Trump Cancels Singapore Summit With North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un (cnbc.com) 504
President Donald Trump has cancelled his much anticipated meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un that was scheduled to take place in Singapore on June 12, he announced moments ago. In a letter to Kim, the president said; "I was very much looking forward to being there with you. Sadly, based on the tremendous anger an open hostility displayed in your most recent statement, I feel it is inappropriate, at this time to have this long-planned meeting. Therefore, please let this letter to serve to represent that the Singapore summit, for the good of both parties, but to the detriment of the world, will not take place." He added, "You talk about your nuclear capabilities, but ours are so massive and powerful that I pray to God they will never have to be used."
Just as scott adams predicted: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's in trumps style of negotiation. He's always going to go for the BEST deal that he can get, and this is not at all out of the ordinary for Trump.
Back when it was first announced, Scott adams almost immediately said "expect one of them, probably trump, to walk away at least once before any actual negotiations take place".
Fun to see these types of negotiating dynamics playing out on the world stage.
Re:Just as scott adams predicted: (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If Un gets overthrown, in my opinion it won't be because he screwed up negotiations with the U.S. His military is just as demented and believing in fictions as he (so I guess Trump and Kim are even on that score). I think if Un gets overthrown it will be because his military decide they have more fear of him sawing off their heads than they have of the U.S. attacking. They know they have S. Korea as hostage, and regardless of any negotiations that happen or fail to happen, they won't be giving that up for s
Re:Just as scott adams predicted: (Score:5, Insightful)
It's in trumps style of negotiation. He's always going to go for the BEST deal that he can get, and this is not at all out of the ordinary for Trump.
Back when it was first announced, Scott adams almost immediately said "expect one of them, probably trump, to walk away at least once before any actual negotiations take place".
Fun to see these types of negotiating dynamics playing out on the world stage.
Did Adams also predict that Trump's newly chosen underling would "accidentally" scuttle the negotiations [washingtonpost.com]? (Causing Trump a loss of face in the process)
Trump isn't the one calling the shots here, the South Koreans arranged the summit they had zero expectation of succeeding because they didn't want Trump to start a war instead, and North Korea agreed to the summit because they wanted the photo op with the US President and all the flowery praise that Trump has been giving them the past few weeks (plus sanction relief if they could weasel it).
But Bolton wanted the summit to go away because North Korea is a country, and he likes invading countries. And so the summit that would never accomplish anything is at least temporarily dead and the really unlikely stupid war is slightly more likely and still just as stupid.
Scott Adams is a partisan hack (Score:5, Insightful)
Coincidentally, remember when Dilbert was last funny? It was a fair bit before the 2016 elections. Now it's just Mallard Fillmore in an office; often forgetting the punch lines as well.
Re: (Score:3)
Had the meeting gone as scheduled, he would have said it was brilliant and just as Trump had planned. Adams worships the ground that Trump walks upon and has convinced himself that all democrats are demon scum. Trump is incapable of doing any wrong in Adams' eyes.
And Adams revealed why in his latest book. He spent the first 3/4's of it trying to explain logically why Trump was using good 'persuasion' techniques (also know as sales tricks) to win the presidency, then near the end lets loose a tirade against Hillary for wanting to tax the richest of the rich (the over $5M bracket) an inheritance tax which like Trump goes off the script. Adams is the classic greedy rich white guy story. I earned lots of money so I deserve to keep it all to myself and not pay tax even t
Re: (Score:3)
While I do not really disagree with your assessment of Adams' character, he has made some very accurate predictions, from the moment that Trump declared he was running.
To be fair, he backed Trump, then switched to Hillary, then to Johnson, then back to Trump. It's the classic gambler's move where you only remember your wins (much like Trump).
Re: (Score:2)
Childish, but that seems to be the level politics is made at today.
Re: (Score:3)
Correct. Worked for a car dealer for a couple of summers while in college, and the only negotiating tactic I saw that worked well was walking away. The car salesmen are at a huge advantage since they negotiate car sales several times a week, and they know all of the tricks. Walking away takes away all of their power.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump Derangement Syndrome is a real thing and it's going to guarantee he gets reelected.
Did Barack win re-election handily because of Obama Derangement Syndrome? It was epidemic throughout the Right & Reich wing of America for 8 years.
Re: (Score:2)
That lunacy is exactly what I mean. The comparison of Obama's opposition to that against Trump is mind-boggling. The Left was even calling Mitt Romney the next Hitler. Right after George W. Bush was Hitler. That you can't even see the damage that you've done to your own causes is astounding.
Re:Just as scott adams predicted: (Score:5, Insightful)
Romney was an up-tight and out-of-touch sellout to the rich (pretty much the same as most Republican nominees), but "the Left" never called him the next Hitler. I dare you to find any kind of meaningful consensus that shows otherwise.
Re:Just as scott adams predicted: (Score:5, Insightful)
Bill Maher comparing the Romeny campaign to the last days of Nazi Germany? http://thehill.com/video/campa... [thehill.com]
Did you even read that or watch the interview? Bill Maher is comparing the end of the republican campaign to the last days of Nazi Germany -- basically saying that they didn't realize or admit that they were going to lose until the very last days of the election. There is absolutely no comparison between Romney and Hitler in terms of personality, politics, ideals, or anything else.
Besides all that, Maher is a single comedian. He is hardly a consensus for "the Left". Try again.
Re: Just as scott adams predicted: (Score:3)
You never heard a word about Trump or racism until he started running for president.
Okay, moron; I'll bite: I remember the 'Central Park Jogger' incident and I was a fucking kid at the time.
Re:Just as scott adams predicted: (Score:5, Interesting)
What else exactly does Trump think he's going to get? The North Koreans already offered unilateral nuclear disarmament and negotiations on reunification with South Korea. That's basically everything that matters.
Spin this as him being smart all you want, but in reality it's him throwing away the best chance at peace on the Korean peninsula in history because his ego is so big that he couldn't deal with the North Koreans legitimately pointing out that telling them Kim Jong Un would end up dead like Gaddaffi isn't a smart move.
Right now the whole world sees the North Koreans having said all the right things, and made all the right moves, and the Americans saying all the stupid things, and making all the wrong moves. The fact is, even if this was just a political game or a negotiating tactic, American has already lost as it's now the country that blew it with North Korean peace talks.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Nope. That is what Trump wanted. NK has so far agreed to stop TESTING conventional physical nuclear weapons, and to destroy the site in which they have done it in the past (which multiple sources have said was already pretty destroyed to the point of uselessness anyway), so while a start, not much.
They never said they would give up their nukes. They never said they would stop their nuclear program. They never said they would stop other non-explosive nuclear testing to further refine their weapons. Allow ins
Re:Just as scott adams predicted: (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Ditto^
Classic negotiating tactic. Indeed, classic diplomacy.
Summits are held to celebrate and codify agreements made in advance, though sometimes these are general agreements, and the specifics are hammered out with staff while the principals posture and reassure each other that the deal can be done.
It does't seem much different than business negotiations, does it? And it should not.
For God's sake.. (Score:2, Troll)
All he had to do is keep his mouth shut and let South Korea do the heavy lifting... But noooooo....
Re:For God's sake.. (Score:5, Insightful)
It wasn't Trump, it was Pence and Pompeo who threatened North Korea with a Libyan outcome.
These people are neophytes on the world stage and it shows.
The Captain goes down with the ship (Score:5, Insightful)
It wasn't Trump, it was Pence and Pompeo who threatened North Korea with a Libyan outcome.
A distinction without a difference. Trump wants to play emperor then he gets to take responsibility for what happens on his watch too. Not just the bits he likes.
Re:The Captain goes down with the ship (Score:4, Interesting)
"Trump wants to play emperor then he gets to take responsibility for what happens on his watch too. Not just the bits he likes"
"The buck stops here" sign has a quite different meaning when it's on Trump's desk
#TrumpIsNotTruman
Re: (Score:2)
"Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action"
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It wasn't Trump, it was Pence and Pompeo who threatened North Korea with a Libyan outcome.
Threatened? No, predicted.
Speaking in May 21 interview on Fox News, Pence said the reclusive regime could end up like the North African country "if Kim Jong Un doesn't make a deal."
Source [cnbc.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I guess I meant Bolton. Who can keep up with the revolving door at the white house these days anyways.
> Separately, new US National Security Advisor John Bolton told Fox News that an agreement with Libya on eliminating its weapons of mass destruction programme could serve as a model for a North Korea deal.
That is an implicit threat.
Re:For God's sake.. (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it isn't - what is the Libya Model? The Lybia model isn't surround yourself with female body guards, torture your citizens, and let your kids kill your country's citizens without restraint. Libya was hell on earth, the locals brought down the government and the US helped.
But that isn't what Bolton was referring to - Libya Model is to demand absolute, verified shutdown of nuclear development, no exceptions.
THAT is the Libyan Model any sane person would understand Bolton was talking about.
Bolton was referring to the need to build trust and verify any denuclearization efforts when he brought up Libya in a CBS interview last month. He didn’t imply, publicly at least, that the “Libya model” would include regime change in North Korea.
Source [washingtonpost.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Please, look up the word implication
Re: (Score:2)
You forgot John Bolton.
Re:For God's sake.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Don't forget that John Bolton is there now, too. The White House is full of dangerous, hypocritical lunatics. It's worse than under George W. Bush, and he had mighty bad advisers.
Shutting up (Score:2)
All he had to do is keep his mouth shut and let South Korea do the heavy lifting... But noooooo....
Right because if there is one thing Trump is good at it's keeping his mouth shut.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
All he had to do is keep his mouth shut and let South Korea do the heavy lifting... But noooooo....
South Korea doing the heavy lifting? Please...
The guy in charge down south is so bent on peace at any price that he's almost just giving Kim everything, including control of South Korea. The leader of South Korea just ran a campaign on this issue and has HUGE political pressure to show results, any kind of results. They are in no mood to lift anything, heavy or not over there.
Kim is really the one who's responsible for this. Kim has been ratcheting up the rhetoric. He's been saying stupid stuff about
Re: (Score:2)
Kim is really the one who's responsible for this. Kim has been ratcheting up the rhetoric. He's been saying stupid stuff about Trump, Pompano and Pence even. I personally think that Kim is afraid of a revolt if he is out of the country for too long with any advance warning
There are people in North Korea who don't want to end the war. These are the people who have believed the propaganda (that N Korea is powerful enough to fight against the US and win, that N Koreans are 'pure', etc. If those are your beliefs, then negotiating is illogical).
Kim has to balance all the various factions in his government. To me, he seems to want peace. He's been outside the country, he knows how it is. He knows things can be a lot better, but not everyone in North Korea agrees. In the past vi
Re: (Score:2)
I am confused by your statement. Kim had bellicose language for the annual military drills that were explicitly stated would continue until a deal was reached just as the sanctions would stay in place. There was some concessions by removing the B-52 bombers (nuclear capable) from the exercise but the language continued. Kim started insulting South Korea as weak. And your response is "let South Korea do the heavy lifting" after Kim called them weak and ineffective? Do you really think any kind of peace can b
Re: (Score:2)
Why did Moon Jae-in say that Trump is the one to credit with getting Kim to agree to talks in the first place?
https://www.reuters.com/articl... [reuters.com]
Re: (Score:2)
https://qz.com/1285452/south-k... [qz.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Because he knows Trump never met a pat of butter that he couldn't spread on his ass and claim the sun was rising again?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Am I the only one who has been convinced the whole time there's nothing to fuck up in the first place? There has never been a reason for them to denuclearize under terms we'd accept. We barely did anything to cause this massive shift in Kim's stance—it was inexplicable. This has all the hallmarks of a feint
Re:For God's sake.. (Score:5, Insightful)
That's not what's going on.
Kim and his advisers came to the conclusion that Trump and his advisers were looking for an occasion for a limited war - some bombing campaign - somewhere in the world. Ideally, the campaign would take place before the mid term elections. The US military was tasked to look into either bombing some nuclear facilities in NK or bombing some nuclear facilities in Iran. Kim and his advisers came to this conclusion and quickly contacted SK to prevent this from happening, because they know very well that the NK could not possibly defend their territory at all and judge that Trump is crazy enough to not care about possible consequences for South Korea.
Moon came to the same conclusion and quickly arranged this initiative together with Kim to prevent the worst from happening. Bear in mind that NK could shell Seoul, population 10 million, plus another 10 million in the area, and even if the artillery is quickly taken care of by air superiority, the death toll would be massive. At the same time Moon is under serious pressure from the US, so he had to include the US despite the fact that Trump is considered a negative factor by both parties. (Trump is considered an annoyance and hard to deal with by essentially every politician in the world, including Moon and Kim, of course.)
Here is what's going to happen: NK and SK will continue with peace talks and friendship initiatives no matter what the US does, for at least as long as Trump is in charge. Neither of them wants war, and even the smallest military action would make an escalation almost unavoidable in the current situation.
I hope the world survives this madman . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
From a game theory point of view, a madman is the best player vs. Un, if you want to reach a productive agreement. A player that the other side does not trust to be rational, is one that can force the other side's hand.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
France and UK weren't in a position to fight a war against Germany in 1938. 1941 was estimated to be the earliest date for a reasonable chance of success, based on the rearmament that Chamberlain was pushing for.
Toddler Diplomacy (Score:3, Interesting)
The US likely cannot get everything it wants. That's not how negotiations usually work. There will have to be compromise. Same with the Iran deal. Compromise is usually better than nothing. T seems to be of the mindset: "give me ALL or I'll throw a tantrum and insult you endlessly on Twitter."
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I hope the world survives this madman . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Kim is playing him like a fiddle. Now Trump looks like the bad guy, unwilling to make concessions or pull back from his brinkmanship.
Give it a while and Kim will keep talking to the south, making progress and setting himself up as the good guy for the post-dictatorship period he knows is coming.
Re:I hope the world survives this madman . . . (Score:5, Interesting)
If we survive (and I think we have a decent chance), we might actually look on this as a positive turning point.
Europeans have, for various historical reasons, been unwilling to stand up the United States for the past 70 years. Sometimes they've tut-tutted loudly, but in general they've let the US get away with whatever they wanted. Now it's become abundantly clear that you can't give anybody a free pass that way.
During the Bush II years there was already rumbling, mostly centered around Iraq. Then Obama came, and he made the US seem sane again. Now the world's only superpower has gone completely insane.
Democracy is a great thing, but it means you can't trust any country to be consistently sane, and you need to structure your institutions and foreign policy accordingly.
Typical Trump (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You can't win if your opponent doesn't think you're willing to stick with the status quo.
Trump is cancelling this summit (Score:5, Funny)
BINGO! (Score:5, Interesting)
BINGO! I win my Donald Trump bingo.
Pulls out of Paris. Messes up with Iran. Get's his ass handed to him by Russians in Syria. NK summit fails... that completes my line across the middle.
4D Chess prize (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is. Trump now has the upper hand. Kim needs the US a lot more than the US needs him.
Re: (Score:2)
lolwut?
North Korea's biggest trade partners are China, India and Pakistan (mostly China). Sure, they'd like removal of a lot of the trade sanctions, but there's almost certainly little effort by China to enforce most of those trade sanctions.
Re: (Score:2)
It is. Trump now has the upper hand. Kim needs the US a lot more than the US needs him.
Really? What does Kim need the US for?
Re: (Score:2)
To be legitimized on the world stage. That's all Kim has ever wanted.
Re: (Score:2)
This must be part of Trumps 4D chess move to win a Nobel Peace prize.
Maybe Kim gets the peace prize because he demolished his test site and pushed for talks... the other side dropped them.
Kim for peace prize?
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:So who wrote what? (Score:4, Insightful)
So I think that he indeed added this as he did not understand that the first part already said the same thing,
I don't think so. The first phrase, as you say, is stern, calm and diplomatic. It's the 'why'. The second is not only a warning but tells Kim how we view ourselves: We fear our own power. I am not sure if Kim fears nuclear weapons the same as we do but regardless it opens the door for hope because in that fear we will work for peace. It also gives Kim a different understanding of "bigger button that works". Can he comprehend a nuclear capability to be actually afraid of using it?
Re: (Score:3)
Bad timing, typical Trump (Score:2)
Presently there is a whole slew of foreigners in North Korea to witness the demolition of the old and useless nuclear test site.
Trump should have waited till most of them were in safety, Kim is crazy enough to keep (some of) them hostage.
Cancelled for now (Score:3)
This is yet another negotiation tactic, because NK was starting to believe they could get a lot of concessions form the U.S.- Trump here is just letting NK in no way will they be able to keep nuclear weapons.
NK will fold soon ad the talks will be back on.
Why is this even here? (Score:2)
I think I've finally figured out why we're getting more and more stories like this on Slashdot. Politicizing the site is a sure way to generate more and more traffic as even long-time members get sucked into pointless, lengthy political debates. The process has been aided and abetted by commenters who seem to have come out of nowhere with multiple accounts and a willingness to abuse the "Anonymous Coward" feature.
This kind of story is money in the bank, because it is certain to foster pointless debate ove
"so massive and powerful" (Score:4, Insightful)
Here we go again with the penis wars.
It depresses me to no end that the leaders of nations act so much like petty school children.
Interesting change in the world dynamic (Score:4, Insightful)
There was once a time where America pulling out of a deal, trade talk, summit, etc was a deathspell. The world looked to America for everything. A very very interesting change has happened in the past 2 years.
America pulls out of the Paris Agreement. Rather than killing it off, it spurred the last 2 remaining countries to join. ... Except all the parties just copied and pasted all the bits not requiring the USA and the newly named CPTPP lives on.
America pulls out of the TPP, and agreement it lead and created. This killed the agreement. It can't be rattified without the USA.
America pulls out of its agreement with Iran, an agreement it was instrumental in creating. The world collectively shrugged with all parties continuing to abide by the agreement.
A lot of people are talking about how America is being laughed at, whereas the reality appears far worse than that.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
When it is important as calling out a Russian Plant, we are going to report on it.
Have a nice day, son.
Re: News for nerds (Score:5, Insightful)
The comments were pretty harsh.
Compared to the US saying that we were going to use "the Libya model"?
Re: (Score:2)
there are multiple things which are referred to as "the Libya model".
Re: News for nerds (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, including one where Gadaffi was overthrown and eventually murdered. Making threats (or just using such ridiculously clumsy language during such a critical phase of diplomacy) is pathetic. It's amateur hour in the White House apparently.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't think it's amateur hour, I think the men inside the White House want a war with North Korea. And they're doing everything in their power to get one and fuck everyone else. So how's that hope and change comin' again ?
Re: News for nerds (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: News for nerds (Score:5, Funny)
Re: News for nerds (Score:4, Interesting)
Which one?
there are multiple things which are referred to as "the Libya model".
The model where a regime voluntarily surrenders it's nuclear weapons program and other WMDs and 5 years later we sponsor a coup where its leader winds up dead. Un is a ruthless dictator, but he is not "crazy". He's a rational actor. All he has to do is look at Libya and Iraq to conclude he'd have to be suicidal to trust the US.
Re: News for nerds (Score:5, Interesting)
All he has to do is look at Libya and Iraq to conclude he'd have to be suicidal to trust the US.
We've already demonstrated that our country won't honor our President's promises longer than his term. With DJT, promises don't seem to last that long. I hear we'll see his taxes if he gets the nomination.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: News for nerds (Score:4, Insightful)
Yup exactly. There is absolutely no relation to dictatorial regime giving up their harshest weapons and a following overthrow and torture of the dictator. Just ask Gaddafi's asshole.
Kim Jong-un has every reason to immediately appease those appalled by his human rights atrocities. #Winning
Re: News for nerds (Score:5, Insightful)
The comments were pretty harsh. That sort of behavior isn't tolerated, and they are letting them know that.
You need to be far more specific considering the harsh rhetoric coming from both sides. I assume you mean the US comments were harsh, since they essentially insinuated they want Kim Jong Un deposed and killed in the streets. North Korea's responses were quite tame by comparison.
Re: (Score:2)
Pence was guilty of "saber rattling", the North Korean was guilty of "being insulting" - apples and oranges.
Re:News for nerds (Score:5, Interesting)
If the threat of imminent death due to nuclear war doesn't trigger your "things I care about" alarm, then you are a special kind of nerd. Maybe rephrasing of the headline would help:
"Trump Cancels Singapore Summit With North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un. Major ISPs In The USA At Risk Due To Nuclear Bombardment."
Does that help?
Re: (Score:2)
If your criteria for "technology news" is it possibly impacts someone that uses technology, then every store on every page of the local newspaper is a candidate for Slashdot... For instance, the 30 year-old "man-child" that refuses to move out of his parent's house [msn.com] while he fights to regain custody of HIS son.
Re: (Score:2)
I just hope that guy who claims to be from the future is just a hoax.
Because he says 2019 there will be two nuclear strikes, NC will hit Hawaii and US will hit back.
Then in 2020 there would be WWIII which will last for 3 years.
Re: (Score:2)
You realize that statement is speculative, right? Cite your conclusive sources.
Re: (Score:3)
He's talking about the seismic activity at their nuclear test site suggestive of a collapse of the site. But there's a massive difference between that and "f'ed their nuclear program". Losing a test site is not the same thing as losing your nuclear programme.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Was the KJU summit going to strip the US of it's ability to strike domestic targets?
As a reminder, it was the previous administration, who got his Nobel Peace Prize in advance of doing anything of any substance, because the members of the committee "just knew he'd do good things once in office, so why wait?", that used drone strikes to target and kill American citizens without benefit of trial. [washingtonpost.com]
there's crazy and then there's crazy. (Score:2)
But he's never kidnapped a director to from a foreign country to force them to make a monster movie. [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Neither did Kim Jong-Un...
Re: (Score:2)
He's only in his second year in office, man. Give him some time; he'll get around to it.
Re: (Score:2)
"He likes his steak well done with ketchup. He only eats fast food because otherwise he'd never have a meal that hadn't been spit in."
Cognitive Dissonance*. Is it fast food or steak? Or does he have a fast steak option I wish I had?
Full disclosure, I use A-1 Steak Sauce on most of my steaks, not the carne asada. It's essentially fancy, well spiced ketchup. SO you've caught me out, just another Trump apologist troll. Gah, I hate that.
(* - actually just trolling, but it;s way more fun to use philosophical dog
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Gina was torturing under Obama.
Your life is invalid.
And she got rewarded handsomely under Trump.
Or do you think being at the head of the CIA is some kind of punishment ?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes.
Next question?
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, it's Trump playing 36-dimensional Cosmic Brain Chess. The only problem is now my Nobel Prize bracket is all shot to hell, and those thousands of commemorative coins that Cheetolf Twitler had the Mint create are going to end up as collectors items sold on QVC.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes it is, almost verbatim.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, they way you get the best deal is to be willing to walk away from the deal if it isn't right.
Unfortunately, too many "experts" view geo-political negotiations like the famous South Park Underpants Gnomes [youtube.com]:
3. Sign Agreement
Re: (Score:2)
Or, if you ever read even a summary of Trump's book The Art of the Deal, you'd know this is negotiations 101 - you have to be willing to walk away if the deal isn't right, in order to get the best outcome.
Re:There was no reason for DPRK to participate (Score:5, Insightful)
The US never agreed to the Iran deal. And Iran never signed the deal anyway, so...
What's that in the top left corner [instagram.com] then?
And voting for UN security council resolution 2231 [un.org] was a strange way of showing that you never agreed with the deal. You can complain about the kindergarten you call congress refusing to support anything and everything Obama did all you like, at the UN, we expect you to send qualified adults that can make decisions befitting their position within your administration.
Re: (Score:2)
A signature not on the signature page? It's on the front cover. The John Kerry State Department confirmed [dailymail.co.uk] that Iran never signed the deal, two months after the meeting.
Perhaps you're not aware of US politics and our Constitution (which trumps UN law, by the way, at least in the US) which requires any foreign treaty of agreement must be submitted to and approved by the Senate to be legal. Anything else is simply the statement/position of a singular man, with no force of law behind it.
Re: (Score:2)
Slashdot is desperate for clicks. This article will end up with more comments that every other article posted today combined.
Re: (Score:3)
> If you're touting this as a failure of President Trump's
How can it be anything else when the entire world knew NK was playing him and Trump started trying to claim a Nobel?