Pinned post
I totally reject this narrative that DJT is somehow weakened by congressional election results and will therefore approach KJU from a position of desperation.
Excuse me, but WHAT? π€£
Didn't y'all get the memo? Americans elect Congress and the president SEPARATELY!
DJT remains our POTUS through January 2029, and he continues to direct all American foreign policy. π€΄πΊπΈ
And BTW, what exactly is a "show summit"? What a completely ridiculous characterization.
Since when did diplomacy become worthless unless both sides arrive with a predetermined agreement?
SMH. π
Engagement is not capitulation. Dialogue is not a concession. And sitting across the table from others we are not in alignment with is not a sign of weakness.
You don't engage only with people you agree with. You engage precisely BECAUSE disagreements exist!
DJT demonstrated at Hanoi that he was perfectly willing to walk away rather than accept an agreement he considered inadequate.
I consider that a WIN. π
As someone who believes deeply in engagement with the DPRK, I reject this absurd notion that every diplomatic encounter must produce an immediate breakthrough to justify its existence.
Sometimes the first achievement is simply reopening the door. Sometimes it's establishing trust, testing intentions, or creating opportunities that didn't exist yesterday.
Diplomacy is a process, not a photo-op or a predetermined outcome.
And if we refuse to engage with others until they agree with us, we've fundamentally misunderstood the entire purpose of diplomacy.
That's not weakness.
That's American diplomacy. πΊπΈπ°π· share.google/0ZeCrldoki1gi8β¦
Excuse me, but WHAT? π€£
Didn't y'all get the memo? Americans elect Congress and the president SEPARATELY!
DJT remains our POTUS through January 2029, and he continues to direct all American foreign policy. π€΄πΊπΈ
And BTW, what exactly is a "show summit"? What a completely ridiculous characterization.
Since when did diplomacy become worthless unless both sides arrive with a predetermined agreement?
SMH. π
Engagement is not capitulation. Dialogue is not a concession. And sitting across the table from others we are not in alignment with is not a sign of weakness.
You don't engage only with people you agree with. You engage precisely BECAUSE disagreements exist!
DJT demonstrated at Hanoi that he was perfectly willing to walk away rather than accept an agreement he considered inadequate.
I consider that a WIN. π
As someone who believes deeply in engagement with the DPRK, I reject this absurd notion that every diplomatic encounter must produce an immediate breakthrough to justify its existence.
Sometimes the first achievement is simply reopening the door. Sometimes it's establishing trust, testing intentions, or creating opportunities that didn't exist yesterday.
Diplomacy is a process, not a photo-op or a predetermined outcome.
And if we refuse to engage with others until they agree with us, we've fundamentally misunderstood the entire purpose of diplomacy.
That's not weakness.
That's American diplomacy. πΊπΈπ°π· share.google/0ZeCrldoki1gi8β¦