Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Make Greenland Great Again

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    The level of doomsday worst case scenario of NATO completely falling apart is just hoping for it to happen. It is not. While we may have a complete blowhard in office (Or whatever you people wish to call him), leaders of our allied forces are not going to destroy any partnership over it. Just straight nonsense.

    I mean, Biden did plenty of dipshit moves and literally was a walking geriatric kid in diapers. Yet, they stuck it out. Same will be said here.

    Good thing countries are not run by arm-chair diplomats who pray for the worst and hope for it too.

    Comment


    • #17
      Forcefully taking Greenland will destroy NATO. This is pretty simple.
      Give 'em Hell, Cougars!!!

      For all this His anger is not turned away, but His hand is stretched out still.

      Not long ago an obituary appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune that said the recently departed had "died doing what he enjoyed most—watching BYU lose."

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by myboynoah View Post
        Forcefully taking Greenland will destroy NATO. This is pretty simple.
        And that is my point. It is not going to be done forcibly. We are or just sending in troops and planting a flag. Now, strong arm tactics in a negotiation. Sure. So again, stop with this nonsense..

        or should I just days “The U.S. is not going to take Greenland by force. It’s that simple.”

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by dabrockster View Post

          And that is my point. It is not going to be done forcibly. We are or just sending in troops and planting a flag. Now, strong arm tactics in a negotiation. Sure. So again, stop with this nonsense..

          or should I just days “The U.S. is not going to take Greenland by force. It’s that simple.”
          So the other NATO nations sending troops to Greenland is also an overreaction?

          After all that has happened when people say take Trump seriously but not literally, is it really ridiculous to assume something resembling an armed invasion? Especially when he said the US must have Greenland, and it will be done either the easy way or the hard way?
          "...you pointy-headed autopsy nerd. Do you think it's possible for you to post without using words like "hilarious," "absurd," "canard," and "truther"? Your bare assertions do not make it so. Maybe your reasoning is too stunted and your vocabulary is too limited to go without these epithets."
          "You are an intemperate, unscientific poster who makes light of very serious matters.”
          - SeattleUte

          Comment


          • #20
            There is no negotiation. Denmark and Greenland have said no. Time for the U.S. to move on. Continued threats are damaging the alliance.
            Give 'em Hell, Cougars!!!

            For all this His anger is not turned away, but His hand is stretched out still.

            Not long ago an obituary appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune that said the recently departed had "died doing what he enjoyed most—watching BYU lose."

            Comment


            • #21
              This is not about protecting Greenland from Russia.
              Assume Trump is anti-NATO because he is. Heads of NATO states view him that way and likely withhold intel from him because he leaks like crazy to Putin.
              Trump has been more vocally critical of NATO than Russia during his political career and it's embarrassing.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Northwestcoug View Post

                So the other NATO nations sending troops to Greenland is also an overreaction?
                I heard they aren’t sending much, certainly nothing that would make a difference tactically. So I wouldn’t call it an over reaction, just a signal and a deterrent.

                Much like Trump’s moves so far, it is strategic posturing. And I would say it is a better strategy than Trump’s.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by beefytee View Post

                  I heard they aren’t sending much, certainly nothing that would make a difference tactically. So I wouldn’t call it an over reaction, just a signal and a deterrent.

                  Much like Trump’s moves so far, it is strategic posturing. And I would say it is a better strategy than Trump’s.
                  No small thing. The threats aren't just coming from Trump but also Vance and Miller.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    How funny would it be for us to be at war with Denmark
                    "Discipleship is not a spectator sport. We cannot expect to experience the blessing of faith by standing inactive on the sidelines any more than we can experience the benefits of health by sitting on a sofa watching sporting events on television and giving advice to the athletes. And yet for some, “spectator discipleship” is a preferred if not primary way of worshipping." -Pres. Uchtdorf

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Moliere View Post
                      How funny would it be for us to be at war with Denmark
                      Hilarious! And Canada and Mexico! lol!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Here we go again. Trump and Putin in cahoots. Trump bends the knee. Blah blah blah.

                        This is about many things including national security and the minerals there. We are in the midst of a race. The race towards AI against China and the necessary minerals to stay with or ahead of them is why Greenland is important. Just as Venezuela was for oil and their minerals and Ukraine. This is the next race globally. Nuclear arms was the last one and whoever wins the AI-race is the new superpower. We are already at the top against China but if we become reliant on China who controls the majority of the minerals used for AI, we would be beholden to them. That is not a good thing. We need to be independent.

                        I have issue with his method but I see the importance of this. Do I think there is another avenues we could use. Yes.. Do I think we will purchase Greenland. Looking likely. I prefer we assist in their efforts to become independence and we become their sole partner on the minerals etc.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by dabrockster View Post
                          Here we go again. Trump and Putin in cahoots. Trump bends the knee. Blah blah blah.

                          This is about many things including national security and the minerals there. We are in the midst of a race. The race towards AI against China and the necessary minerals to stay with or ahead of them is why Greenland is important. Just as Venezuela was for oil and their minerals and Ukraine. This is the next race globally. Nuclear arms was the last one and whoever wins the AI-race is the new superpower. We are already at the top against China but if we become reliant on China who controls the majority of the minerals used for AI, we would be beholden to them. That is not a good thing. We need to be independent.

                          I have issue with his method but I see the importance of this. Do I think there is another avenues we could use. Yes.. Do I think we will purchase Greenland. Looking likely. I prefer we assist in their efforts to become independence and we become their sole partner on the minerals etc.
                          This is largely an issue of imperialism and expansion for the vain glory of Donald Trump. You don't just buy Greenland, and a free and autonomous population with human rights, and voila you have access to all these hidden resources. It will be very difficult to mine for rare earth minerals, and require many years and trillions in investment. What does the US do in the mean time?

                          https://theweek.com/world-news/green...mpossible-mine

                          As a result, most of the efforts to mine Greenland’s minerals “generally haven’t advanced beyond the exploratory stage,” said The Associated Press. And beyond the weather playing a major factor, the remote areas where many of these elements are located also present a problem. Even in southern Greenland, where the island is “populated, there are few roads and no railways, so any mining venture would have to create these accessibilities,” said Diogo Rosa, an economic geology researcher with the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland, to the AP. There is also the question of power, as many of these remote areas don’t have consistent electricity.

                          As of now, Greenland only has one fully operational mine, which produces anorthosite and is “located deep inside a fjord system with no road access,” said Business Insider. All of the mine’s supplies, including the crew, “arrives by ship during the ice-free months or by helicopter when the fjord freezes over for months on end.”
                          The US faces a similar problem in Venezuela. It's not as simple as buying a piece of property and building a luxury hotel. The US will go bankrupt, as has happened with Trump businesses eleven times.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            What’s the going rate for a planet’s largest island anyways? Could we swap a few smaller tropical islands? How about going halfsies with another country besides Russia or China? Or maybe fractional ownership, like we get Greenland for 2 months of the year?

                            the whole purchasing argument is absurd, and exposes just how laughable Trump’s deal-making reputation is. The US could secure mining rights for the right price. He could drop all tariffs on the EU in exchange for some deal if it the resources were that vitally important. But no, he antogonizes the entire world with imperialistic plans.
                            "...you pointy-headed autopsy nerd. Do you think it's possible for you to post without using words like "hilarious," "absurd," "canard," and "truther"? Your bare assertions do not make it so. Maybe your reasoning is too stunted and your vocabulary is too limited to go without these epithets."
                            "You are an intemperate, unscientific poster who makes light of very serious matters.”
                            - SeattleUte

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Northwestcoug View Post
                              What’s the going rate for a planet’s largest island anyways? Could we swap a few smaller tropical islands? How about going halfsies with another country besides Russia or China? Or maybe fractional ownership, like we get Greenland for 2 months of the year?

                              the whole purchasing argument is absurd, and exposes just how laughable Trump’s deal-making reputation is. The US could secure mining rights for the right price. He could drop all tariffs on the EU in exchange for some deal if it the resources were that vitally important. But no, he antogonizes the entire world with imperialistic plans.
                              And idiots eat it up, and think wow, it's inevitable, places and people and culture can just be bought and sold ... or conquered if necessary. Ha ha—the US is going to fight Denmark ha ha. The prospect of killing people is so funny, but of course so necessary because the reds are coming and we gotta buy and build something.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Greenland has made it clear they do not want to be purchased so we should fuck off.

                                We are worried about minerals and right now getting locked out of Africa and China keeps establishing sweetheart deal through their road and belt initiative and Russia via the Wagner Group and now its successor the Africa Corps have been toppling governments left and right and locking out the West. Meanwhile Trump cements that with all this racist Stephen Miller immigration policy.

                                I'd urge everyone to stop giving Trump the benefit of the doubt. It's not logical.



                                And yeah blah blah blah Russia eyeroll. At this point it's naive to act like Trump doesn't cower to Putin. He is actively destroying NATO, and that is Putin's geopolitical wet dream and more than enough to justify Maduro being abandoned.

                                He and JD Vance (who unleashed his inner-mean girl) were embarrassing as they humiliating Zelenskyy, who was than walled off from any real involvement in peace talks.

                                We abandon offense cyber operations against Russia from almost day one. We quit sharing intel with Ukraine (which was very valuable to us).


                                I've always been open to discuss why I think the way I do but I'm over the low effort dismissive barbs.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X