Trump said at Davos in his random, incomprehensible speech that “We will not take Greenland with Force”.
Then went on to trash them and Denmark repeatedly.
I think the stock market problems at home was whispered in his ear and he somehow retained the thought while speaking.
What a silly man.
(Oh and what the heck is wrong with his hair? It’s worse than usual)
Facebook should be shunned by sane people for allowing such dribble. I cancelled my account years ago, despite it meaning I can barely make a private sale anymore due to the loss of marketplace.
As a Canadian, the only real threat to Canada is and has always been the US - which attacked Canada twice in the past before being held off by England.
Geography adequately protects Canada from anyone else. If any other Country (including China) wanted to occupy Canada we’d have a long lead time to observe them building ocean going landing craft, aircraft carriers and gathering the truly immense amount of logistics needed to support that effort. Russia would never have those resources and isn’t a real threat.
So this is saying we need to be occupied by the US to protect us from … the US?
Yeah, dude’s angry that Canadians have the freedom to… criticize the USA. GASP!
Must find a way to revoke THAT. Good little fashy that he is.
And Greenland’s “mineral resources” are more a case of potential than actual value. It’s hard to do extraction from under an ice cap, and since we really don’t want that ice cap to disappear, it would take a lot of investment to start exploiting them, and the payoff just isn’t there under current economic conditions.
Yeah, I liked this excerpt from the MAGA post D_G shared:
If the United States announced tomorrow that it would no longer defend Canada, how long do you think Canada would last?
Russia would be thrilled.
It would immediately abandon fighting hardened warriors in Ukraine and turn its attention to a far easier, softer, and far more valuable target.
Canada.
Sure, Russia would immediately abandon its war with Ukraine, cross over Siberia and the Bering Strait, march though Alaska (which we would allow apparently, since we are no longer defending Canada) and proceed to easily take over Canada. Right.
These people are fear based. Afraid of everything. Or say they are.
They’ll just match across Nunavut. It worked out great the last time someone tried!
I’d assume a winter campaign marching over the pole. Need to move quickly while there is still an ice bridge every winter (I’m assuming there is normally one?).
What I find funny is that nobody, certainly not Trump nor anyone who speaks for him, has suggested “going to war” with Denmark. What I find not so funny is how easily allegedly intelligent people are spoofed. Has no one ever looked up the phrase “negotiation tactics”…? Has no one ever read “The Art of The Deal?” Oh, wait… fuhgeddaboudit.
yeah, funny
Earlier this month, when deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller was asked by CNN’s Jake Tapper about taking Greenland by force, he responded ominously that “nobody is going to fight the United States over the future of Greenland.”
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt followed that up by saying that “utilizing the U.S. Military is always an option at the commander in chief’s disposal.”
When asked whether he would rule out using the military last week, Trump said, “I don’t talk about that.”
And in a recent letter to Norway’s prime minister, Trump even said suggestively that his Nobel Peace Prize snub made him less likely “to think purely of Peace” – which many interpreted rather menacingly.
I have not. But I hear the author is not a trump fan.
So what’s the end game? What does Trump intend to achieve, if she’s just bluffing about a takeover of the country?
You assume he has one.
I assume no such thing. But our new poster @FriendOfRoland apparently does. If, as they say, Trump is just engaging in the art of the deal, I’d be really Interested in knowing what deal that is. My best guess is that others finally pointed out that he can already increase US troop presence in Greenland, and he intends to call that a “win”.
And which, as others have pointed out…….under the existing Greenland agreement, he already could have. During the Cold War, the USA had thousands more troops in Greenland than today, all legally.
This would be like as if Trump quarreled with the NYC government and declared victory that he was finally allowed access to…..his own Trump Tower in Manhattan.
That’s what I meant. I expect that Trump was told that he can always increase the number of American troops in Greenland, and he’ll eventually announce that he’s doing just that. He’ll clam some sort of victory, asserting that it was a concession made by Denmark, but in the meantime all he’s done is weaken America’s alliances (and economy, too)
Trump invading or buying Greenland is unpopular, even among many Republicans.
I don’t really think that popularity matters. I truly think that the biggest and most feckless cowards in the universe are the American people who have largely stood by and silently watched all this chaos unfold within a short year.
What’s that MLK Jr quote: “In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends”
Granted there are some righteous people out there (RIP Renee Goode), but most would dumbingly watch their own country slide into fascism (with even masked secret police hunting and killing their fellow Americans in the streets with blanket federal immunity) and insanely expect it to stop on its own.
The USA isn’t Iran or China. American people live in a free society where public assembly can’t be controlled. And yet… They are largely docile.
Who cares? It’s the content that matters.
I honestly don’t know… and I’d even bet that, at this point, neither does Trump. At least, not exactly. He is probably the most flexible, and therefor the least predictable, negotiator ever to enter US politics. What I meant when I said “funny” is that it’s more than a bit comical to see others jumping to unfounded conclusions, then lambasting him as a person… but very rarely do they wait for (and then criticize) the “end game”… the actual results.