Category: Politics-US

I wonder what burger joint Trump would hold this proposed summit at?  Would Dennis Rodman be invited?:

 

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said Wednesday he would “accept” North Korean leader Kim Jong-un to the United States and hold nuclear negotiations with him while eating hamburgers, according to news reports.

“If he came here, I’d accept him,” Trump said during campaigning in Atlanta, reaffirming his willingness to meet with the North’s leader, according to reports. “Who the hell cares? I’ll talk to anybody.”

Trump first expressed his willingness to meet with Kim in an interview last month, drawing criticism not only from critics, but also from his own party that such a meeting would end up bolstering the dictator.

But while Trump has insisted on his willingness to speak to the North’s leader, but said he won’t go to the North for such talks.

Should Kim visit the U.S., Trump said he won’t throw him a state dinner.

“I wouldn’t give him a state dinner like China or all these other nations who are ripping us off,” Trump was quoted as saying. “We should be eating a hamburger on a conference table and making better deals.”

Trump said he will only “make a good deal” if he were to hold talks with the North’s leader.

The real-estate tycoon was also quoted as saying that there’s a “10 percent or 20 percent chance” he could talk Kim out of developing nuclear weapons.  [Yonhap]

You can read more at the link, but I think Donald Trump is over estimating his negotiating skills if he thinks he has up to a 20% chance of talking Kim out of developing nuclear weapons.  The only deal I can see  that would convince the Kim regime of stopping their nuclear weapons development would be to allow them to conquer South Korea.  This is obviously something the US would never agree to so what deal does Trump have in mind that would convince them?

A ROK Drop favorite Congressman Ed Royce is of course correct that any legislation that a possible Trump presidency proposes has to go through Congress.  The only affect that I see a possible Trump presidency having on South Korea is that they will have to pay more for the upkeep of the US-ROK alliance:

Q. South Koreans have some trepidation over what a Donald Trump presidency may mean for the U.S. alliance with Seoul, such as Washington maintaining U.S. troops on the peninsula and continuing to extend its nuclear umbrella to the region. Should we be concerned?

A. Well, remember the way in which our system works. It is Congress that has passed many of these laws, and whether it is having given Korea NATO-plus-three status, which was a bill that I authored, or whether it’s [the Korea-U.S. free trade agreement] legislation, which I was a co-sponsor of, it is Congress that has passed these bills. And we are deeply committed.

Republicans and Democrats in a bipartisan way feel that this is a very important alliance for our members in Congress. For our House members and Senate members, this is a strongly held position. And it is Congress that passes the laws. Every spending bill originates in the House of the Representatives. I’m chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee; we have 44 members, and we have set these policies. I’ve been traveling here for over 20 years, and for 10 of those years, I was chairman of the inter-parliamentary exchange working with the [Korean] National Assembly. I would say I’ve never seen the relationship as strong as it is today… and I think it’s going to get stronger.   [Joong Ang Ilbo]

By the way Congressman Royce has a lot more in the interview that is worth reading at the link.

The Donald has once again put allies on notice that they better be ready to pay up in a Trump Presidency:

U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said Friday he will continue to defend South Korea, but wants the Asian ally to pay more for American defense support.

Speaking on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” Trump also said that he’s willing to hold talks with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, but won’t go to the communist nation.

“As far as Japan and South Korea are concerned, all I’m saying is we defend them. They are paying us a tiny fraction of what it’s costing. I want them to pay,” Trump said. “I would love to continue to defend Japan. I would love to continue to defend South Korea. We have 28,000 soldiers on the line between North and South Korea right now.”

Trump has unnerved foreign countries, especially such allies as South Korea and Japan, as he has displayed deeply negative views of U.S. security commitments overseas, contending the U.S. should stop being the policeman of the world.

The real-estate tycoon has said that the U.S. should be prepared to end protection of allies unless they pay more. He even suggested allowing South Korea and Japan to develop their own nuclear weapons for self-defense so as to reduce U.S. security burdens.

“We are not a country that can afford to defend Saudi Arabia, Germany, the NATO nations, 28 NATO nations, many of which are not paying us and they’re not living up to their agreement,” Trump said on MSNBC. “Japan, South Korea, nobody, we’re like the dummies that protect everybody. All I’m saying is, we have to get reimbursed because we can’t afford it.”  [Yonhap]

You can read more at the link, but I was glad to see Trump finally put some focus on Middle Eastern and European nations instead of just Korea and Japan.

Trump says he’s open to direct talks with Kim. The US policy of deterrence is working very well @JohnDelury. https://t.co/0EAAVDZ7Ak

— Daniel A. Pinkston (康大植) (@dpinkston) May 18, 2016

I am not sure why Trump continues to go after South Korea on this issue, when it comes to freeloading US allies South Korea is not the best example to use in my opinion:

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said Wednesday that South Korea should pay for all costs related to U.S. troop presence in the country.  Trump made the remark in an interview with CNN, reiterating his long-running argument that the U.S. should be prepared to let allies defend themselves unless they pay more for American defense support.  “Why not a 100 percent?” Trump said as the interviewer pointed out that Seoul already shoulders about 50 percent of the cost.

 

Asked if he meant that countries like South Korea, Japan and Germany should pick up all the expenses, Trump said, “Of course they should pick up all the expense. Why are we paying for this?”   Trump also said the U.S. should be “prepared to walk” unless allies pay more, referring apparently to the potential troop withdrawal. In that case, the countries should defend themselves “against North Korea (where) we have a maniac.”  “If they don’t take care of us properly, if they don’t respect us enough to take care of us properly, then you know what will have to happen? Very simple, they’re going to have to defend themselves,” he said.  [Yonhap]

You can read the rest at the link.

In a Trump Presidency a big change for the military will be that General Officers will no longer be allowed to talk to the media:

If he becomes commander in chief, Donald Trump won’t let military generals speak to “the dishonest press,” out of fear they’ll spill national security secrets.  “I don’t want them saying things like ‘our nation has never been so ill-prepared.’ Even though it’s true, I don’t want the enemy knowing that.”“A general should not be on television,” the Republican front-runner told a crowd of supporters during a rally at Carmel, Indiana, on Monday. “I don’t want our generals on television. I will prohibit them.  [Military Times]

You can read more at the link.

Have you ever wondered what Koreans think of Donald Trump?  Well someone found out:

Hat Tip: Reddit Korea

This is definitely a long shot to ever happen, but if there was ever going to be conditions for someone like General Mattis to be elected President this is probably about as good as they will ever be:

General Mattis may be called back into action to serve his country — this time possibly assuming the role of Commander-in-Chief.

According to The Daily Beast, an anonymous collective of conservatives are in a position to persuade General James “Mad Dog” Mattis, the retired Marine Corps commander who has a reputation as a superb combat leader with excellent rapport with his men.

Considered a contingency action if Trump gets the nomination by the Republicans in Ohio,
Mattis could swing the vote and disrupt operations, even as a third-party candidate.

“Everyone is hoping that Ted Cruz pulls it out, but I think a great deal of Republicans would rally behind an American hero if the choice is between Mattis and Trump,” said John Noonan, a former Jeb Bush aide now involved in the project to draft Mattis.

“He’s a man of character and integrity. He’s given his life to his country. How do you ask someone like that to leap headfirst into this toxic mud-puddle of a race? It’s damn hard. But Trump is a fascist lunatic and Hillary has one foot in a jail cell. That means the lunatic can win. I’d be first in line to plead with the general to come save America,” Noonan added.

While a Mattis victory would not be an easy task, the primary strategy appears to be that of political insurgency — denying Clinton and Trump the 270 electoral votes needed to outright win a general election. On top of that, the benefactors of the Mattis camp would have to undertake the challenge of getting Mattis on the ballot in a large number of states.  [USMC Life]

If he did try and third party candidacy could you imagine the awesome quotes he would give on the campaign trail.  Here is just one from this article:

Mattis has gone on record in saying that he feels he could not endure the political correctness involved in being a Presidential candidate.

“I’ve lived a very colorful life and I’ve said some things,” Mattis told an audience last year. “But not once have I taken them back, and I’ve never apologized for them — and I won’t. I like the enemy knowing there are a few guys like me around.”

You can read much more on how the strategy to get him elected would work at the link.

https://twitter.com/ZacharyKeck/status/718447705182314496

This was something I was surprised to read about over the weekend.  Usually former Defense Secretary Robert Gates is pretty measured with his words, but he had some pretty strong things to say about President Obama:

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates says he felt President Obama “double-crossed” him during his tenure over budget cuts to the Pentagon.

In a Fox News report Friday that explored the president’s approach to the military, Gates said Obama had promised him that there wouldn’t be any “significant changes” in the defense budget for a while.

When asked by Fox whether Obama kept to his word, Gates replied, “Well I think that began to fray. ‘Fray’ may be too gentle a word.”

According to the report, Gates was told to cut hundreds of billions of dollars from the defense budget after already having slashed it.

“I guess I’d have to say I felt double-crossed,” Gates said. “After all those years in Washington, I was naïve.”

The former defense secretary added that he advised Obama to slow the cuts to the military because it would endanger U.S. troops.

“I think he acknowledged that what I was pitching at a minimum was, ‘The world doesn’t seem to be getting better. Before you head down a path of deep cuts in defense, why don’t you take it kind of slow,’ ” he said. “You know it was one of those things where I lost the argument.”  [The Hill]

You can read more at the link.