Greenland USA

[cherokeetroy]

Putin, still in the Ukraine despite all the ramblings of Europe.  

Iran.  The US set back their nuke program.  The left whined it was going to be WWIII.

Venezuela.  Added, taking on Chinese influence in the western hemisphere.  The left complained it was the start of a new war.

Trump flexes US muscle with simple goals accomplished, the left whines.  Trump isn’t taking direct action keeping the US out of empire building, the left whines.

Make up your freaking minds.

Now watch the arguments shift from:

"We have to own Greenland because Genocide"

To:

"Another masterful round of 5D chess. Checkmate!"

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

I'm noticing a pattern in how he dealt with China
Then Putin
Iran
And now NATO

Is it the Cry Wolf Strategy?

Every. Time. I say, "Next time I wont believe him when he does this."  And every time I believe him when he does this and think everything is going fascist again.   

I guess if you intersperse things where you ACTUALLY do something (Iran, Nigeria, and Venezuela) you are more effective selling you might do the unlikely.  

Like, "Please stop making me think you've turned America into nazis when it turns to the propaganda you're posting to garner support as you cry wolf." 

That was textbook scary.  Even if it was a false textbook..

Because, all of a sudden it was Denmark's atrocity. Denmark's past. Greenland plight. How American = good guys. Even if the "identify with American" thing was ripped from the annexation of Czechoslovokia or invasion of Poland. 

And when people turned against Denmark, EU, and NATO seemingly on command, for trumped up reasons, it was really freghtening seeing how little anyone learned from history.

So until next time Trump does somrthing and i think everyone turned fascist again by how they support whatever he says and does.

And then it works out and I have to write this again...

[putnam6]

 

 

The White House

@WhiteHouse


"Based upon a very productive meeting that I have had with the Secretary General of NATO, Mark Rutte, we have formed the framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland and, in fact, the entire Arctic Region.

This solution, if consummated, will be a great one for the United States of America, and all NATO Nations.

Based upon this understanding,

I will not be imposing the Tariffs that were scheduled to go into effect on February 1st.


 Additional discussions are being held concerning The Golden Dome as it pertains to Greenland.

Further information will be made available as discussions progress.

Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, and various others, as needed, will be responsible for the negotiations

— They will report directly to me. Thank you for your attention to this matter!" - PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP

[Solvedit]

Is it the Cry Wolf Strategy?

Every. Time. I say, "Next time I wont believe him when he does this."  And every time I believe him when he does this and think everything is going fascist again.   

I guess if you intersperse things where you ACTUALLY do something (Iran, Nigeria, and Venezuela) you are more effective selling you might do the unlikely.  

Stop making me think you've turned into nazis when it turns to the propaganda Trump is using to garner support as he cries wolf.

Denmark's top general in the Arctic did indicate he was inviting NATO repriesentatives because of concerns about Russia. There clearly was an issue, and something is being done. Trump has agreed not to consider military force to take Greenland and NATO is taking Greenland's security more seriously. What's wrong with any of that?

That was textbook scary.  Even if was a false textbook..

Because, all of a sudden it was Denmark's atrocity. Denmark's past. Greenland plight. How American = good guys. Even the "identify with American" thing was straight from the annexation of Czechoslovokia.  

I only recall Trump mentioning China and Russia and the mineral wealth of Greenland going un-extracted, not atrocities against the natives. Although, more investment instead of keeping Greenland a closed shop run by Denmark might provide more money to deal with the natives ethically and humanely.

And when people turned against Denmark, EU, and NATO on command, for trumped up reasons, it was really freghtening seeing how little anyone learned from history..

Denmark's top general in the Arctic and NATO seem to have gotten on board with the need for increased security.

Could it be, though, that if Denmark hadn't let the US or NATO keep Greenland more secure, something more drastic would have been called for? It's not a non-issue because Denmark and NATO are gearing up to do something.

You may be trying a little too hard to frame this issue in terms of Nazism.  How about the Entente powers just mobilized to keep the Nazis from re-militarizing the Rhineland?  How about they're helping Czechoslovakia resist the occupation of the Sudetenland?   That might be the real analogy.

[UltraBudgie]

I think this whole thing has increased the probability that the US will leave NATO before the end of Trump's term. NATO will become a European alliance, and Britain will have to make a choice. This is actually a boon to them in negotiating the various ways in which they may want to debrexit.

Whether that was an intentional effect or not, we likely won't know for decades. I certainly won't give Trump alone credit for it, because if it is what will happen, he has never had the power himself to make it so.

[WallFlowerActive]

Now watch the arguments shift from:

"We have to own Greenland because Genocide"

To:

"Another masterful round of 5D chess. Checkmate!"

Are US interests being served. Is Trump taking more effective steps to limit the influence of Russia and China in the western hemisphere than Biden.

[UltraBudgie]

Because, all of a sudden it was Denmark's atrocity. Denmark's past. Greenland plight. How American = good guys. Even if the "identify with American" thing was straight from the annexation of Czechoslovokia. 

And when people turned against Denmark, EU, and NATO seemingly on command, for trumped up reasons, it was really freghtening seeing how little anyone learned from history.

Aww c'mon. We didn't even get around to the part where we started hating on Lego.

[Solvedit]

Now watch the arguments shift from:

"We have to own Greenland because Genocide"

When did the administration say they were interested in Greenland because of the treatment of the natives? They only cited security concerns, and Trump claimed NATO had been warning Denmark security was inadequate for 20 years. Now, it seems, Denmark and all of NATO seem to be agreeing and doing something.
Why does Trump want Greenland, and what could it mean for Nato and the EU?

In recent years, there has been increased interest in Greenland's natural resources, including rare earth minerals, uranium and iron. It could also have significant oil and gas reserves.
Trump has focused on such resources elsewhere - including in his dealings with Ukraine - but denies they are behind his desire for Greenland.
However he has repeatedly described the threat he perceives from Russia and China in the region.
In one Truth Social post, he wrote: "Nato has been telling Denmark, for 20 years, that 'you have to get the Russian threat away from Greenland.' Unfortunately, Denmark has been unable to do anything about it. Now it is time, and it will be done!!!"

 

To:

"Another masterful round of 5D chess. Checkmate!"

Perhaps it is so, perhaps the threat was serious enough that if Denmark and the rest of NATO had continued to ignore the threat, something more drastic would have had to be done.

[CriticalStinker]

I don't recall the administration using it for a justification.  We have since learned that he agreed with the head of NATO that there would be no military action to take Greenland.

We can and are doing better, though.  The Inuit in Alaska are getting a little money from the oil business.  

Can it be the Danes want to run a closed shop and simply don't have the investment capital to develop any oil or mineral extraction with enough profit left over to pay off their indigenous people enough to secure their agreement?  Greenland is mainly a fishing economy.

And, like I've said a hundred times, the unfortunate events seem to betray that Denmark can't afford to manage and police their indigenous population, which implies they may not be securing Greenland well enough.The US is not "going into Venezuela." There is not presently a war.

He has agreed with the head of NATO not to use military force to take Greenland.

There is no war in Iran. Removing their nuclear weapon program may have prevented a war.

I guess I'm confused on the policing of Greenland. You keep pointing to the point of forced sterilizations. But we did that as well. Hell, we forcefully took Indian kids and put them in catholic boarding schools well into the 70's to try and teach the Indian out of them. Does Greenland have higher crime than our indigenous communities?


As for the rest, we did go into Venezuela, and my point stands that wasn't part of the campaign. Neither was Iran or Greenland. And make no mistake, Iran is very much on the table to happen again. And saying we prevented a war is just a claim. Who knows what would have happened, but I sincerely doubt Iran was just going to attack America out of nowhere. I remember as a kid when we were led to believe Iraq was this massive threat that might hit us with WMD. I've heard that bit before. Venezuela is under the same regime, same vice president. But my guess is their turmoil will come when we least expect it. I don't know if you remember Iraq, but it looked like a decisive victory for some time before it became a decades long thorn in our side. 

People forget that. Just because we do something, and it appears successful, doesn't mean it doesn't come back to bite us. Hell, the regime in Iran exists because the people overcorrected when they over through the dictatorship we installed. Osama was a CIA trained tactician. Saddam at times had good relations and support from the US. This is why the pendulum swung. People got tired of the US going around and playing police, it always ended up biting us in the ass.

Obama was rightfully criticized because he ended up bombing more countries than Bush, and we saw the rise of Isis under him. Where are we now? Bombing Venezuela, Iran, Syria, Nigeria, Somalia, Yemen... Speaking of Yemen, Houthis, a non state actor have stayed alive and well after massive bombing campaigns from Saudi Arabia, Biden, and Trump. I think it should serve as a reminder that all of our capabilities are only as good as the hearts and minds campaign we can drive as we learned in Iraq.

But I hold to my original point. Trump is the new Obama, just of the right. Promised worlds of change only to deliver the same things we've seen time and again.

I think the next conflict in Iran is likely in the next week, maybe two. And I think it looks different since the objective is clearly regime change, not just a nuclear program with an off ramp.

[WallFlowerActive]

Where are we now? Bombing Venezuela, Iran, Syria, Nigeria, Somalia, Yemen...

Half of you all are saying Trump isn’t doing enough.  The other half too much.

Make up your minds…