He's playing good cop, bad cop.
What is hard to understand is why we fail to build a viable anti-missile defense for our own country,
Somebody will have a KEW system deployed within a decade if they don't already.
Gospace said...Funny thing about that. We're currently hitting missiles with missiles.
The computers of 2017 are not the computers of 1981.
The plane I flew had a mainframe IBM computer on it with reel to reel tape. The same plane now has a Unix computer for each crew position, each more capable than the mainframe, and solid-state drives.
Etienne said...
Gospace said...Funny thing about that. We're currently hitting missiles with missiles.
The computers of 2017 are not the computers of 1981.
Exactly. If you can't do it today, right now, that doesn't men you can't do it tomorrow, next week, next year... if you work on it. The anti-Star Wars scientists said it could NEVER be done. Edward Teller was right, they were wrong.
If we had never worked on it because of their expertise, they would have been right. Until someone did work on it. Then Edward Teller would still have been right.
At the CEO level, business and government are theater. Unfortunately, gadflies in the audience keep shouting at the protagonist, making "The Trump Story" unpleasant to watch. Everyone should calm down and enjoy the show.
Beyond that, I would remind Americans* of something many of them seem to have forgotten: If you keep doing things the same old way, you'll get the same old results.
---
* Am I an American? You bet. I am an international businessman who served in the U.S. Army during the Vietnam War. A couple of my ancestors arrived in North America before the pilgrims.
I have spent a lot of time in Asia, Africa and the Middle East. I have a lot of Korean friends.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/donald-trumps-combative-rhetoric-has-helped-north-korea-crisis-julie-bishop-20171001-gys5y6.html
View from the Australian foreign minister.
Ms Bishop said people need to keep the recent months of bellicose rhetoric in perspective.
"North Korea has been carrying out illegal ballistic tests and illegal nuclear missile tests long before President Trump was inaugurated," she told the ABC's Insiders on Sunday.
Despite international consternation over Mr Trump's approach, Ms Bishop indicated she believed it was proving strategically effective because it was drawing China - Pynongyang's only real economic ally - into a much more central role. - Sydney Morning Herald, which, as I recall from my days living there, is about as anti-American paper as you can get in Australia.
"View from the Australian foreign minister."
Yeah, but she is white. Plus, if she is siding with Trump, she is not even a "real" woman.Dem Rules.
(And, without UN Security Council approval, he violates international law.) I'm pretty sure international law is like Santa Claus, it only exists in the imaginations of those who need it to feel better. The only law the US is subject to is the law of the United States. Now we certainly can have treaties with other nations, but those only become US law by agreement of the President and then Senate ratification. (although, that Iran deal Obama got before he left somehow finagled Senate approval before there was even an agreement.)
"The only law the US is subject to is the law of the United States. Now we certainly can have treaties with other nations, but those only become US law by agreement of the President and then Senate ratification."
The UN Charter, to which we are a signatory, IS a treaty agreement...that's why its provisions are the "law of the land," as per the Constitution.
he's tweaking the media
I'm 74 years old, and Congress has not declared war in my lifetime, yet the US has been at war repeatedly: The Korean War (authorized by the UN, not Congress). The Bay of Pigs Invasion. The Cuban Missile crisis. The Viet Nam War (including Laos and Cambodia, as well as North Viet Nam; "authorized" by the Tonkin Gulf Resoution). The Invasion of the Dominican Republic. Operation Eagle Claw (aka the Jimmy Carter Desert Classic). Lebanon. Grenada. Panama. The first Gulf War. Somalia. The Balkans. Haiti. Afghanistan. The Second Gulf War (Iraq). Syria (ISIS). Libya.
Is that a paradox? No. It just means that the US has engaged in military activities without declaring war.
Suppose North Korea fires a nuclear missle at Hawaii (or Seattle, or Los Angeles, or take your pick), and in response the President orders a strike against North Korea. Should the President be impeached for vioating the Constitution?
___ Rex Tillerson is about to be fired
It's Trump's dumbed-down version of an unsuccessful Nixon "crazy man" strategy, undone by his desperate need to call attention to it.
https://www.axios.com/inside-trumps-crazy-train-2491643924.html?utm_medium=linkshare&utm_campaign=organic
His pathological narcissism won't allow him to be perceived as weak or inadequate if talks fail, so he's getting out in front of that. If talks succeed he can claim credit for being strong and intimidating. His personality structure means that his concerns begin and end with him. I think people who are ascribing any nuance or focused strategy to what he does are whistling past the graveyard.
Late to the thread, but I find the comments interesting. I would assume there are some high level managers as well as business owners commenting at Althouse. Have any of you had the experience of having a project manager involved in contentous negotiations you were pretty sure we're going to necessitate a lawsuit anyway? And assuming you had faith in said manager (and i did) and he was telling you he thought he had a chance of diffusing the situation. A very small chance in your estimation.
In my instance of this scenario I let the manager try, while I made sure the other party knew I was ready to go to court. It wasn't good cop/bad cop. It was me letting the client know I was willing to go to the mat. The project manager was on his own. If he got something better, fine. The client was sue happy, and had done this to on of my competitors before. I should have had my head examined for taking the job, but, well, greed.
The comparison only goes so far I suppose, but surely others have had experiences close to this.
My story ends in a win for the manager in my case, (10K go away cost vs 200K starting point). I know had I not been willing to go all in the the project manager wouldn't have done so well. Not saying Tillerson can do the same, the stakes are a bit higher, but Trump has played this game on a smaller (and less deadly) scale many times. The thing I find interesting is that so few take this into account when considering his actions.
@pacwest. ... Trump had recourse to bankruptcy as civilian. How Can he adjust to President?
As I say, the comparison breaks down at a certain point. I'm not making a judgement for or against policy in that comment, but trying to make a point about the Trump-Tillerson relationship.
My project manager had my confidence overall. I could have lost the big amount and he still would have paid for himself many times over. It would have been a black mark if the whole thing had gone south, but a small one. I just don't think Trump is as egotistically stupid as some make him out to be. A big ego yes, but there are plenty of those around.
Excellent comment at 10:25 PM, pacwest.
1. Kim Jong-un is in way over his head right now. At the same time, he is Korean. To succeed, Trump will have to give him a way to save face. Otherwise, the whole thing will turn into an unbelievable mess.
I made a suggestion on this blog a while ago -- half-jokingly -- that perhaps Trump should make a deal with Kim Jong-in to turn North Korea's military into an American Foreign Legion and ask him to take over America's problems in Afghanistan. While that idea is probably silly, thinking outside the box is not.
2. Re: "The thing I find interesting is that so few take this into account when considering his actions."
We are all products of our experiences.
Make that "Kim Jong-un," not "Kim Jong-in." (I hate autocorrect.)
Trumps overall win/ loss in biz is pretty good.
Amazing how many companies were in the original blade runner movie, that are gone now. Fortune 500 may be better example. Trump businesses have survived.
>@pacwest. ... Trump had recourse to bankruptcy as civilian. How Can he adjust to President?
I don't see a way out where NK denuclearizes.
Why should they?
A past Pakistan President commented they would eat grass to get nukes.
I am sure Trump knows NK won't give up nukes after Libya, Ukraine, and Iraq showed what happens if you don't have nukes. And Pakistan was eventually welcomed into the nuke club, along with India. And Iran is on route to nukes.
Trump has done much better than I expected on pressuring NK and China.
Ray,
Partial agreement. Nothing is for sure. Personally I think Trump (and others in his circle) believe that a nuclear NK and soon to follow Iran, and others, are unacceptable to the USA's security as well as future world stability. If every tinpot dictator has a nuke the future of the species becomes pretty grim. My thoughts on the matter tend to fall along those lines, but how we get past this to there is beyond my ability to reason out.
Ray: "I don't see a way out where NK denuclearizes."
I don't either. That seems to leave three options at this point:
1. Destroy the North Korean government before its first attack and hope the North Korean government doesn't have nuclear-armed submarines near the U.S.
2. Ask China and Russia if they want to see large amounts of radioactive dust float across their counties after the nuclear destruction of North Korea. If not, tell them to solve the problem.
3. Make the North Koreans your friends.
However, the whole situation changes if we have a flawless way to disable North Korea's nuclear weapons on the launch pad or in the air.
Pacwest - agree on the danger of every hot headed country having a nuke.
And you don't need an icbm to launch one. 20 ft container would work fine to take out a city with a harbor.
And the way Pakistan guards nukes is terrifying. Due to fears of an Indian first strike they move them around with minimal security.
I have been surprised at no nuclear terrorist attack, chemical, or biological by terrorists.
I hope something good happens with NK, that surprises me, and I don't see as possible.
4 Wish fall thinking ideas:
1. SK takes over NK Due to coup.
2. China causes a coup and NK gives up nukes. Chinese friendly government installed. Unfortunately NK leader seems to paranoid to allow this to happen.
3. NK signs a peace treaty, recognizes SK, and gives up nukes. China guarantees NK with nukes if NK attacked.
4. US developes super anti missile and anti artillery and deploys to SK, making NK threat obsolete.
President Trump is the worst one in my lifetime, and I do not say such a thing lightly.
The solution to NK is China. The NK leadership can't survive long w/o Chinese help, or a least non-hinderance. In the past, the Chinese have seemed to enjoy having the crazy Rocket Boy unsettling the region, plus, they worry about the potential Florida d of refugees, if the country falls apart. But their opponents in the area are starting to arm themselves, putting China's continued expansion in the area a bit in doubt. And maybe more importantly, they have been made aware of their vulnerability in their place in the worldwide manufacturing chain and web. Much of what they build can also be built in other countries, and war in the region could very likely diminish their role there, as the big manufacturers look elsewhere for their parts, in order to better assure their prompt and continuous supply. Affecting this would impact negatively the growing middle class.
As Trump and his Sec of State play bad cop/good cop, the Chinese seem increasingly willing to exert their influence and power on the NORKs. Rocket Boy may want to bluster and ignore that Trump may actually be as Cra Cra as he appears, but the Chinese are notoriously risk adverse, and want stability, including internal and economic stability, more than almost anything right now. They want the US killing Muzzies in the Middle East, and not threatening to annihilate their next door neighbor that they have supported for almost all of their existence as a government. With a government that is supposed to share Communist goals - one of the very few left in the world. The Chinese didn't fear Obama, because Obama seemed to fear exerting American strength. They do seem to fear Trump, with his craziness combined with his apparent willingness to exerting such.
Post a Comment