world

Global reaction to Trump-Kim summit mainly positive

42 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2018 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

42 Comments
Login to comment

I think many are happy, and surprised, that they even met each other. This is a positive thing.

As for me I am glad they met at least. I was watching NHK last night and the body language spoke volumes. Kim was definitely out of his element and seemed as if he was not sure how to act.

Not much was accomplished and I would not take stock in any "signed document" at this point and would take more stock in what happens in the future.

Not much mention that human rights inside of North Korea was left off the table for this meeting. As a human being I find this very sad but as a pragmatist I understand why (which is also sad).

It has been said an invitation has been extended for Kim to visit the White House. It will be interesting to see if he accepts this and if further progress is made.

As for China; I can imagine a positive outcome for them is anything that reduces U.S. influence in Northeast Asia.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Iran will be more difficult, but if the don’t want to denuclearize, they will have to deal with the fallout from the US, the Saudis and Israel, either way, take the US out of the equation, Israel, the Saudis, the Egyptians and most of the Sunnis would never allow a nuclear Iran to exist.

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

I’m not going to bemoan the meeting... it’s all good. I don’t trust N. Korea and never will.

What scares the **** out of me is that Trump can’t manage a relationship with our closest friends, people who believe in rule of law, but feels a very special bond with someone who murders multitudes in cold blood, someone who can order the nerve gas killing of a relative.

That should give literally every American pause.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

As for Iran, it's quite impossible to "denuclearize" when you've never "nuclearized" to begin with.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

The complete opposite of the global reaction to Trump's behavior at the G7 summit, just a few days before.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

What scares the **** out of me is that Trump can’t manage a relationship with our closest friends, people who believe in rule of law, but feels a very special bond with someone who murders multitudes in cold blood, someone who can order the nerve gas killing of a relative.

That should give literally every American pause.

Keep your friends close, but don’t let them abuse and keep your enemies even closer and complement them. What Trump did was brilliant and we better than going to war, which is something that all the liberals are worried about and now they are still complaining, these people are never satisfied.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

Yesterday’s meeting was the greatest diplomatic event of our generation. Yet it is already being played down in the news, even in the article above calling it “mostly positive.”

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Keep your friends close, but don’t let them abuse

But with Trump, it's 'alienate and abuse your friends', not 'keep your friends close'.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

(Schumer) said if North Korea does not denuclearize, the "meeting alone will be a victory for North Korea and a defeat for the U.S." -- article

The democrats, led by Cryin' Chuck, have been actively rooting against America and for NoKo since the first mention of this summit meeting. Since nothing else they have lobbed at President Trump in the past 500-plus days have stuck, why not go all in and side with an oppressive Communist dictatorship?

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Yesterday’s meeting was the greatest diplomatic event of our generation.

Considering NK agreed to the same thing in 2005, that's a pretty short generation.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

My reaction: Mr. president if you did this good approach to NK to start the agreement for peace, why not with Iran, too?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Yesterday’s meeting was the greatest diplomatic event of our generation.

That's quite a statement. Like most posters here, I'm supportive of any event which reduces risk of war on the Korean peninsula - but did this meeting achieve anything? The main points I've read is that Trump has agreed to cease SK-US military exercises in exchange for some undefined "denuclearization" (of whom, by when, and how remain unclear). Would you be so kind as to support your post with whatever facts you can find, as they seem to be thin on the ground.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The democrats, led by Cryin' Chuck, have been actively rooting against America and for NoKo since the first mention of this summit meeting.

Nah, the Republicans are the ones who were against it. Trump threw it in their face, and now they are crying and looking stupid with egg on their face.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

It’s always good to meet and talk.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Step 1. Done.

5,000 more steps needed.

The sanctions worked, especially when NK and Chinese ships were caught multiple times violating the sanctions.

ZTE will be penalized for providing NK and Iran equipment. US Congress is trying to block Trump's "personal deal" now, with many republicans pushing it as well. Trump can't pardon a company for any price.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

keep your enemies even closer 

Does that include Iran?

I have always believed that there is no harm in dialogue, which is why I think the Trump-Kim meeting was a good start. Interesting, however, that Republicans (and Fox) blasted both Obama and Hillary Clinton for suggesting they would meet with leaders of Iran and North Korea.

The counter-argument from the right is going to be that Trump met from a position of strength, not weakness. That claim is false. North Korea now has nuclear weapons and long-range missiles. Kim has so far not promised immediate denuclearization (which is what the Trump team originally insisted on before it would hold talks), and Trump has now suggested an end to joint US/South Korea "war games". Kim has the upper hand, and he's using the optics to further that hand.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

I have always believed that there is no harm in dialogue, which is why I think the Trump-Kim meeting was a good start.

It doesn't matter how many times we point this out, the right comes up with some falsehoods that we're all beholden to a has-been who none of us care about anymore. I think it's their coping mechanism to deal with the fact that their leader did what we've supported all along, which doesn't behoove them well.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

being played down in the news, even in the article above calling it “mostly positive.”

FYI, "mostly positive" refers to worldwide reaction to the meeting, not the meeting itself. That is a fair analysis.

the greatest diplomatic event of our generation

Counting chickens already?

5 ( +5 / -0 )

The democrats, led by Cryin' Chuck

Cryin' Chuck. Very catchy. Now your assertion is valid and persuasive.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Iran will be more difficult, but if the don’t want to denuclearize, they will have to deal with the fallout from the US, the Saudis and Israel

Iran will be fine. These terrorist nations will not get away with their bullying and threats.

I am still optimistic that the meeting went ahead. And I welcome it in the same open-minded fashion that the conservatives here welcomed Obama's meeting with Raul Castro.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

I'm listening to the news in Australia right now as I type. The newscasters are not giving any personal opinions, but they've had a couple Korean people on over the past hour, and the Koreans are quite pessimistic about the whole thing.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Mainly positive? Yep, everyone in this article pretty much loved it except Iran and the Democrats. Imagine that.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

Mainly positive? Yep, everyone in this article pretty much loved it except Iran and the Democrats.

No, that's not true.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Does that include Iran?

Rhetorical question?

I have always believed that there is no harm in dialogue, which is why I think the Trump-Kim meeting was a good start. Interesting, however, that Republicans (and Fox) blasted both Obama and Hillary Clinton for suggesting they would meet with leaders of Iran and North Korea.

The difference is, there was a lot of backdoor dealing to give relieve the sanctions for the Obama admin. to get a win in the final days of his presidency and to allow them to get access to their money and a deal that was made by the President and NOT handed over to the congress for a vote to give it binding teeth, Obama knew it wouldn't get passed the congress and even some Democrats balked at the deal, but as in true lemming fashion, they supported it nonetheless.

The counter-argument from the right is going to be that Trump met from a position of strength, not weakness. That claim is false.

Not true, Trump and the US has the biggest sanctions and nothing was given, No buckets of money, the only thing that was given was time and a halt to the war games exercise and if the North Koreans renege on their pledge, then in 2019 the games will resume and there won't be any turning back, so we should know from now and until next year if Kim is sincerely committed or not.

North Korea now has nuclear weapons and long-range missiles. Kim has so far not promised immediate denuclearization (which is what the Trump team originally insisted on before it would hold talks), and Trump has now suggested an end to joint US/South Korea "war games". Kim has the upper hand, and he's using the optics to further that hand.

Well, Kim doesn't have the upper hand because once if he gets in his head that he can take on the US, then that will be the final chapter in the Kim dynasty and I personally don't think he wants to go out like that. China doesn't want the US to put sanctions on it as well, so Kim is boxed in, we have our Subs and some destroyers off the Peninsula as well as some new F-22s and F-35s cocked, locked and ready to rock. These were the first steps and many more to come. Trump was good to give some space to let the NK see that there is good will on their part, so let's see where this will go, but the US has their finger on the trigger and if Kim blinks, we will have our make my day moment and no one wants that.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

So who else in this article was negative about the summit then?

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Iran will be fine.

As long as they don't get in their head to blow the US or Israel or the Sunnis including the Saudis out of the water with nukes, they should be fine.

These terrorist nations will not get away with their bullying and threats. 

And that's why the President is on it.

I am still optimistic that the meeting went ahead. And I welcome it in the same open-minded fashion that the conservatives here welcomed Obama's meeting with Raul Castro.

You are joking, right? Lol

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

All we can do is wait and see what happens. Arm chair quarterbacking it is pointless.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

No one was negative about the summit. We all thought it was a good idea.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

bass: Obama knew it wouldn't get passed the congress and even some Democrats balked at the deal, but as in true lemming fashion, they supported it nonetheless.

You won’t support any deal Trump makes because it won’t have teeth unless it’s approved by Congress, even one controlled by Democrats?

we have our Subs and some destroyers off the Peninsula as well as some new F-22s and F-35s cocked, locked and ready to rock.

It was settled that there’s no military option years ago because of Seoul and China. I guess Trump fans are trying to revive it.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

So you said "not true" to my statement based on no facts, because I said no one in the ARTICLE except Iran and the Democrats. So the headline of "mainly" positive downplays the article contents, should be "mostly" or "majorly".

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I agree. So can you tell your liberal friends to stop using cancelling of the war games as proof that " oh my God! Trump "gave away everything!"

It was settled that there’s no military option years ago because of Seoul and China. I guess Trump fans are trying to revive it.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

As long as they don't get in their head to blow the US or Israel or the Sunnis including the Saudis out of the water with nukes, they should be fine.

They will be fine, as long as the don't trust the US, Israel or the Saudis.

And that's why the President is on it.

As leader of the terrorist nations, yes. We are watching very closely.

You are joking, right? Lol

Obama meets with Raul Castro is a bad thing, but Trump meeting with Kim is great. And why is that?

The hypocrisy of Trump disciples is astounding.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Trump only met with North Korea so that his pal the wife-beating and alcoholic Rodman could go on vacation there.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/north-korea-best-hotels-beaches-trump-kim_us_5b1fc2a1e4b0bbb7a0e18c73

1 ( +2 / -1 )

haha nice try. But no.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Trump also faced mounting questions about whether he got too little and gave away too much - including an agreement to halt U.S. military exercises with treaty ally South Korea. -- article

Six months ago when our President talked about unleashing "fire and fury" on NoKo, the so-called experts were falling all over themselves trying to get to a microphone to pontificate on how President Trump was too strong and he would lturn the world into a nuclear watseland. And now these all-knowing pundits are saying he' s too weak?

What's more is President Trump told ABC News earlier this year that he was curtailing the joint military exercises with SK because: A.) they are too expensive, and, B.) the world already knows just how powerful our combined Armed Forces really is. Besides, when was the last time the American left (politicians, the Deep State, the VSM) even cared about our men and women serving in uniform?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Trump haters will play the summit down, regardless of the outcome.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

The summit with NK is a good start, but the game has only just begun. The signed statement was similar to all the other statements NK signed and covertly and overtly violated.

I don't know how I feel about ending the war games. Training is important, and the military needs to be at the top of their game if a war starts in Korean.

Presumably, NK will stop torpedoing SK ships, shelling SK, trying to blind pilots with lasers designed to track a persons eyes and blind them, covertly sending special ops into SK (and Japan). let alone the propaganda issued by their news painting the Western world as warmongers intent on burinng NK to the ground and Kim being a godlike ruler...

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Crazy: "*What scares the *** out of me is that Trump can’t manage a relationship with our closest friends, people who believe in rule of law, but feels a very special bond with someone who murders multitudes in cold blood, someone who can order the nerve gas killing of a relative.

That should give literally every American pause."

bass: "Keep your friends close, but don’t let them abuse and keep your enemies even closer and complement them. What Trump did was brilliant and we better than going to war, which is something that all the liberals are worried about and now they are still complaining, these people are never satisfied."

Bass gets it, Crazy doesn't. Trump could walk on water and Crazy would complain he can't swim.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

I'm happy with how this is going so far actually. Trump is being reasonable to the point that it seems completely out of character - cancelling the joint exercises with South Korea is a good thing and Trump is right, they are provocative.

The comparisons with Obama and other administrations kind of miss the point that this really is something that only Trump could do, basically because of the politics of it. It would have been political suicide for Obama to have gone this far, but Trump can do it because he is doing something Democrats want to do but can't (so their criticism is muted), and something that Republicans normally wouldn't do but because he is their guy they are going along with it (so criticism from them is muted to).

The historical parallel would be Nixon establishing relations with China - something no Democrat could have done for basically the same domestic political reasons. And that worked out reasonably well so hopefully this will too. Of course there is a lot of work to go, but this is now Trump's signature move so he's got an interest in seeing it through, and North Korea has a lot of incentive to keep things going too, so for the first time since Trump came to office he has done something which gives me some optimism.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Trump's habit of speaking off-the-cuff (and even bragging about it) is both his greatest strength and weakness, and what we're seeing here is a display of this. For example, Trump’s declaration that he intended to end joint military exercises in Korea took both South Korean and U.S. military officials by surprise. Who knows? Maybe it's a good idea; maybe it's not. Perhaps he should have consulted with his security officials beforehand; perhaps not. The exercises themselves may be of benefit, or perhaps not. At any rate, whether he adheres to this pledge is as trustworthy as all the others he's made. With Trump, one never knows.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites