North Korea

Well isn't that sweet.

If I didn't also just read in every major newspaper that NK had continued clandestinely on their nuke program after Kim and Trumps "sit down"- I would almost think the whole Korea Conflict had been solved.

TRUMP THANKS NORTH KOREA’S KIM JONG UN FOR HIS ‘NICE LETTER’ AND HOPES TO SEE HIM SOON
https://www.newsweek.com/trump-thanks-north-korea-kim-jong-un-nice-letter-hopes-see-him-soon-1053561

n a late-night tweet, U.S. President Donald Trump thanked Kim Jong Un for returning what are believed to be the remains of American soldiers killed in the Korean War.

It followed a pledge made at their summit in Singapore that also included an apparent agreement struck with the North Korean dictator for Pyongyang, North Korea, to denuclearize.

On Thursday, the U.S. president also said he was looking forward to seeing Kim again, tweeting: “Thank you to Chairman Kim Jong Un for keeping your word & starting the process of sending home the remains of our great and beloved missing fallen! I am not at all surprised that you took this kind action. Also, thank you for your nice letter - l look forward to seeing you soon!”

Kim sent a letter to Trump in July expressing hope there would be another meeting between the two, but it was unclear if that was the letter Trump was referring to.
Click to expand...
 
tenacious said:
Well isn't that sweet.

If I didn't also just read in every major newspaper that NK had continued clandestinely on their nuke program after Kim and Trumps "sit down"- I would almost think the whole Korea Conflict had been solved.
Click to expand...
I would almost think that you were thinking.
 
tenacious said:
Congratulations, you've discovered post modern criticism, but mathematics is a language and therefore must have a built is bias? lol

That doesn't even make any sense. For example what's the bias in 1+1 =2? I'd be interested in you showing me how language, or how bias makes this untrue?
The above sentences by Mr Turd is an expose on his/her/" they " 's stupidity.....

Even in imaginary worlds, where there are aliens who don't talk. Seems to me 1+1+2 would be true in all instances in that other world too.
Click to expand...


You never took Calculus did you, you're trying to argue about something to
which you have NO knowledge.
I posted the bias Mr Turd.....

Mathematics IS a language between mathematicians Mr Turd and I posted the Bias Mr Turd.

" Aliens "....they cross our borders.

Intelligent life forms beyond this planet that visit here most likely
view you with as a red circle with a line across it.....

" Do not interact, harmful to their mental stability " are the instructions below your
image.......
 
Multi Sport said:
Is the New York Times considered a reputable source?
Click to expand...

Founded in 1851, still the major national newspaper of record, and the paper has won 125 Pulitzer Prizes. Seems like a reputable source for accurate reporting, to any rational and reasonable person of average intelligence.

Unless you have an ulterior motive to seek to discredit it’s record of 167 years of reporting truth to power.

At least one person in this country presently has a personal vendetta to seek to undermine the paper’s credibility due to so many accurate yet humiliating stories exposing his criminal enterprises. Surely you’re not supportive of such an ongoing effort, true?
 
Multi Sport said:
Is the New York Times considered a reputable source?

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/23/world/asia/north-korea-dismantling-missile-facilities.html
Click to expand...

The NYT article is discussing a report by another source --

The North Koreans have started taking apart the engine test stand at the Sohae Satellite Launching Station, said Joseph S. Bermudez Jr., an expert on North Korea’s weapons programs, in a report published on Monday on the website 38 North. The dismantling work probably began sometime within the last two weeks, he said.
​
Unless you have something to show that indicates the NYT didn't understand or lied about the 38 North article, yes, they are still a reputable source. The question you should have asked, if you had read and understood the article, is whether 38 North is a reputable source.
 
espola said:
The NYT article is discussing a report by another source --

The North Koreans have started taking apart the engine test stand at the Sohae Satellite Launching Station, said Joseph S. Bermudez Jr., an expert on North Korea’s weapons programs, in a report published on Monday on the website 38 North. The dismantling work probably began sometime within the last two weeks, he said.
​
Unless you have something to show that indicates the NYT didn't understand or lied about the 38 North article, yes, they are still a reputable source. The question you should have asked, if you had read and understood the article, is whether 38 North is a reputable source.
Click to expand...
So you don't believe the NYT vetted this article? You believe that they are careless like that?

You amuse me when you talk out of both ends..
 
Nonononono said:
Founded in 1851, still the major national newspaper of record, and the paper has won 125 Pulitzer Prizes. Seems like a reputable source for accurate reporting, to any rational and reasonable person of average intelligence.

Unless you have an ulterior motive to seek to discredit it’s record of 167 years of reporting truth to power.

At least one person in this country presently has a personal vendetta to seek to undermine the paper’s credibility due to so many accurate yet humiliating stories exposing his criminal enterprises. Surely you’re not supportive of such an ongoing effort, true?
Click to expand...
So then the article that they posted would be considered a solid, truthful piece.

Thanks for clarifying and confirming this. And Rat... thanks for agreeing as well.
 
Nonononono said:
Founded in 1851, still the major national newspaper of record, and the paper has won 125 Pulitzer Prizes. Seems like a reputable source for accurate reporting, to any rational and reasonable person of average intelligence.

Unless you have an ulterior motive to seek to discredit it’s record of 167 years of reporting truth to power.

At least one person in this country presently has a personal vendetta to seek to undermine the paper’s credibility due to so many accurate yet humiliating stories exposing his criminal enterprises. Surely you’re not supportive of such an ongoing effort, true?
Click to expand...
Oh my.:)
 
Nonononono said:
Founded in 1851, still the major national newspaper of record, and the paper has won 125 Pulitzer Prizes. Seems like a reputable source for accurate reporting, to any rational and reasonable person of average intelligence.

Unless you have an ulterior motive to seek to discredit it’s record of 167 years of reporting truth to power.

At least one person in this country presently has a personal vendetta to seek to undermine the paper’s credibility due to so many accurate yet humiliating stories exposing his criminal enterprises. Surely you’re not supportive of such an ongoing effort, true?
Click to expand...
You mean truth to republicans, NYT is just a liberal asslicking organization, just ask Obama.
 
Multi Sport said:
So you don't believe the NYT vetted this article? You believe that they are careless like that?

You amuse me when you talk out of both ends..
Click to expand...

They wrote about an article in another publication that focuses on matters involving the two Koreas. The NYT article was a truthful and accurate description of the 38 North article, and the 38 North article reported facts (the apparent dismantling of the NK rocket test site) that were verified by other sources. Should NYT have ignored that article and the vetted facts in it?

What's your point?
 
espola said:
They wrote about an article in another publication that focuses on matters involving the two Koreas. The NYT article was a truthful and accurate description of the 38 North article, and the 38 North article reported facts (the apparent dismantling of the NK rocket test site) that were verified by other sources. Should NYT have ignored that article and the vetted facts in it?

What's your point?
Click to expand...
Are you trying to talk in circles again? Are you really that much of an idiot?

Thanks for making my point...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top