Fair play to Trump, there is no way Hillary would have had the balls to do this.

she would have had the brains not to legitimize a dictator

This was a massive 2 fingers up to the military industrial complex. They need enemies like Kim and if one does not exist they will create one. Trump looked past the fear and paranoia they created and diffused a very dangerous situation. I say give credit where it's due.

Her 'brains' would have left her listening to the hawks as she always does and taking us ever closer to the brink of nuclear war.

Yeah that's complete bullshit. Hillary was no more aggressive than any past presidents on NK and advocated for sanctions. Trump was the one actively taunting Kim and comparing missile sizes.

It's because Trump knows the republicans are a bunch of spineless sycophants who will let him get away with anything. If Hillary did this you can bet that the republicans would have a total meltdown about how Hillary was selling out America.

Hillary was the one cheerleading for both Libya and Syria... that went well.

Because Libya and Syria are the same situation as North Korea, and put us on the brink of nuclear war. Fantastic logic there. While we're on it, why not bring up Iraq and Afghanistan? Clearly Bush also wanted to nuke NK.

Hillary is a hawk, and a spineless one at that. I don't believe for a second that Hillary would have defied the military industrial complex like Trump did to go and make peace with NK. As I said in my original post she wouldn't have the balls.

"Made peace"? A bit premature, isn't it?

Well I'd say nuclear war is off the table so that's a good start. Again, credit where it's due.

Quite a stretch. In what way is it off the table?
There might have been a tiny baby step in that direction, or not, but to claim it's a done deal is ludicrous. We don't even know how many or what kinds of nukes they have, and no plan at all on disarmament.
You give credit for unlikely future possibilities as if they're past accomplishments.

All I can hear is the sound of straws being grasped at trying to find a way that this doesn't look good for Trump. I'm hearing the same thing everywhere, what is wrong with people?

Look I'm no Trump fan (I despise Hillary but then people who start wars generally piss me off), but can't we all just admit he did a good thing? I for one hope he does more of it.

When has the American government ever cared about the type of government it will support. America will generally support ANY government as long as they play ball. Dictators included.

He took one tiny step towards a good thing, and gave up quite a lot of leverage to take that tentative step. IF it eventually leads to some binding meaningful agreement, kudos to him. It's insanely early to be patting any backs yet, though, except perhaps Kim's back, he did amazingly well for his country already.
It's not straw grasping, it's reality, there's no agreement yet, only a stated willingness to discuss one. That's only a good thing if it's successful, certainly not good if it ends with more concessions from us but nothing from NK, and I think that's what many people expect. Don't expect any kudos for Trump until the process bears tangible fruit that benefits us.

Edit: you said he made peace, but there is no peace agreement and we are still technically at war, then you said he got nuclear war off the table, but that's simply not in any way true. Who's grasping?

trump has asked for more money for the military; it was one of his campaign promises; he's conceded to the wants of China concerning NK and has gotten nothing in return

he also blew up a denuclearization agreement with Iran that was working and had defined goals and milestones

He's a mixed bag to be sure, but I still think he's less likely to start a war than Hillary.

I don't understand how you can made definitive blanket statements like that, based on the limited info we have.

All we have right now is one lying sack of shit talking to another lying sack of shit about some vague agreements.

NK has promised to denuclearize, on multiple occasions, since the early 1990s.

Please don't be naive.

Exactly. Meeting Kim is the one thing that Trump has done that on the surface looks good. There is no conclusive evidence about any real results, AFAIK Kim did not promise anything new while Trump made concessions, but Trump fans are happy because their star appears to have scored.

I say good for you, I for one hope that pronounced achievements really get accomplished, that peace will be made and US gets to invest in NK, private ownership and human rights get established, people there get to eat, and everyone will live happily ever after.

However I am not sure that China, NK, SK, Japan and Russia consider this meeting anything more than a fleeting episode in a long struggle over bits and pieces of the far east. Trumps come and go and say things.

So now he is friends with two dictators, one has personally pledged not to interfere with US elections and another has promised not to nuke the US. That would be better if those same dictators had a history of keeping their promises.

I don't get this line of argument, America has been propping up the Saudi regime since the 50's and they are the worlds leading sponsor of global terror.

America has been too reliant on the CIA to achieve it's geopolitical goals, and all they know how to do is spread fear and paranoia followed by screwing countries over with hired goons. It always ends badly. I'm just glad Trump is taking a different approach here.

that is a fair point; I remember my Dad, a diehard R, trying to justify our trade policy with China; it's pretty funny how far people can stretch their values to justify something