Open main menu

Comments:North, South Korea announce summit about 'denuclearization and peace' for April 27

Back to article

Wikinews commentary.svg

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Use the "Start a new discussion" button just below to start a new discussion. If the button isn't there, wait a few seconds and click this link: Refresh.



Start a new discussion

Contents

Thread titleRepliesLast modified
Will the summit actually progress towards peace?300:34, 2 April 2018

Will the summit actually progress towards peace?

I don't see how these high level meetings get close to peace. That does not mean they should not try. Dictators, by definition have absolute power and absolutely will not give it up. If Kim Jung Un does reach a deal, he will have to push the international community for immunity since there are known crimes against humanity. My guess is those are just the tip of the iceberg.

The underlying question is do you sellout your morals to appease a regime into a deal of questionable danger from unclear intelligence about nuclear warheads with no reliable delivery system?

AZOperator (talk)22:16, 1 April 2018

Hard to say, but I think it's just Kim Jong-un following in his father's footsteps.

SVTCobra22:51, 1 April 2018
 

Not convinced there is evidence to support the seeming supposition that Trump has morals, or that (like some politicians) he simulates having them.

Without such a supposition, the likely outcome of the summit — if it happens — becomes even harder to read, because it's unclear what Trump's motives are, as well as questionable whether he —or, in fact, anyone— would be competent to achieve them.

Pi zero (talk)23:39, 1 April 2018

If I was trying to make this happen, I would for look for a neutral party that both side respected as a moderator and can ensure adherence to any agreement. Immediately you cross out the US, China, and Russia. The only one that comes to mind is Germany's prime minister Angela Merkel.

A first move forward would be the North removing artillery from the DMZ and the US buy back the THAAD III missile defense shield. That is a tall, VERY TALL order.

AZOperator (talk)00:31, 2 April 2018