Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Exclusive: Trump would talk to North Korea's Kim, wants to renegotiate climate accord
Reuters ^ | May 17, 2016 | Steve Holland and Emily Flitter

Posted on 05/17/2016 8:35:33 PM PDT by TigerLikesRooster

Exclusive: Trump would talk to North Korea's Kim, wants to renegotiate climate accord

NEW YORK | By Steve Holland and Emily Flitter

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said on Tuesday he is willing to talk to North Korean leader Kim Jong Un to try to stop Pyongyang's nuclear program, proposing a major shift in U.S. policy toward the isolated nation.

In a wide-ranging interview with Reuters, Trump also called for a renegotiation of the Paris climate accord, said he disapproved of Russian President Vladimir Putin's actions in eastern Ukraine, and said he would seek to dismantle most of the U.S. Dodd-Frank financial regulations if he is elected president.

The presumptive Republican nominee declined to share details of his plans to deal with North Korea, but said he was open to talking to its leader.

"I would speak to him, I would have no problem speaking to him," he said.

Asked whether he would try to talk some sense into the North Korean leader, Trump replied, "Absolutely."

North Korea's mission to the United Nations did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Trump's remarks.

Trump, 69, also said he would press China, Pyongyang's only major diplomatic and economic supporter, to help find a solution.

"I would put a lot of pressure on China because economically we have tremendous power over China," he said in the interview in his office on the 26th floor of Trump Tower in Manhattan.

(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: climateaccord; kimjongun; nkorea; trump
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 last
To: Lower Deck
There is no way that South Korea can take it other than abandonment,

It would be interesting to see if suddenly in that case the ChiComs suddenly switch their allegiance to South Korea. They've been cozying up in recent years, and the one think China and South Korea do not want is millions of Nork refugees pouring over their borders.

41 posted on 05/18/2016 8:51:25 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
It would be interesting to see if suddenly in that case the ChiComs suddenly switch their allegiance to South Korea.

More like South Korea shifts more towards China. Japan would likely do the same; they have no more love for the North than South Korea has. If either country concludes that they can't depend on the U.S. to be there in the event of North Korean aggression then they will have no other choice.

42 posted on 05/18/2016 8:53:51 AM PDT by Lower Deck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Lower Deck

Talking with them is not dealing with them in any way that would undermine our ally. South Korea, as Western European nations, should certainly pay for our help. But note, Trump also recognizes that Japan & South Korea might be well advised to develop nuclear weapons to protect themselves from North Korea. (Frankly, I would strongly suspect that they have already done so, quietly.)


43 posted on 05/18/2016 8:53:58 AM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Lower Deck

I always suspect the end-game is that China goes to South Korea and says, “We’ll take care of the North Korea problem for you.” The US gets kicked out, and the united Korea is firmly in China’s orbit.


44 posted on 05/18/2016 8:56:10 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

“I would speak to him, I would have no problem speaking to him,” he said........But when Madman Albright gave him permission to develop a nuke problem, Clinton was hailed as a statesman?


45 posted on 05/18/2016 8:59:25 AM PDT by Safetgiver (Islam makes barbarism look genteel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf

He is supposed to meet Kissinger tomorrow....DON”T do it, Trump! Stay away! He gots a dementia!!


46 posted on 05/18/2016 9:01:07 AM PDT by Safetgiver (Islam makes barbarism look genteel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man

Bad move to say this....Not when he tells him where the panda shit in the bamboo patch. Unlike Crinton and Arbright.


47 posted on 05/18/2016 9:03:48 AM PDT by Safetgiver (Islam makes barbarism look genteel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jimmy McGill

(as opposed to Trump himself)?....Annnnnd, your point is? Cameron has no f’n reason to get into our politics.


48 posted on 05/18/2016 9:06:43 AM PDT by Safetgiver (Islam makes barbarism look genteel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Lower Deck

Because the U.S. position has always been that you don’t deal with North Korea alone......Time to stop that losing scenario, don’t you agree?


49 posted on 05/18/2016 9:11:14 AM PDT by Safetgiver (Islam makes barbarism look genteel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan
Talking with them is not dealing with them in any way that would undermine our ally. South Korea,

What purpose is gained from excluding South Korea and talking with North Korea one-on-one, which has been a North Korean demand for 60 years? How can South Korea take it any other way other than undermining them and a weakening of U.S. support?

50 posted on 05/18/2016 9:18:08 AM PDT by Lower Deck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Safetgiver
Time to stop that losing scenario, don’t you agree?

Why?

51 posted on 05/18/2016 9:18:36 AM PDT by Lower Deck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Lower Deck

Why?....We lost when Maddie Halfbright dealt with them ALONE.


52 posted on 05/18/2016 9:24:24 AM PDT by Safetgiver (Islam makes barbarism look genteel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Lower Deck
Having a talk with an enemy, which has deliberately threatened us also, does not mean that we are "excluding" anyone else. If the subject is confined to the Korean Peninsula, obviously South Korea--not the United States--would be the one to decide whether to talk--if North Korea refused, that talk would not take place.

We have our own issues with North Korea, however. They have been developing missiles that are obviously not designed for the range of South Korea. We can talk to the enemy--talk plainly to the enemy without any suggestion that we have any right whatsoever to compromise South Korean sovereignty.

Trump does not advocate the Neocon insanity, which assumed an American right to reprogram other nations. He would certainly not be talking to North Korea in that vein.

53 posted on 05/18/2016 9:31:30 AM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

The real news here is that when Yahoo posted this story they included a complimentary picture of Trump!! They usually try to make him look snarky.

Previous administrations have insisted that they would only meet with others when confronting North Korea. The idea was that they did not want to meet Kim as a peer.

But with Trump, this may work out pretty well. I would love to be a fly on the wall at that meeting. I suspect that Trump will brush the State Department flacks out of the way and DICTATE to Kim. That is what should have been done a long time ago.


54 posted on 05/18/2016 9:39:36 AM PDT by the_Watchman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trebb
"Be advised, my toaster will run against you..... "

It would not just make toast, it would BE toast.

55 posted on 05/18/2016 4:11:12 PM PDT by norwaypinesavage (The Stone Age did not end because we ran out of stones)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: norwaypinesavage
It would not just make toast, it would BE toast.

Be advised - my toaster has accepted the challenge - it looks forward to engaging you next Presidential Primary season......

56 posted on 05/19/2016 2:35:34 AM PDT by trebb (Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Battle of the haircuts? :)


57 posted on 05/19/2016 6:45:25 AM PDT by ZULU (DON'T GO OFF THE RESERVATION.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trebb
NEXT primary season???

Haven't you heard that the NotTrumpers are looking for the Perfect Candidate to run in this primary, in order to win Texas and prevent both Hillary and Trump from getting 270 electoral votes?

58 posted on 05/19/2016 11:58:01 AM PDT by norwaypinesavage (The Stone Age did not end because we ran out of stones)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: norwaypinesavage
NEXT primary season???

Haven't you heard that the NotTrumpers are looking for the Perfect Candidate to run in this primary, in order to win Texas and prevent both Hillary and Trump from getting 270 electoral votes?

I've seen all the stories - many with Cruz's fingerprints on them.

There's about 360 electoral votes available in the remaining States and Trump needs 69 to reach 1237 and maybe another 80 to become "delegates-who-bail proof". That's only 42% and he's polling well ahead of that.

I can't think of anyone they could offer that would please the People enough for them to forget the intended betrayal of the act.

59 posted on 05/20/2016 2:52:18 AM PDT by trebb (Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson