It's a nice highlights package of the interview. You can just go to the original at WSJ if you want.Originally Posted by bruhnaldo
It's a nice highlights package of the interview. You can just go to the original at WSJ if you want.
The transcripts from his call with the Australian PM are quite good.
They were from Kyrgyzstan of Chechen descent, so they're both wrong.
Russia disagrees.
You can't actually. WSJ didn't put out a transcript so Politico uploaded their copy.
Typing 'WSJ transcript' into Google still returns the correct transcript as the first result so that's a bit of a distinction without a difference.
Sean Spicer trying to cc people into a tweet somehow just seems absolutely correct.
Lamest duck.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...bull?CMP=fb_gu
Worth a read.
I recommend using this instead, it has linkable highlights and stuff. First piece of well designed digital text I've seen in a while.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graph...=.a573c03207d3
He really is just an old, racist Fox viewer.They are not going to be wonderful people who go on to work for the local milk people.
I like to think that's what Donald just calls white people now.
How has someone gotten a hold of that transcript?
Is it common practice to record and transcribe phone calls like that?
Just read this
Discriminate against Boats.
I just fucking.
Boats
Context would be dope I guess.
The word-for-word transcript of the entire conversation is posted twice on this very page.
My personal favourite is the Boston Bombers bit
Hard to argue against that though. They are where they were.
12 dimensional logic.
Read the thing then. But in a gist: Turnbull keeps talking about how they will accept anyone who doesn't come by boat in the country (the whole world knows the thing with Australia and boats by now). Trump doesn't get it.
Guess I need to read up on Australia and boats.
I wish these transcripts included sighs because it looks like there would have been quite a few.
So reading the transcript bit about the boats. What is wrong with what he said? I'm seriously asking. Turnbull kept saying they won't take anyone by boat, Trump asked why?
Is he supposed to know why beforehand? If so, then sure I get that, but it's not as if "discriminate" was improperly used in that sense?
I think that one was Maz not knowing English properly
It would be within the White House, but they've obviously been leaked from there.
'...fire and fury like the world has never seen before.'
So nuclear weapons, presumably. This will be fun.
The world has seen that, and also Napalm carpet bombing.
I wonder if he means accelerated global warming?
Little Boy and Fat Man are relatively mundane compared to some of the weapons the Americans have now.
Presumably if the North Koreans have indeed nailed the miniaturisation process to fit the warhead onto an ICBM, you're into a new phase where a few sanctions isn't going to cut it.
Or, just possibly, nothing he says means anything?
It's bluster, obviously, but it's not like it changes the fact that the basic rules of the game have changed - if they've miniaturised the warhead, that is.
I was listening to a podcast the other day about what war with North Korea would look like and it was fucking terrifying. It was a BBC radio show. I'll see if I can find a link, it's worth a listen.
EDIT: Here we go
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p029399x/episodes/downloads
After the healthcare debate, I've stopped thinking anything Trump says is designed to do anything but move the news cycle for a day.
It's a decent bet to lean towards the more conservative assessments of North Korean nuclear capabilities. I read SIXTY NUKES earlier, with another geezer claiming twenty at best. I think people read that and imagine loads of them lined up and ready to be launched into San Francisco (possibly not a bad thing), but most of whatever they have will be massive and effectively useless (unless he wants to blow himself up), and lobbing missiles into the sea is a million miles away from having them as the basis of a worthwhile nuclear capability.
The nuclear weapons we have now are so much bigger than the ones dropped on Japan that they should probably be called something else. The biggest one ever actually tested was a few thousand times bigger than those two, and that was in the sixties.
Tom Nichols, from the Naval War College, has been making the same point. Showing that you can miniaturize a warhead and demonstrating you can attach it to a missle are separate steps. As is demonstrably being able to launch an ICBM afterwards. It is unlikely they can nuke San Francisco for another couple of years.
The nightmare scenario has always been what can happen conventionally with Seoul, isn't it? And you can add in Trump's inane bluster eventually eroding our deterrence threat. But I can't claim to be up on deterrence theory.
Trump's unsuitability has always been an unwillingness to or simply not caring about calming the country. About this, the new floods in New Orleans, Minneapolis bombing, or anything really.
At the moment it is, but if they kit themselves out with working nuclear missiles that changes, obviously.
For now the fact that Seoul is a hundred yards away from the border means they could essentially flatten it. I remember reading something which said current estimates had them able to land some sort of ordinance on every square inch of Seoul within something like two hours of the first shot.
The basic distinction is that the Jap[ane]s[e] got whomped with fission weapons (nuclear bombs, or atomic bombs), and the mega ones are fusion weapons (thermouclear weapons, or hydrogen bombs). Unless you have the latter then you're basically a chump, and, although North Korea claimed to have tested one last year, they quite clearly never.
What their artillery can apparently do to Seoul sounds impressive, but I would have thought that 1) a pre-emptive American/South Korean strike would be more than capable of taking a significant proportion of it out simply by raining death all over where they think it might be; 2) what survived would be less effective anyway because of pre-existing supply problems exacerbated by what had just happened; and 3) what did survive and what did work would soon be polished off once it reveals its position (that is if they haven't panic moved it to do some actual defensive work). I'm sure a few Daewoos would get scratched, but the million dead scenario seems a bit far fetched. Chemical weapons are probably the biggest threat, but even they have limited use.
Should have said my semi understanding was that the convential damage was essentially unstoppable because it is mostly automated rockets and missiles. But yeah to the rest.
I have to wonder what the South Korean President thinks of Trump. They've got the most to lose, and Trump's sounding off incoherently like an idiot.
He hasn't even nominated an ambassador to South Korea yet. I'd be surprised if he knew how close Seoul is to the border. Actually, I'd be a little surprised if he knew there was a land border at all. It goes without saying, but he's just so utterly incompetent at everything the job entails.
Meanwhile, Sebastian Gorka, a military advisor primarily involved with counter terrorism strategy, reckons there's never been a terror attack on US soil which was 'unconnected from ISIS or Al Qaeda'. I wonder whether he thinks Timothy McVeigh was involved with Al Qaeda, or just doesn't know the Oklahoma bomb ever happened.
There's a bit of a developing theme there actually among people Trump gives jobs to. Giuliani is involved with advising the White House on cyber security (a colossal lol on its own) and he reckoned there was never a single Islamist terror attack on US soil until Obama became President. That from the man who was mayor of New York on 11/9.
The Trump jobs thing is pretty simple really. The best way to get a job from Trump is to attach your lips to his ass and never let go. Nothing else matters.
I said the same thing when Fandango was hired but I'm not so sure now. He stood at the White House podium and said Trump had the best political instincts of all time, could throw a perfect spiral through a tyre and make infinite three point shots, along with about a hundred other deeply absurd compliments, and he lasted not much more than a week.
The problem is his administration is so chaotic it's difficult to find any connective tissue beyond the fact that everyone involved has at some stage been forced to get in front of a microphone and talk about how wonderful Donald Trump is.
Getting hired is, I think, less challenging than staying hired.
It is crazy though. You hear all the absurd stories about North Korean officials making ludicrous claims about Kim Jong-Un's achievements, and you laugh at how implausible they are and how stupid they think we are. Then you hear it out of the US, and you start to see how it can happen.
In a country with less structure, Trump would be a tinpot dictator by now. And he'd not see a thing wrong with that.
I read a load of those 'facts' about Kim Jong-Il while back and some of them are simultaneously so bonkers and so meaningless that you have to wonder what the purpose of them is. You can get behind all the stuff about him being born of a star and never shitting because it's basically just a religious tale, but who decided he invented the hamburger?
Trump's inauguration day lies are no more stupid than North Korea claiming to have won the world cup, I suppose. Actually, less stupid, because the people he's lying to have access to pictures and footage.
Gorka keeps popping up in the news here because he is a total fraud, occasionally wears pins of a Hungarian organization which may be facist, and will say whatever on tv. Last time he popped up it was revealed he has not received any security clearance so he can't actually do any work in his assigned role. Then it was determined that he doesn't actually have an assignment. The connection between the vast majority of admin people is that they are Republican rejects who have glommed onto an administration that has no actual policy agenda and has been in such chaos that they can go about unnoticed. Outside of the generals pretty much the entire Republican foreign policy establishment can't work for Trump because they all signed various letters saying he was unfit during the election.
I think a lot of those are also completely made up, I'm not why people would make them up - but they clearly are. When I was there, there were certainly more haircuts than that apparent "approved haircut list" - and I'm sure I read somewhere that the golf achievements of Jong-Il originated at some college campus in the us (though I cant find a link now...).
The recent Trump News things, that I thought were a joke, but are actually true, are very similar to the news shows over here - it's so cringe.
Well all of that is much, much worse than what I was lolling at.
The last version of the approved haircut list I remember seeing circulated had about thirty on it. How do you go about remembering whether you've seen more than thirty different haircuts or not? That's not to say I wouldn't believe it's made up, it's such a bonkers yet secretive place that you could make just about anything up and people will buy into it.
The three I mention above are all included in his official state biography, so they're not the result of some whopper making things up to look clever. Now that I think about it, I can't remember if it said he was born of a star, or that his birth was so momentous that the universe created a star in his honour. Either way, it's mad.
Was it an "approved haircut list", or was it just a photo of a hair salon in North Korea, showing what choices they have available?
We know DPRK is bonkers, but shit stories about haircuts and hamburgers are just a waste of time.
EDIT: That isn't to say that the Star stuff is completely bollocks, of course.
Choice.
Thankfully, Trumps opinion polling is way down. His "base" seems to be finally eroding.
I could do without a nuclear war, thanks.
But you've got to wonder if in his head, he doesn't really care about Seoul or anything that far away and is willing to sacrifice it for the sake of being able to grandstand for a bit.
Trump's presidency so far is the best advert for not having a presidential system I can think of.
Half the population of one of the most advanced countries on the planet still thinks the earth is twenty minutes old and that Jesus was both real and magic. Claiming to have invented a sandwich seems pretty small beans in comparison.
Reply With Quote
