How much of a screw up does an American have to be when North Korea doesn't even want to retain you for their benefit? I mean seriously, is he the only person to ever get expelled from North Korea? Maybe they thought the dude was Dennis Rodman but didn't want to keep him when the found out he couldn't play basketball.
"Earlier Wednesday, North Korean state media KCNA reported that the secretive state had decided “to expel” King, who entered its territory during a tour of the Joint Security Area (JSA) between North and South Korea in July."
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/27/asia/nort...index.html
North Korean leadership perceived that they would not gain anything from him as a hostage, nor would they gain anything by killing him.
Why did they make that calculation? They certainly made a different calculation with Otto Warmbier. I don't know. They are opaque and dishonest. There is nothing to say about it. A bad politician would speculate that this has something to do with Biden's weakness (or strength) or whatever they want it to be. But North Korea's decisions reflect on North Korea only.
(09-29-2023, 09:52 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]North Korean leadership perceived that they would not gain anything from him as a hostage, nor would they gain anything by killing him.
Why did they make that calculation? They certainly made a different calculation with Otto Warmbier. I don't know. They are opaque and dishonest. There is nothing to say about it. A bad politician would speculate that this has something to do with Biden's weakness (or strength) or whatever they want it to be. But North Korea's decisions reflect on North Korea only.
Probably because here we make everything about race, so if they're perceived as not killing/torturing a POC, then they hope that reflects kindly based on the values that seem most important to us.
Travis was enlisted in the army, maybe that mattered to them.
The North Koreans thought Otto had insulted the Leader by stealing a Communist Party poster. Maybe that's why they apparently beat him to death.
Travis is lucky. Otto was not lucky. I hope we didn't offer anything to get Travis back.
(09-29-2023, 11:16 AM)KingIngram052787 Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2023, 09:52 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]North Korean leadership perceived that they would not gain anything from him as a hostage, nor would they gain anything by killing him.
Why did they make that calculation? They certainly made a different calculation with Otto Warmbier. I don't know. They are opaque and dishonest. There is nothing to say about it. A bad politician would speculate that this has something to do with Biden's weakness (or strength) or whatever they want it to be. But North Korea's decisions reflect on North Korea only.
Probably because here we make everything about race, so if they're perceived as not killing/torturing a POC, then they hope that reflects kindly based on the values that seem most important to us.
They obviously didn't take the Russian method to heart. They exchanged an anthem-kneeling black lesbian for a king's ransom because they knew those attributes are what is most valued by this administration. We know this because they left Paul Whelan to rot.
And what did his genuflection to Putin's demands get us? Another U.S. hostage taken in Evan Gershkovich.
The ENTIRE world sees the Biden administration as total pushovers. Especially when it comes to catering to racial and sexual minorities.
(09-29-2023, 11:41 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2023, 11:16 AM)KingIngram052787 Wrote: [ -> ]Probably because here we make everything about race, so if they're perceived as not killing/torturing a POC, then they hope that reflects kindly based on the values that seem most important to us.
They obviously didn't take the Russian method to heart. They exchanged an anthem-kneeling black lesbian for a king's ransom because they knew those attributes are what is most valued by this administration. We know this because they left Paul Whelan to rot.
And what did his genuflection to Putin's demands get us? Another U.S. hostage taken in Evan Gershkovich.
The ENTIRE world sees the Biden administration as total pushovers. Especially when it comes to catering to racial and sexual minorities.
Your interpretation is far from the simplest or most obvious. Defense consultants and journalists pose much more of a threat to a guy like Putin than basketball players, regardless of race or sexuality.
We know they negotiated over Whelan, and the negotiation didn't work out.
Takes two to tango.
One interpretation is Biden wanted Griner more, for the reasons you list.
Another interpretation is Putin valued Whelan more, and his price was more than any reasonable US President would ever pay.
Insisting on your interpretation is literally blaming America first. You're in the blame America first crowd. That's not good.
(09-29-2023, 11:57 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2023, 11:41 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]They obviously didn't take the Russian method to heart. They exchanged an anthem-kneeling black lesbian for a king's ransom because they knew those attributes are what is most valued by this administration. We know this because they left Paul Whelan to rot.
And what did his genuflection to Putin's demands get us? Another U.S. hostage taken in Evan Gershkovich.
The ENTIRE world sees the Biden administration as total pushovers. Especially when it comes to catering to racial and sexual minorities.
Your interpretation is far from the simplest or most obvious. Defense consultants and journalists pose much more of a threat to a guy like Putin than basketball players, regardless of race or sexuality.
We know they negotiated over Whelan, and the negotiation didn't work out.
Takes two to tango.
One interpretation is Biden wanted Griner more, for the reasons you list.
Another interpretation is Putin valued Whelan more, and his price was more than any reasonable US President would ever pay.
Insisting on your interpretation is literally blaming America first. You're in the blame America first crowd. That's not good.
Yes, there is more than one interpretation, and you took Putin's side. That's not good.
(09-29-2023, 12:12 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2023, 11:57 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Your interpretation is far from the simplest or most obvious. Defense consultants and journalists pose much more of a threat to a guy like Putin than basketball players, regardless of race or sexuality.
We know they negotiated over Whelan, and the negotiation didn't work out.
Takes two to tango.
One interpretation is Biden wanted Griner more, for the reasons you list.
Another interpretation is Putin valued Whelan more, and his price was more than any reasonable US President would ever pay.
Insisting on your interpretation is literally blaming America first. You're in the blame America first crowd. That's not good.
Yes, there is more than one interpretation, and you took Putin's side. That's not good.
Putin's side is that Paul Whelan is an international criminal and funder of death and destruction. I don't believe that. As for what Putin wants in exchange for Whelan, has he said? I don't know what he wants so how could I agree with it?
(09-29-2023, 12:35 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2023, 12:12 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, there is more than one interpretation, and you took Putin's side. That's not good.
Putin's side is that Paul Whelan is an international criminal and funder of death and destruction. I don't believe that. As for what Putin wants in exchange for Whelan, has he said? I don't know what he wants so how could I agree with it?
Funder of death and destruction? I remember espionage charges but not that. However, the person we gave them in exchange is a proven funder and provider of death and destruction. Perhaps you're getting those two confused?
Regardless, everyone knew what Putin wanted, and that was the release of Viktor Bout. Putin also knew Biden's handlers were more concerned with the release of Griner than Whelan because springing a white guy instead of a black lesbian would have detrimental effects on his approval number (not that it helped, as we know now).
So, in review, not only do you feign ignorance of Putin's wishes, but abet his goals by your very act of dissemblance. Why do you want to support Putin? And even more importantly, why do you support the release of
proven purveyor of death and destruction so he can implement more carnage?
(09-29-2023, 12:52 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2023, 12:35 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Putin's side is that Paul Whelan is an international criminal and funder of death and destruction. I don't believe that. As for what Putin wants in exchange for Whelan, has he said? I don't know what he wants so how could I agree with it?
Funder of death and destruction? I remember espionage charges but not that. However, the person we gave them in exchange is a proven funder and provider of death and destruction. Perhaps you're getting those two confused?
Regardless, everyone knew what Putin wanted, and that was the release of Viktor Bout. Putin also knew Biden's handlers were more concerned with the release of Griner than Whelan because springing a white guy instead of a black lesbian would have detrimental effects on his approval number (not that it helped, as we know now).
So, in review, not only do you feign ignorance of Putin's wishes, but abet his goals by your very act of dissemblance. Why do you want to support Putin? And even more importantly, why do you support the release of proven purveyor of death and destruction so he can implement more carnage?
There is so much more that Putin wants besides Viktor Bout. Half of Russia's reserves of foreign currencies are frozen. Your confidence in your own understanding counts for nothing when your understanding is wrong.
(09-29-2023, 01:36 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2023, 12:52 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Funder of death and destruction? I remember espionage charges but not that. However, the person we gave them in exchange is a proven funder and provider of death and destruction. Perhaps you're getting those two confused?
Regardless, everyone knew what Putin wanted, and that was the release of Viktor Bout. Putin also knew Biden's handlers were more concerned with the release of Griner than Whelan because springing a white guy instead of a black lesbian would have detrimental effects on his approval number (not that it helped, as we know now).
So, in review, not only do you feign ignorance of Putin's wishes, but abet his goals by your very act of dissemblance. Why do you want to support Putin? And even more importantly, why do you support the release of proven purveyor of death and destruction so he can implement more carnage?
There is so much more that Putin wants besides Viktor Bout. Half of Russia's reserves of foreign currencies are frozen. Your confidence in your own understanding counts for nothing when your understanding is wrong.
Correct. There is so much more Putin wants, but in the case of this exchange, he wanted Bout on the cheap and knew he could leverage Biden’s ideological allegiances to get it - and he did.
He didn’t have to give up a valuable political hostage who had been imprisoned for much longer than Griner, he only had to surrender a cheap social icon.
Biden and America - 0
Putin and Mikesez - 1
(09-29-2023, 01:48 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2023, 01:36 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]There is so much more that Putin wants besides Viktor Bout. Half of Russia's reserves of foreign currencies are frozen. Your confidence in your own understanding counts for nothing when your understanding is wrong.
Correct. There is so much more Putin wants, but in the case of this exchange, he wanted Bout on the cheap and knew he could leverage Biden’s ideological allegiances to get it - and he did.
He didn’t have to give up a valuable political hostage who had been imprisoned for much longer than Griner, he only had to surrender a cheap social icon.
Biden and America - 0
Putin and Mikesez - 1
Again, I'm not on Putin's side. I'm on the side of "we don't know whom to blame for Whelan still being in prison." Could be Bidens fault, could be Putin's fault. You're on the side of certainty that it's Biden's fault. If either of our opinions are a "win" for Putin, it's yours.
(09-29-2023, 02:47 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2023, 01:48 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Correct. There is so much more Putin wants, but in the case of this exchange, he wanted Bout on the cheap and knew he could leverage Biden’s ideological allegiances to get it - and he did.
He didn’t have to give up a valuable political hostage who had been imprisoned for much longer than Griner, he only had to surrender a cheap social icon.
Biden and America - 0
Putin and Mikesez - 1
Again, I'm not on Putin's side. I'm on the side of "we don't know whom to blame for Whelan still being in prison." Could be Bidens fault, could be Putin's fault. You're on the side of certainty that it's Biden's fault. If either of our opinions are a "win" for Putin, it's yours.
Of course we know why Whelan is still rotting in a Russian prison. Viktor Bout was a highly prized negotiating pawn and Biden squandered it for political points. Plain and simple. No one with any sense even argues that.
It's okay, sometimes we have to take one for the team and I'm sure any Biden supporters reading this (if there are any left) appreciate your efforts.
(09-29-2023, 06:07 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2023, 02:47 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Again, I'm not on Putin's side. I'm on the side of "we don't know whom to blame for Whelan still being in prison." Could be Bidens fault, could be Putin's fault. You're on the side of certainty that it's Biden's fault. If either of our opinions are a "win" for Putin, it's yours.
Of course we know why Whelan is still rotting in a Russian prison. Viktor Bout was a highly prized negotiating pawn and Biden squandered it for political points. Plain and simple. No one with any sense even argues that.
It's okay, sometimes we have to take one for the team and I'm sure any Biden supporters reading this (if there are any left) appreciate your efforts.
You haven't explained why he's still in prison. What does Putin think he can get for him? How would you have played this differently?
(09-29-2023, 10:46 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2023, 06:07 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Of course we know why Whelan is still rotting in a Russian prison. Viktor Bout was a highly prized negotiating pawn and Biden squandered it for political points. Plain and simple. No one with any sense even argues that.
It's okay, sometimes we have to take one for the team and I'm sure any Biden supporters reading this (if there are any left) appreciate your efforts.
You haven't explained why he's still in prison. What does Putin think he can get for him? How would you have played this differently?
You're running in circles. I explained he's still in prison because Biden took the shiny bait for political reasons rather than negotiate moderately hard for Whelan. Or did you mean why he was in prison in the first place? Does it matter? We're dealing with the Russians here. You can be assured they are lying, or exaggerating, about the charges. Regardless, he's a U.S. citizen.
We had Viktor Bout, who could have been traded for both Griner and Whelan. But instead of playing hardball, the Biden handlers took Griner only because she was the grand shiny prize in a U.S. landscape that was in the middle of a social and gender identity maelstrom, and Putin knew it. That's exactly why they arrested her. She ticked off all the boxes of leftist social and political passions.
Try to wrap your head around the fact that a U.S. citizen is still languishing in a Russian prison because his government left him there in order to achieve a political victory for a particular constituency, because that is exactly what happened.
(09-30-2023, 08:51 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2023, 10:46 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]You haven't explained why he's still in prison. What does Putin think he can get for him? How would you have played this differently?
You're running in circles. I explained he's still in prison because Biden took the shiny bait for political reasons rather than negotiate moderately hard for Whelan. Or did you mean why he was in prison in the first place? Does it matter? We're dealing with the Russians here. You can be assured they are lying, or exaggerating, about the charges. Regardless, he's a U.S. citizen.
We had Viktor Bout, who could have been traded for both Griner and Whelan. But instead of playing hardball, the Biden handlers took Griner only because she was the grand shiny prize in a U.S. landscape that was in the middle of a social and gender identity maelstrom, and Putin knew it. That's exactly why they arrested her. She ticked off all the boxes of leftist social and political passions.
Try to wrap your head around the fact that a U.S. citizen is still languishing in a Russian prison because his government left him there in order to achieve a political victory for a particular constituency, because that is exactly what happened.
Your reasoning is circular, not mine. The men imprisoning Whelan answer to Putin, not Biden. You admit that Putin exagerrates and lies. Yet you are sure that Biden had a clear path to getting Whelan freed. Where does your confidence come from? Did Putin tell you what he wants? He didn't tell me. Separately, should Griner still be in Russian prison?
(09-30-2023, 10:11 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2023, 08:51 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]You're running in circles. I explained he's still in prison because Biden took the shiny bait for political reasons rather than negotiate moderately hard for Whelan. Or did you mean why he was in prison in the first place? Does it matter? We're dealing with the Russians here. You can be assured they are lying, or exaggerating, about the charges. Regardless, he's a U.S. citizen.
We had Viktor Bout, who could have been traded for both Griner and Whelan. But instead of playing hardball, the Biden handlers took Griner only because she was the grand shiny prize in a U.S. landscape that was in the middle of a social and gender identity maelstrom, and Putin knew it. That's exactly why they arrested her. She ticked off all the boxes of leftist social and political passions.
Try to wrap your head around the fact that a U.S. citizen is still languishing in a Russian prison because his government left him there in order to achieve a political victory for a particular constituency, because that is exactly what happened.
Your reasoning is circular, not mine. The men imprisoning Whelan answer to Putin, not Biden. You admit that Putin exagerrates and lies. Yet you are sure that Biden had a clear path to getting Whelan freed. Where does your confidence come from? Should Griner still be in Russian prison?
You're parsing the argument in order to find wiggle room. But that's neither here nor there. The premise of the entire argument is we had someone the Russians wanted badly, and we gave him up for a cheap political consolation prize.
Should Griner still be in prison? If we had earnestly negotiated with the Russians, the answer is yes if they weren't willing to give us Whelan and Griner. Whelan should have been first in queue to be repatriated and we had the negotiating piece to do it. Now we don't and probably never will again until Whelan serves out his sentence.
I don't know why you are so hell bent on defending Biden's obvious faux pas. It's really puzzling.
(09-30-2023, 10:30 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2023, 10:11 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Your reasoning is circular, not mine. The men imprisoning Whelan answer to Putin, not Biden. You admit that Putin exagerrates and lies. Yet you are sure that Biden had a clear path to getting Whelan freed. Where does your confidence come from? Should Griner still be in Russian prison?
You're parsing the argument in order to find wiggle room. But that's neither here nor there. The premise of the entire argument is we had someone the Russians wanted badly, and we gave him up for a cheap political consolation prize.
Should Griner still be in prison? If we had earnestly negotiated with the Russians, the answer is yes if they weren't willing to give us Whelan and Griner. Whelan should have been first in queue to be repatriated and we had the negotiating piece to do it. Now we don't and probably never will again until Whelan serves out his sentence.
I don't know why you are so hell bent on defending Biden's obvious faux pas. It's really puzzling.
You assert without evidence that Whelan should have been "first in line". On what basis do you make this judgement? Russia decided Griner should be first in line. Suppose you are the negotiator. Do you leave them both in prison until Russia agrees with you that Whelan should be freed first?
(09-30-2023, 01:47 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2023, 10:30 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]You're parsing the argument in order to find wiggle room. But that's neither here nor there. The premise of the entire argument is we had someone the Russians wanted badly, and we gave him up for a cheap political consolation prize.
Should Griner still be in prison? If we had earnestly negotiated with the Russians, the answer is yes if they weren't willing to give us Whelan and Griner. Whelan should have been first in queue to be repatriated and we had the negotiating piece to do it. Now we don't and probably never will again until Whelan serves out his sentence.
I don't know why you are so hell bent on defending Biden's obvious faux pas. It's really puzzling.
You assert without evidence that Whelan should have been "first in line". On what basis do you make this judgement? Russia decided Griner should be first in line. Suppose you are the negotiator. Do you leave them both in prison until Russia agrees with you that Whelan should be freed first?
I see now my answer was not clear. Whelan should have been the negotiating prize. If the release of only one person was all that Russia would negotiate, it would be Whelan. However, considering the value of Bout, getting both released for Bout in exchange was achievable. But only if Biden's handlers were willing to play hardball, and they were not. Freeing the black lesbian was essential to their cause and the Russians knew it and capitalized on it. Why do you think they imprisoned her in the first place?
If someone is considered first in line, what does that typically indicate?
If you're negotiating, do you allow the other side to set all of the conditions?
Come on, Mike, you can do this. I know you can.
(09-30-2023, 03:46 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2023, 01:47 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]You assert without evidence that Whelan should have been "first in line". On what basis do you make this judgement? Russia decided Griner should be first in line. Suppose you are the negotiator. Do you leave them both in prison until Russia agrees with you that Whelan should be freed first?
I see now my answer was not clear. Whelan should have been the negotiating prize. If the release of only one person was all that Russia would negotiate, it would be Whelan. However, considering the value of Bout, getting both released for Bout in exchange was achievable. But only if Biden's handlers were willing to play hardball, and they were not. Freeing the black lesbian was essential to their cause and the Russians knew it and capitalized on it. Why do you think they imprisoned her in the first place?
If someone is considered first in line, what does that typically indicate?
If you're negotiating, do you allow the other side to set all of the conditions?
Come on, Mike, you can do this. I know you can.
Why is Whelan first in line?
Suppose Russia was holding 10 American petroleum workers with no connection to national defense or government. Russia just accuses them of jaywalking and holds them. They are various races, all men, not gay.
Is Whelan still "first in line" over all 10 them? Why?