SEOUL The U.S. and South Korea remain united in pursing a diplomatic solution to end the North Korean nuclear threat, but their national security priorities may differ over what would be the role of the U.S. military in Korea after a denuclearization deal is reached. "That is going to be the moment of truth, so to speak, when the United States and South Korea will have to agree on what kind of security alliance we want to maintain moving forword," said Go Myong-Hyun, a North Korea analyst at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies in Seoul. U.S. President Donald Trump on Friday revived the June 12 Singapore summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, eight days after canceling it. Trump said he was convinced of Kim's commitment to denuclearization by the renewed diplomatic talks that included a visit to Washington by Kim Yong Chol, the North's former intelligence chief, who carried a letter from the North Korean leader. South Korean President Moon Jae-in has been influential in facilitating the U.S.-North Korea summit, in getting Kim to agree to the broad goal of denuclearization, and in urging Trump to stay committed to the diplomatic process to resolve differences with North Korea. President Trump seems to be leaning now towards Moon's approach versus the more confrontational stance advocated by some of his security team in demanding that North Korea unilaterally and completely disarm before any concessions are granted. Friday Trump downplayed expectations for a major breakthrough at the summit, saying it will be the beginning of a process. He also backed away from his "maximum pressure" approach that stressed tough sanctions and the threat of military force, focusing instead on brokering an agreement to end the North's nuclear program for economic aid and security guarantees that could include a peace treaty to replace the armistice that ended the Korean War in 1953. South Korean officials said there is possibility that Moon may join Trump in Singapore to help negotiate a nuclear deal with Kim, as the... Who backed away from a "maximum pressure" approach with North Korea? - Trump - Kim Jong Un - not enough information - Moon Jae-in
Trump

I lost my baby boy at 31 weeks of pregnancy in February 2013. My heart shattered into a million pieces that weekend in February. I knew that I wanted the chance to bring home another live, healthy baby in my arms. I had some medical issues that would concern doctors during a uncomplicated pregnancy and would put me at high risk if, and that at the time was a big if I was able to get pregnant, and could I make it past the second trimester. I had doctors who supported my decision to try again, but my body wasn't co operating. 2015. I got pregnant, straight on the medication I needed, lots of blood tests. Got a horrible sinking feeling something went wrong at the 6 week stage, bleeding at 8 weeks. At 9weeks of pregnancy, got a scan and no heartbeat was found. I choose the d&c operation, I couldn't deal with seeing the miscarriage blood for days. I tried to convince myself to give up, move on. Wasn't an easy thing to do, but the depression and sadness wasn't fair to my 6 year old son. He needed his mummy who was always sad, in his mind. About 6 months later, I was having a scan. This time, I had a strong heart beat on screen. The pregnancy was extremely high risk, consultant led, daily injections, scans every 2 weeks from 18 weeks. No guarantees of a good outcome. Planned c section at 38 weeks. Healthy baby girl. I was lucky, I got the chance to have my happy ever after. Was it worth the heartache and infertility caused by stress - yes Was it worth the terrifying 34 weeks of pregnancy- yes Do I miss and wish the baby boy I lost at 31 weeks was here - every day For me, being bloody minded and stubborn worked out for me. In regard to trying again, the writer believes that - It was worth all of the stress - The stress took a horrible toll on her body - It tore her marriage apart - not enough information
It was worth all of the stress

The Transylvanian city of Brasov is usually just a day trip from Bucharest. People spend maybe an hour or so to wandering around the town square, and buy a drink before hopping back on their transport back to the capital city of Romania. But, thanks to an epic tip-off from the travel ninja Shikha at Why Waste Annual Leave and a few other Brasov devotees, instead of following the crowds, we booked a couple of leisurely nights there. At the end of our day trip, instead of returning to Bucharest and getting stuck in the Sunday evening traffic, we checked into our hotel and waved our guide off. Yes, you can easily 'do' Brasov in an afternoon it's a popular stop off at the end of a day trip after visiting the "home" of Dracula Bran castle, and the beautiful Peles castle but having the leisure to linger was exquisite. In addition to trying local dishes, we also ate lunch at McDonalds. Yes, yes, as a blogger we shouldn't pretend to eat anything other than caviar washed down with champagne and unicorn tears, but we were hungry and couldn't be bothered to find somewhere. (For the record, we both opted for a Big Mac and a diet coke.) For the first half day, we wandered around whilst the skies were beautifully blue learned a lot of local history, admired the Hollywood style sign in the hills slipped into a couple of churches (not to mention dodged giggling kids racing around on miniature cars) some hidden, and some hidden in plain sight and admired the sign from our cosy hotel, as it lit up at twilight Our only full day dawned fairly murky for the most part, it was a Sunday so a lot of things were closed, so after hitting 20,000 steps and getting lost a few times in the less pretty corners of the city How long did the blogger spending exploring the city of Brasov? - a few days - a day - not enough information - an hour
a few days