Triumph of Ron, Rand, and Trump in North Korea

[Galileo Galilei]

Triumph of Ron, Rand, and Trump in North Korea

It is evident that the international process of peace begun by Ron Paul and continued by Rand Paul, has come to fruition by President Trump in Korea. The groundwork for everything done by Trump was aid by Paul. The torch of freedom has a new foothold, and this is just the beginning. Our troops will soon be home from Syria and Afghanistan.

President Trump stands with President Kennedy in the hailed halls of greatness!

[AuH20]

Trump is one weak man surrounded by a glut of vipers. I wouldn't be spiking the ball prematurely.

[donnay]

Trump is one weak man surrounded by a glut of vipers. I wouldn't be spiking the ball prematurely.

Correct my memory if I am wrong... which US President(s) got North and South Korea to finally have a sit-down to amicably talk for possible reunification?

[shakey1]

If he pulls it off, it will be HUUUUUUUUUUGE!

[pao]

Correct my memory if I am wrong... which US President(s) got North and South Korea to finally have a sit-down to amicably talk for possible reunification?

I'm pretty sure that the North will demand some sort of concession that the US will not accept such as removing their military presence in the SK. I hope to be wrong.

[donnay]

I'm pretty sure that the North will demand some sort of concession that the US will not accept such as removing their military presence in the SK. I hope to be wrong.

We'll see. But I think this is positive on all sides, and I am sure Trump won't have a problem taking our troops out and putting them on our borders.

[kcchiefs6465]

We'll see. But I think this is positive on all sides, and I am sure Trump won't have a problem taking our troops out and putting them on our borders.
Because nothing says 'triumph of freedom' like a standing army of soldiers guarding the borders of this country.

[Swordsmyth]

Don't count your chick before they're hatched.

[donnay]

Because nothing says 'triumph of freedom' like a standing army of soldiers guarding the borders of this country.

No borders, no country. Dr. Paul agreed too.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mlm0Ae9UYXE

[H_H]

Because nothing says 'triumph of freedom' like a standing army of soldiers guarding the borders of this country.

Wait, are we not in favor of "Bring the Troops Home" anymore?

I kind of thought we still were. Hard to keep up, though. Fill me in, Kansas.

I mean, I get that "Disband the Troops" or "Fire All the Troops -- Cancel This Whole 'Having An Army' Business" might probably be better. Would definitely be better, ultimately, in theory -- I am support. But, that's not what Ron Paul said. He said "Bring the Troops Home" and have them "Guard Our Borders Instead of the Borders of Korea." And we didn't nit-pick him or counter-signal him on it, now did we? I sure didn't, and that was as a total open borders open-the-floodgates guy.

So... help me out. Should we have (counter-signaled)? Have we advanced? Do we now "Disavow" ole Ron?

"I have also supported the strengthening our border and increasing the number of border patrol agents. It is an outrage that our best-trained border guards are sent to Iraq instead of guarding our borders. For national security, we need to give more attention to our own border which is being illegally breached every day, and yet the government shirks one of its few constitutionally mandated duties, namely to defend this country. Citizens lose twice with our current insecure border situation — we don’t have the protection we should have, and then taxpayers have to deal with the fallout in the form of overstretched public resources and loss of jobs."

~"Why do we have our troops guarding the borders of Korea, of Iraq? Let's have them guard our own borders. It's time we come home."(rough idea, expressed repeatedly in the debates, not an exact quote)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChXYfLaJnj4

[Swordsmyth]

Because nothing says 'triumph of freedom' like a standing army of soldiers guarding the borders of this country.

That says freedom shall be preserved from foreign enemies, it is up to us on the inside to make freedom triumph.

[AuH20]

One solitary individual versus an entrenched bureaucracy that spans multiple administrations? Who would you bet on? I'd bet on the deep state/bureaucracy nearly every time.

For Trump to defeat them, he would have to risk everything, which isn't a psychological level that he has reached.

When Trump starts scheduling evening addresses on National Television, naming and outing the said forces, then maybe, I will start to believe in his agenda. Sunlight is something that these people despise, since they rely on anonymity to conduct their operations.

[kcchiefs6465]

Wait, are we not in favor of "Bring the Troops Home" anymore?

I kind of thought we still were. Hard to keep up, though. Fill me in, Kansas.
Yes, "we" (in whatever limited sense there is a "we") are in favor of bringing the troops home.

And while I do understand that you are incredibly clever and I find myself being amused by some of your postings, you can cut the bullshit and respond without the witty rhetoric.



I mean, I get that "Disband the Troops" or "Fire All the Troops -- Cancel This Whole 'Having An Army' Business" might probably be better. Would definitely be better, ultimately, in theory -- I am support. But, that's not what Ron Paul said. He said "Bring the Troops Home" and have them "Guard Our Borders Instead of the Borders of Korea." And we didn't nit-pick him or counter-signal him on it, now did we? I sure didn't, and that was as a total open borders open-the-floodgates guy.
What is politically palatable for Americans and the welfare class being discussed as a means to an end and the acceptance of ideals contrary to freedom and the promotion of a standing army are two different things.

And yes, I would correct Dr. Paul in that we do not need the National Guard, Army, Marines, etc. on our borders. As a Constitutionalist, I doubt he'd much disagree. Pragmatically, paying them to guard the border was a gift to the interventionists and welfare recipients so as to not scare away the ignorant.

However, there is something that is more flagrant about them guarding borders than say, fixing potholes.



So... help me out. Should we have (counter-signaled)? Have we advanced? Do we now "Disavow" ole Ron?
Ron Paul is against standing armies and for good, sensible, reason. Him showing the absurdity of troops guarding other borders while people cross ours rather unabated was useful rhetoric intended to help open the eyes of the American people.



"I have also supported the strengthening our border and increasing the number of border patrol agents. It is an outrage that our best-trained border guards are sent to Iraq instead of guarding our borders. For national security, we need to give more attention to our own border which is being illegally breached every day, and yet the government shirks one of its few constitutionally mandated duties, namely to defend this country. Citizens lose twice with our current insecure border situation — we don’t have the protection we should have, and then taxpayers have to deal with the fallout in the form of overstretched public resources and loss of jobs."
So are these Marines going to cease being Marines? Increasing the number of border patrol agents does not equate to stationing an army at the border.


~"Why do we have our troops guarding the borders of Korea, of Iraq? Let's have them guard our own borders. It's time we come home."(rough idea, expressed repeatedly in the debates, not an exact quote)

It is a practical soundbite that provokes conversation. Bringing home soldiers to guard the border would be the definition of a standing army. I don't much care to dig up Ron Paul quotes regarding standing armies and it is not necessary.

And besides from debating on a largely inactive forum bearing his name, what does Ron Paul have to do with anything, anyways?

[kcchiefs6465]

That says freedom shall be preserved from foreign enemies, it is up to us on the inside to make freedom triumph.
And robbing me of some 50% of my earnings to pay for welfare programs promotes this?

What do you think of Constitution Free Zones, if you don't mind me asking?

[PierzStyx]

Correct my memory if I am wrong... which US President(s) got North and South Korea to finally have a sit-down to amicably talk for possible reunification?

None of them.

Don't tell me you seriously think Trump is responsible for North Korea and South Korea talking?

[donnay]

None of them.

Don't tell me you seriously think Trump is responsible for North Korea and South Korea talking?

Yeah I do.

[Swordsmyth]

And robbing me of some 50% of my earnings to pay for welfare programs promotes this?
I always call for the DoD budget to be cut to the bone.



What do you think of Constitution Free Zones, if you don't mind me asking?
There can be no such thing.

[PierzStyx]

No borders, no country. Dr. Paul agreed too.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mlm0Ae9UYXE

Curious he says "resources" and not "soldiers."

Which makes sense. Use American resources to support America. And people living here will more easily be able to activate to defend the border if necessary. But none of that suggests support for militarization of the border. In fact he openly comes out against that idea. In fact he openly says a border wall would hurt Americans most and supports the idea that anyone who honestly makes money and wants to walk across the border should be able to do so without government regulations getting in the way.

Which, for the record, is the exact opposite of what you propose.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=geI2ZGiTDAQ

Starts about 4:28

[Swordsmyth]

One solitary individual versus an entrenched bureaucracy that spans multiple administrations? Who would you bet on? I'd bet on the deep state/bureaucracy nearly every time.

For Trump to defeat them, he would have to risk everything, which isn't a psychological level that he has reached.

When Trump starts scheduling evening addresses on National Television, naming and outing the said forces, then maybe, I will start to believe in his agenda. Sunlight is something that these people despise, since they rely on anonymity to conduct their operations.

He may (or may not) be taking baby steps to set the stage in preparation for more aggressive moves like that.

[Swordsmyth]

Don't tell me you seriously think Trump is responsible for North Korea and South Korea talking?

He played a major part.

[Raginfridus]

Correct my memory if I am wrong... which US President(s) got North and South Korea to finally have a sit-down to amicably talk for possible reunification?

He's only saying this matter isn't laid to rest. Our forces will needlessly remain for decades to come no doubt.

[TheCount]

We're going to need a lot more mission accomplished banners.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

We're going to need a lot more mission accomplished banners.


Where have you and your fellow progressives been all this time? The Democratic party once led the charge against war. Not so much any more. The traditional media is all in lockstep.

You progressives also used to lead the free speech charge. Cal-Berkeley was the center of it all, but now it's just pitiful.

And why weren't you making these posts when your boy Obama was in charge? (Oh, I know; you don't get paid to do that.)

[Swordsmyth]

South Korean President Moon Jae-in, who suggested on Monday that Donald Trump deserves the Nobel Peace Prize (https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-30/trump-should-win-nobel-peace-prize-south-koreas-moon)...

https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/MW-EE684_tump_n_20160203125210_ZH_0.jpg

...has convinced North Korean leader Kim Jong Un to hold his historic meeting with US President Donald Trump at the demilitarized zone (DMZ) separating the two Koreas - a region Bill Clinton called the "scariest place on earth (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/12/20/heres-what-its-like-worlds-most-dangerous-strip-land/964977001/)" in 1993, CNN (https://edition.cnn.com/2018/04/30/asia/trump-kim-summit-dmz/index.html) reports.
Moon and Kim met last Friday at the same location (https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-27/kim-proclaims-new-era-peace-amid-historic-north-south-korea-border-summit) in Panmunjom, as the historically significant event led to an agreement to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula and formally end the Korean War.

https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/2018-04-27_1-14-32_1.jpg


There is a "strong possibility" the summit will be held at the site, with some events possibly scheduled on the northern side of the military demarcation line separating the two countries, according to an official with deep knowledge of North Korea's thinking on the matter. -CNN (https://edition.cnn.com/2018/04/30/asia/trump-kim-summit-dmz/index.html)
The summit, thought to be held in "in late may," will also mark a historically significant moment in US history - as the agreement between the two Koreas marks the first sitting US President to meet with a North Korean Leader, ending decades of failed US foreign policy as the multi-generational regime pursued its nuclear ambitions.

More at: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-05-01/kim-jong-un-agrees-historic-summit-trump-dmz

[H_H]

Yes, "we" (in whatever limited sense there is a "we") are in favor of bringing the troops home.

And while I do understand that you are incredibly clever and I find myself being amused by some of your postings, you can cut the bull$#@! and respond without the witty rhetoric. :) Yes, you got me; it was a bit much, I'll tone it down.



What is politically palatable for Americans and the welfare class being discussed as a means to an end and the acceptance of ideals contrary to freedom and the promotion of a standing army are two different things.
...so as to not scare away the ignorant.
...was useful rhetoric intended to help open the eyes of the American people.
It is a practical soundbite that provokes conversation.

...what does Ron Paul have to do with anything, anyways? It would seem to me that we are still living in that same world that Ron Paul lived in. Still subject to the same political realities. Political palatability is still highly relevant. Scaring away the ignorant may still be inadvisable (debatable). Certainly effective and useful rhetoric, soundbites, and (new to the scene in the last couple years) memes are always welcome and helpful to the cause.

It doesn't seem that the calculation has changed much.

I, like you, would be all for not having a standing army. But, since, again, nothing much seems to have changed, for (at least) all the reasons that I agreed with and promoted the rhetoric in years past: "Let's bring the troops home, and let's secure our own border." If that means 2 million troops on the Mexican border, so be it. Least of our problems. If it means disbanding all the services and having all these guys be Border Patrol instead of Marines, Navy, Army, etc., to make it Constitutional so be it. And if they aren't re-branded, whatevs. It would be unconstitutional, but it would be such a minor technicality in the scheme of all the blatantly horrible, illegal, civilization-destroying crimes the gov't is committing daily.

[Anti Globalist]

Of course. An alpha male like Trump could only make this possible. Do people really think that a beta male would be able to make this possible?

[Anti Globalist]

Also I don't expect the troops in SK to come home. We beat Germany in WW2 73 years ago yet we still have troops there.

[TheCount]

Where have you and your fellow progressives been all this time? The Democratic party once led the charge against war. Not so much any more. The traditional media is all in lockstep.

You progressives also used to lead the free speech charge. Cal-Berkeley was the center of it all, but now it's just pitiful.

And why weren't you making these posts when your boy Obama was in charge? (Oh, I know; you don't get paid to do that.)
Are you sure that Bolton wants you supporting peace on the Korean peninsula?

Might want to double check this week's marching orders.

[donnay]

Curious he says "resources" and not "soldiers."

Which makes sense. Use American resources to support America. And people living here will more easily be able to activate to defend the border if necessary. But none of that suggests support for militarization of the border. In fact he openly comes out against that idea. In fact he openly says a border wall would hurt Americans most and supports the idea that anyone who honestly makes money and wants to walk across the border should be able to do so without government regulations getting in the way.

Which, for the record, is the exact opposite of what you propose.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=geI2ZGiTDAQ

Starts about 4:28

I think you are trying too hard to make it fit your way of thinking. Resources = Soldier are paid. Why should they be paid to defend borders abroad when they can be in their own country?

Trump is also chipping away at the welfare (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-welfare/trump-push-to-scale-back-welfare-programs-has-republicans-on-edge-idUSKBN1ET1AG)--which is the part of the incentives for these people to come here.

[juleswin]

This belongs here, Hail trump the peacemaker


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SC4xMk98Pdc

Give all credit to Trump and very little to the actual people on the ground in both Koreans trying trick the orange buffoon into falling for a real peace plan. Now watch Trump and his war cabinet try their very best to derail the very Korean peace plan.

I hope Trump and his people fails hard and the Koreans make up. Btw, this is the part that annoys me about some Americans, these people go about thinking the world revolves around them and their nosy presidents. The Koreans just worked out a peace plan, well give Trump the Nobel prize cos that just makes all the sense in the world :rolleyes:

[euphemia]

In what way did Dr. Ron Paul have anything to do with this? He advocated for peaceful negotiation, but I have not heard a single positive syllable from him regarding Donald Trump.

Dr. Ron's silence on this is disappointing. When Trump does something right libertarians turn into hypocrites.

[kcchiefs6465]

In what way did Dr. Ron Paul have anything to do with this? He advocated for peaceful negotiation, but I have not heard a single positive syllable from him regarding Donald Trump.

Dr. Ron's silence on this is disappointing. When Trump does something right libertarians turn into hypocrites.
To be fair, after so many years it is hard not to be pessimistic.

Cheers to peace. And if South Korea wants to credit Trump, well, that's good enough for me.

Especially considering my signature, you could color me surprised. God bless Donald Trump for helping to end the Armistice.

(Now if he could quit bombing the 10 or so odd countries he is bombing, one might give him more slack.)

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Are you sure that Bolton wants you supporting peace on the Korean peninsula?

Might want to double check this week's marching orders.

LOL. Is that all you got, you prostitute? I make better posts than you and I don't even get paid. Maybe I should call your payroll manager!

[euphemia]

To be fair, after so many years it is hard not to be pessimistic.

Cheers to peace. And if South Korea wants to credit Trump, well, that's good enough for me.

Especially considering my signature, you could color me surprised. God bless Donald Trump for helping to end the Armistice.

(Now if he could quit bombing the 10 or so odd countries he is bombing, one might give him more slack.)

People who believe in peaceful negotiation should be applauding this move. Trump is not trying to take credit. Nobody thought it could be done. Obama sure never did it. Neither of the Bushes did it. Clinton never did it. The last president who brought mortal enemies to the table was Carter.

If this is the kind of foreign policy we want, we need to be all over this with our senators and congresspeople. We have to be consistent.

[euphemia]

PS, I think Trump will eventually stop the rest of the wars we're involved in. He sees no sense in it, and you notice all the military who surrounded him during the first year of his administration are quietly moving on.

[Anti Globalist]

Ron Paul should definitely give Trump credit for this. Paul's a great guy, but he's no George Washington 2.0 like Trump. I don't know if reincarnations exist, but I wouldn't be surprised if Trump is George Washington reincarnated.

[TheCount]

LOL. Is that all you got, you prostitute? I make better posts than you and I don't even get paid. Maybe I should call your payroll manager!
Bolton doesn't pay you? Is guaranteed government employment part of the deal or is it just to ingratiate yourself?

[r3volution 3.0]

PS, I think Trump will eventually stop the rest of the wars we're involved in.

He advocated for war with Libya (on exactly the same grounds as people were calling for war with Syria: humanitarian intervention), at the same time that he was allegedly opposed to the Iraq war (after having been in favor of it initially). He clearly has no convictions with regard to foreign policy, and his instincts are belligerent (if tinged with simple-minded nationalism; "take the oil to pay for it" etc).


you notice all the military who surrounded him during the first year of his administration are quietly moving on.

You might notice that he just appointed neocon warmongers John Bolton and Mike Pompeo to the top ranks of the national security team, is about to pull out of the peace agreement with Iran, and is currently coordinating with Israel in a propaganda campaign which looks an awful lot like the contrived build-up to the Iraq war in 2002-2003.

There will be US soldiers in Tehran before there aren't US soldiers in Kabul.

[euphemia]

I guess we'll see. I've been wrong before.

[Raginfridus]

In what way did Dr. Ron Paul have anything to do with this? He advocated for peaceful negotiation, but I have not heard a single positive syllable from him regarding Donald Trump.

Dr. Ron's silence on this is disappointing. When Trump does something right libertarians turn into hypocrites.He's said positive things about the administration in the past, only to need to retract. There's still no rush here, not while our troops remain, before the President and Un have actually dealt with each other.

[H_H]

(Now if he could quit bombing the 10 or so odd countries he is bombing, one might give him more slack.)

Very, Very TRUE.

[shakey1]

Will need to wait to see how things shake out... & hope for the best.

[r3volution 3.0]

This belongs here, Hail trump the peacemaker


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SC4xMk98Pdc

Give all credit to Trump and very little to the actual people on the ground in both Koreans trying trick the orange buffoon into falling for a real peace plan. Now watch Trump and his war cabinet try their very best to derail the very Korean peace plan.

I hope Trump and his people fails hard and the Koreans make up. Btw, this is the part that annoys me about some Americans, these people go about thinking the world revolves around them and their nosy presidents. The Koreans just worked out a peace plan, well give Trump the Nobel prize cos that just makes all the sense in the world :rolleyes:

Well said

People forget that back when Trump was having his twitter-fit with "rocket man," Seoul was already negotiating and told him to back off. Maybe Trump gets credit for being inept/erratic enough to accidentally stifle efforts by the US foreign policy establishment to undercut a Korean peace made by Koreans, which they really don't want (they want to stay in the South much more than they care about what the North does).

[euphemia]

It's Trump's style. Straight out of his book.

[jmdrake]

In what way did Dr. Ron Paul have anything to do with this? He advocated for peaceful negotiation, but I have not heard a single positive syllable from him regarding Donald Trump.

Dr. Ron's silence on this is disappointing. When Trump does something right libertarians turn into hypocrites.

Not true at all.

Ron Paul from December of last year. I would be an envoy to Korea if Trump asked me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDY3ZtvJPIg

Ron Paul. Trump is trying to stop a global collapse. Cutting taxes and regulations is good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYJR-_ZxOao

Ron Paul. The entire Russia narrative is false. How did we allow a guy like Muller to get in charge?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPc_lp88AoI

That said, I'm still waiting for Alex Jones to take Trump to task for face scanning cameras by executive order and trying to ban bumpfire stocks by executive order.

[r3volution 3.0]

I'm still waiting for Alex Jones to take Trump to task for face scanning cameras by executive order and trying to ban bumpfire stocks by executive order.

https://memecrunch.com/meme/BHAS5/still-waiting/image.jpg?w=400&c=1

[Galileo Galilei]

TRUMP TELLS SEN. RAND PAUL HE’S KEEPING PROMISE ON AFGHANISTAN

https://greatamericanpolitics.com/2018/05/trump-tells-sen-rand-paul-hes-keeping-promise-afghanistan/

[Swordsmyth]

South Korea said on Wednesday the issue of U.S. troops stationed in the South is unrelated to any future peace treaty with North Korea and that American forces should stay even if such an agreement is signed.

"U.S. troops stationed in South Korea are an issue regarding the alliance between South Korea and the United States. It has nothing to do with signing peace treaties," said Kim Eui-kyeom, a spokesman for the presidential Blue House, citing President Moon Jae-in.
The Blue House was responding to media questions about a column written by South Korean presidential adviser and academic Moon Chung-in that was published earlier this week.
Moon Chung-in said it would be difficult to justify the presence of U.S. forces in South Korea if a peace treaty was signed after the two Koreas agreed at an historic summit last week to put an end to the Korean conflict.

More at: https://www.yahoo.com/news/south-korea-says-wants-u-troops-stay-regardless-065208505.html

[thoughtomator]

Because nothing says 'triumph of freedom' like a standing army of soldiers guarding the borders of this country.

https://i.imgur.com/OGN9Ov0.jpg

Act now and get a free helicopter ride!

[kcchiefs6465]

https://i.imgur.com/OGN9Ov0.jpg

Act now and get a free helicopter ride!
Compelling graphic. I will remember it the next time I drive through a hut huddled cadre of wannabe Marines at the Constitution Free Zone checkpoint.

Liberty will prevail when instead of wannabe Marines, they're actual Marines!

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Bolton doesn't pay you? Is guaranteed government employment part of the deal or is it just to ingratiate yourself?



Lame trolling technique straight from the Open Society Foundation's (https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/grants)playbook (your employer):

4.2. If caught paid trolling, then pretend like the person who caught you is the actual troll.



Look here, Count Lazy. You're either going to have to step it up, or you'll be demoted back to salting fries!

[Swordsmyth]

Lame trolling technique straight from the Open Society Foundation's (https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/grants)playbook (your employer):

4.2. If caught paid trolling, then pretend like the person who caught you is the actual troll.



Look here, Count Lazy. You're either going to have to step it up, or you'll be demoted back to salting fries!

It's not his fault really, trolling is just a side gig, he is too busy being a field agent to be very good at it.
But his "vacation" in the middle east has gone quite well, Trump's plans to leave Syria have been delayed indefinitely, Israel is almost openly at war with Iran and chaos in general is on the rise.

[TheCount]

Lame trolling technique straight from the Open Society Foundation's (https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/grants)playbook (your employer):

4.2. If caught paid trolling, then pretend like the person who caught you is the actual troll.

I have found a member who is following this playbook. Check out this damning evidence:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?521808-Triumph-of-Ron-Rand-and-Trump-in-North-Korea&p=6623591&viewfull=1#post6623591

[Swordsmyth]

President Donald Trump has ordered the Pentagon to prepare options for reducing the number of U.S. troops in South Korea, the New York Times reported on Thursday, citing several people briefed on the deliberations.Reduced U.S. troop levels are not intended to be a bargaining chip in Trump's planned summit in late May or early June with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un about Pyongyang's nuclear weapons program, the Times said.
The officials said, however, that a peace treaty between the two Koreas could diminish the need for the 23,500 U.S. soldiers currently stationed on the peninsula, the newspaper said.
A full withdrawal of U.S. troops was unlikely, the officials said, according to the paper.


Trump has said the United States should consider reducing the number of troops in South Korea unless South Korea shoulders more of the cost.
Then-CIA Director Mike Pompeo, before taking office as U.S. secretary of state, met Kim last month and reported the North Korean leader was not demanding the withdrawal of all U.S. forces as a precondition for a summit with Trump.

More at: https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-orders-pentagon-consider-reducing-u-troops-south-020322087.html

[dannno]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Fb2infH3PE