Merged Greenland is part of NATO via Denmark

[TV and credit cards]

So the fucktard in Chief goes to Davos and tells them “Without us, you’d be speaking German now!”
I can only imagine the blank stares.
It has been a long time and I’ve only been to Switzerland twice iirc. And I don’t speak German. But I swear, as I recall, THEY DO!

Macron should have shot back, And if it wasn't for France, you'd know how to speak English.

 

[bilby]

So the fucktard in Chief goes to Davos and tells them “Without us, you’d be speaking German now!”
I can only imagine the blank stares.
It has been a long time and I’ve only been to Switzerland twice iirc. And I don’t speak German. But I swear, as I recall, THEY DO!

Yeah, but the US was on the Swiss side in WWII. Well, up until December 1941.

 

[unapologetic]

I don't get why people keep ignoring Vance. Trump going away isn't going to get rid of Vance, especially if Trump is able to cancel elections, but dies in some way, we'll be still stuck with Vance. And even if you get rid of Vance, there's another Republican in the line of succession who'll carry on the regime. Yes, Vance doesn't have the same charisma. Irrelevant if democracy will be gone.

If nothing is done about Rump nothing changes.
If Rump gets REMOVED (any way possable) Vance (or whoever) will know the same could happen to him.
If you are afraid to get rid of Rump, you deserve him.

Trump should have 100,000 US citizens move to Greenland without documentation. These undocumented migrants should then demand the right to vote, then vote to secede from Denmark, then vote to join the US.

I love that idea. Send 100k MAGAots to greenland. Secede, become US teritory, with no voteing privlidge. Hell, send as many as we can.

Where do I get one of those "Make America Go Away" hats?

Independant Greenland Visor | Zazzle

Shop Independant Greenland Visor created by NO_kings_here. Personalize it with photos & text or purchase as is!

www.zazzle.com

 

[bilby]

Bus shelters in Nuuk have been plastered with these posters overnight:

They show Trump and Epstein, with the legend "Yes NATO, No Pedo" in English and West Greenlandic (Kalaallisut).

 

[TV and credit cards]

Dumbo Blinked.
Yes, under threat of the EU's anti coercion tool originally developed with China in mind, it would instead be deployed against Trump's United States (Trump's, not mine). The tool would have applied retaliatory tariffs of up to 30% against some US goods, and not just any US goods but US goods that are predominately produced in Republican states.
Thank you for checking Trump's power, EU. If only we had a body of leaders to do the same.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I have a friend in Davos. I have no idea of how much he said is published news, but here it goes.

Trump backed down on the tariffs because all EU countries threatened to hit USA with 30% tariffs. Not just those Trump had targetted for tariffs.

The talk that made most diplomats excited and got all the attention was this talk by Zelensky. It's basically Zelensky telling Europe that they're pathetic and can't do anything without USA leading them. Implied that since USA doesn't care about Ukraine Europe isn't helping them.



The US team have still no respect for EU or the European NATO members. They think Europe is all talk and no action. Which still is true. No EU country is willing to sacrifice anything in order to beef up their military spendinig. Their increased military spending so far has not impacted the economy of European citizens one iota. They've just reprioritised. Ie, taken money from symbolic nonsense programs, and put it on defense. They think Europe have been, and still are, embarrasingly useless in their lack of support for Ukraine (and I agree). If Europe isn't willing to defend Ukraine, then why would USA sacrifice anything to do so. Also a valid critique.

Everyone thinks Trump is an idiot. Even their own team. But the going theory on why Trump made a play for Greenland is because Trump didn't think EU had the balls to oppose USA, (or anyone else) from taking it. His critique that he doesn't want Russia to grab Greenland is valid. There's very little, now, preventing Russia from grabbing Greenland. If Russia manages to take Ukraine, why wouldn't Russia then take Greenland? The fact that Europe is putting up any resistance came as a surprise to Trump.

Trumps worry isn't that Russia gets a hold of Greenland's oil and mineral wealth. It's that Russia takes it and sells it to China. Trump thinks that Russia is a corrupt basket case of a nation and mostly doesn't pose a genuine threat to anyone but themselves. While China is a genuine long term threat.

My friend thinks that Europe is doomed. They're still mostly all talk and no action. The European delegates puts all their effort into delivering nice sounding speeches, but have zero mandate from their home govornments to do anything.

He thinks USA (ie Trump) are mostly worried about complete bullshit issues, and lacks focus. He described Trumps diplomatic "strategy" as "cacaphony".

He still thinks the future will be dominated by USA because USA has balls (for good and for ill) and has wise domestic economic policies.

He said nothing about what China's delegation was up to. He also didn't mention the Russian delegation. But I suspect that nobody cares what Russia says about anything anymore.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

His critique that he doesn't want Russia to grab Greenland is valid. There's very little, now, preventing Russia from grabbing Greenland. If Russia manages to take Ukraine, why wouldn't Russia then take Greenland? The fact that Europe is putting up any resistance came as a surprise to Trump.

It isn't valid because Greenland is protected by NATO including the US and European countries.

Trumps worry isn't that Russia gets a hold of Greenland's oil and mineral wealth. It's that Russia takes it and sells it to China. Trump thinks that Russia is a corrupt basket case of a nation and mostly doesn't pose a genuine threat to anyone but themselves. While China is a genuine long term threat.

Trump is friendly with Russia and Trump is transactional. The worry about rare earth minerals isn't so much about who is going to take them, but rather we could use more direct routes to rare earth minerals in a flow to the US. It's more about making them accessible and mining them and then controlling them which reduces US dependence on external entities if US oligarchs are in control.

 

[Patooka]

It isn't valid because Greenland is protected by NATO including the US and European countries.

To be fair, those protections have never really been put to the test. Only one country has invoked article 5, and that nation is the current issue.

Trump is friendly with Russia and Trump is transactional.

I suspect it's far more likely Trump is compromised financially with Russia.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I have a friend in Davos. I have no idea of how much he said is published news, but here it goes.

Trump backed down on the tariffs because all EU countries threatened to hit USA with 30% tariffs. Not just those Trump had targetted for tariffs.

The talk that made most diplomats excited and got all the attention was this talk by Zelensky. It's basically Zelensky telling Europe that they're pathetic and can't do anything without USA leading them. Implied that since USA doesn't care about Ukraine Europe isn't helping them.



The US team have still no respect for EU or the European NATO members. They think Europe is all talk and no action. Which still is true. No EU country is willing to sacrifice anything in order to beef up their military spendinig. Their increased military spending so far has not impacted the economy of European citizens one iota. They've just reprioritised. Ie, taken money from symbolic nonsense programs, and put it on defense. They think Europe have been, and still are, embarrasingly useless in their lack of support for Ukraine (and I agree). If Europe isn't willing to defend Ukraine, then why would USA sacrifice anything to do so. Also a valid critique.

Why are you gaslighting for the Trump Admin. The Trump Admin isn't upset that the EU isn't contributing enough, the Trump Admin doesn't want to support Ukraine, period.

Everyone thinks Trump is an idiot. Even their own team. But the going theory on why Trump made a play for Greenland is because Trump didn't think EU had the balls to oppose USA, (or anyone else) from taking it. His critique that he doesn't want Russia to grab Greenland is valid. There's very little, now, preventing Russia from grabbing Greenland.

Just the minor issue of Greenland having no infrastructure whatsoever, along almost the entire island.

Trumps worry isn't that Russia gets a hold of Greenland's oil and mineral wealth. It's that Russia takes it and sells it to China. Trump thinks that Russia is a corrupt basket case of a nation and mostly doesn't pose a genuine threat to anyone but themselves. While China is a genuine long term threat.

Wha?

My friend thinks that Europe is doomed. They're still mostly all talk and no action.

Europe's lack of action comes from centuries of experience of murdering each other, culminating in the near total destruction of Europe in the 1930/40s.

He thinks USA (ie Trump) are mostly worried about complete bullshit issues, and lacks focus. He described Trumps diplomatic "strategy" as "cacaphony".

He still thinks the future will be dominated by USA because USA has balls (for good and for ill) and has wise domestic economic policies.

Your friend isn't that wise on America and what Americans are thinking and what Trump is doing. Trump is disengaging the US from Europe and our other allies, including our largest trading partner. This shit started with the Neocons in the W Admin and accelerated under Trump. The Neocons did it because they had an old school agenda they wanted to follow through on. Trump is doing it because of Russian cockroaches speaking into his ear while he sleeps. Americans... are dumb. Trump was elected because he convinced enough Americans that Biden was the cause of inflation. Oh, and that 30% of the population is sold on totalitarianism after 30 years of far-right wing media ingestion.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I have a friend in Davos. I have no idea of how much he said is published news, but here it goes.

Trump backed down on the tariffs because all EU countries threatened to hit USA with 30% tariffs. Not just those Trump had targetted for tariffs.

The talk that made most diplomats excited and got all the attention was this talk by Zelensky. It's basically Zelensky telling Europe that they're pathetic and can't do anything without USA leading them. Implied that since USA doesn't care about Ukraine Europe isn't helping them.



The US team have still no respect for EU or the European NATO members. They think Europe is all talk and no action. Which still is true. No EU country is willing to sacrifice anything in order to beef up their military spendinig. Their increased military spending so far has not impacted the economy of European citizens one iota. They've just reprioritised. Ie, taken money from symbolic nonsense programs, and put it on defense. They think Europe have been, and still are, embarrasingly useless in their lack of support for Ukraine (and I agree). If Europe isn't willing to defend Ukraine, then why would USA sacrifice anything to do so. Also a valid critique.

Why are you gaslighting for the Trump Admin. The Trump Admin isn't upset that the EU isn't contributing enough, the Trump Admin doesn't want to support Ukraine, period.

It's not gaslighting. Just look at the numbers of equipment sent to Ukraine by European countries. We didn't start getting our act together before Trump withdrew support. From the end of WW2 NATO has been a "let USA pay for Europe's defence"-club. It's a mystery why American presidents have been so cool about it until now.

Nobody knows what goes on in Trump's ping pong ball of a brain. He's an idiot.

Everyone thinks Trump is an idiot. Even their own team. But the going theory on why Trump made a play for Greenland is because Trump didn't think EU had the balls to oppose USA, (or anyone else) from taking it. His critique that he doesn't want Russia to grab Greenland is valid. There's very little, now, preventing Russia from grabbing Greenland.

Just the minor issue of Greenland having no infrastructure whatsoever, along almost the entire island.

Why is that relevant?

Trumps worry isn't that Russia gets a hold of Greenland's oil and mineral wealth. It's that Russia takes it and sells it to China. Trump thinks that Russia is a corrupt basket case of a nation and mostly doesn't pose a genuine threat to anyone but themselves. While China is a genuine long term threat.

Wha?

This is what my friends says is what the diplomats and other big wigs are saying at Davos.

My friend thinks that Europe is doomed. They're still mostly all talk and no action.

Europe's lack of action comes from centuries of experience of murdering each other, culminating in the near total destruction of Europe in the 1930/40s.

So one would have thought we'd have learned by now the cost of not having a defence. It's worth remembering that France slimmed it's defence in 1937 because the world seemed so peaceful at the time.

It's like you and me look at the same history and draw the diametrically opposite conclusions.

He thinks USA (ie Trump) are mostly worried about complete bullshit issues, and lacks focus. He described Trumps diplomatic "strategy" as "cacaphony".

He still thinks the future will be dominated by USA because USA has balls (for good and for ill) and has wise domestic economic policies.

Your friend isn't that wise on America and what Americans are thinking and what Trump is doing. Trump is disengaging the US from Europe and our other allies, including our largest trading partner. This shit started with the Neocons in the W Admin and accelerated under Trump. The Neocons did it because they had an old school agenda they wanted to follow through on. Trump is doing it because of Russian cockroaches speaking into his ear while he sleeps. Americans... are dumb. Trump was elected because he convinced enough Americans that Biden was the cause of inflation. Oh, and that 30% of the population is sold on totalitarianism after 30 years of far-right wing media ingestion.

What? Lot's of Americans are against free speech because of 30 years of extreme left wing media ingestion. It's like you and me see the same things but draw opposite conclusions. As far as I can tell the American right are liberal (in the classical sense) and the American left are PoMo wokesters who live in fantasy land and want to limit people's freedoms. Whoever is the most liberal has my vote. I don't think American "liberals" are liberal.

My friend in Davos is American. He's one of the San Franciscan self made billionaire IT guys. He's made so much money he's retired early and now just fucks around going to stuff he thinks sounds cool. Like Davos. And because he has money it opens doors. He also doesn't have any horses in any races. He's not running for office.

 

[bilby]

From the end of WW2 NATO has been a "let USA pay for Europe's defence"-club. It's a mystery why American presidents have been so cool about it until now.

I know, right? All the US ever got out of it was the ability to completely dominate the world, like the British Empire before them, only more so, and with nuclear fucking weapons.

Bearing in mind that "Europe" wasn't really a thing before the Treaty of Rome, and that the EEC, and now the EU, still doesn't have a defence role - Without NATO, the EU members would each have their own entirely separate defence forces, and would be incapable of wielding any military power whatsoever - unless they built a European army.

There is no European army, navy, or airforce; Just individual national forces.

And the US has kept these forces small and weak, by integrating them into a NATO that is dominated by American forces. No European nation could afford to match the US singlehandedly, and there is no multilateral force except NATO itself.

The US pays for the defence of Europe, and in return all she gets is to rule the world.

It's not the one-sided act of charity that Trump and his neocon backers would have you believe.

If the EU does decide to build an integrated and unified European armed force, then the US goes from having two foreign peers (China and Russia), who can challenge her domination of the world, to having three, and her global influence starts to be increasingly constrained to the Americas.

A European Army would save the US a lot of money, but could not be required, nor expected, to act in the US interest.

This narrow, small-minded and shortsighted attitude, that knows the price of everything but the value of nothing, will (perhaps) save a lot of dollars, while literally costing Americans the world.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I have a friend in Davos. I have no idea of how much he said is published news, but here it goes.

Trump backed down on the tariffs because all EU countries threatened to hit USA with 30% tariffs. Not just those Trump had targetted for tariffs.

The talk that made most diplomats excited and got all the attention was this talk by Zelensky. It's basically Zelensky telling Europe that they're pathetic and can't do anything without USA leading them. Implied that since USA doesn't care about Ukraine Europe isn't helping them.



The US team have still no respect for EU or the European NATO members. They think Europe is all talk and no action. Which still is true. No EU country is willing to sacrifice anything in order to beef up their military spendinig. Their increased military spending so far has not impacted the economy of European citizens one iota. They've just reprioritised. Ie, taken money from symbolic nonsense programs, and put it on defense. They think Europe have been, and still are, embarrasingly useless in their lack of support for Ukraine (and I agree). If Europe isn't willing to defend Ukraine, then why would USA sacrifice anything to do so. Also a valid critique.

Why are you gaslighting for the Trump Admin. The Trump Admin isn't upset that the EU isn't contributing enough, the Trump Admin doesn't want to support Ukraine, period.

It's not gaslighting. Just look at the numbers of equipment sent to Ukraine by European countries. We didn't start getting our act together before Trump withdrew support. From the end of WW2 NATO has been a "let USA pay for Europe's defence"-club. It's a mystery why American presidents have been so cool about it until now.

Your ignorance of America is astounding for a person who thinks they know so much about America. Why are American president "so cool" about it? The Military Industrial Complex. Military aid to Ukraine is military contractor welfare to the US.

Nobody knows what goes on in Trump's ping pong ball of a brain. He's an idiot.

It is less important to know what is happening in Trump's fragile mind than to look at the big foreign policy picture and see how things are shifting, and Trump's actions have been shifting centrally and away from our allies. And not in a diplomatically way, but adversarial.

Everyone thinks Trump is an idiot. Even their own team. But the going theory on why Trump made a play for Greenland is because Trump didn't think EU had the balls to oppose USA, (or anyone else) from taking it. His critique that he doesn't want Russia to grab Greenland is valid. There's very little, now, preventing Russia from grabbing Greenland.

Just the minor issue of Greenland having no infrastructure whatsoever, along almost the entire island.

Why is that relevant?

It makes "taking" or more importantly "keeping" an island that size very hard! No food, no electricity, no roads, no airstrips. Taking it (in theory) might not be too hard, but keeping it would be quite difficult.

Trumps worry isn't that Russia gets a hold of Greenland's oil and mineral wealth. It's that Russia takes it and sells it to China. Trump thinks that Russia is a corrupt basket case of a nation and mostly doesn't pose a genuine threat to anyone but themselves. While China is a genuine long term threat.

Wha?

This is what my friends says is what the diplomats and other big wigs are saying at Davos.

Seeing Trump's actions are benefiting Russia and no one else, not certain I buy that for a second.

My friend thinks that Europe is doomed. They're still mostly all talk and no action.

Europe's lack of action comes from centuries of experience of murdering each other, culminating in the near total destruction of Europe in the 1930/40s.

So one would have thought we'd have learned by now the cost of not having a defence. It's worth remembering that France slimmed it's defence in 1937 because the world seemed so peaceful at the time.

France put all of its chips on the Maginot Line and Germany cut around it.

It's like you and me look at the same history and draw the diametrically opposite conclusions.

He thinks USA (ie Trump) are mostly worried about complete bullshit issues, and lacks focus. He described Trumps diplomatic "strategy" as "cacaphony".

He still thinks the future will be dominated by USA because USA has balls (for good and for ill) and has wise domestic economic policies.

Your friend isn't that wise on America and what Americans are thinking and what Trump is doing. Trump is disengaging the US from Europe and our other allies, including our largest trading partner. This shit started with the Neocons in the W Admin and accelerated under Trump. The Neocons did it because they had an old school agenda they wanted to follow through on. Trump is doing it because of Russian cockroaches speaking into his ear while he sleeps. Americans... are dumb. Trump was elected because he convinced enough Americans that Biden was the cause of inflation. Oh, and that 30% of the population is sold on totalitarianism after 30 years of far-right wing media ingestion.

What? Lot's of Americans are against free speech because of 30 years of extreme left wing media ingestion.

Yeah, that isn't remotely true. "Extreme left wing"? The idea that corporate media would be presenting "extreme left wing media" is just ridiculous. In the 80s and early 90s, CNN was the only go to, and they reported the news. They didn't need to compete. So reporting news wasn't a problem. The whole "liberal media" bs was invented by Rush Limbaugh in order to make his highly partisan crap look professional. The right-wing media got more and more partisan and now we have two right-wing "news" stations (OANN and Newsmax) that are nothing but far-right propaganda.

It's like you and me see the same things but draw opposite conclusions.

I've lived inside of it, you are over 1,000 miles away.

As far as I can tell the American right are liberal (in the classical sense) and the American left are PoMo wokesters who live in fantasy land and want to limit people's freedoms. Whoever is the most liberal has my vote. I don't think American "liberals" are liberal.

What right-wing? The US right now has a MAGA movement which is nothing but a nationalist movement with little principal behind it but nationalism. There aren't many conservatives left in the US. Lots of Reagan Republicans are Democrats now. Dick Cheney's daughter was excommunicated from the GOP. Lynne "conservative as all fuck" Cheney was kicked out of the GOP.

The American Left is powerless. The progressive caucus is a minority of the Democrat party. There hasn't been a liberal candidate for President except John Kerry in 30 years. Clinton, Obama, Biden were effectively moderates.

Also, for a "liberal" you seem quite susceptible to using alt-right talking points.

 

[DrZoidberg]

From the end of WW2 NATO has been a "let USA pay for Europe's defence"-club. It's a mystery why American presidents have been so cool about it until now.

I know, right? All the US ever got out of it was the ability to completely dominate the world, like the British Empire before them, only more so, and with nuclear fucking weapons.

The Brittish empire was a vanity project. The Brits had a couple of fun centuries. But the empire was always a net loss. The reason the empire fell apart was because Great Britain couldn't afford it anymore, (because of the the cost of winning the world wars).

USA is in a similar position. It's now the world's greatest superpower. But there's less benefit to the US economy than the cost of swinging around it's large penis. It's a vanity project. Ie, Americans get to have the lovely feeling of creating world peace, and getting to feel being the saviour of the world. That's the transaction. But there's little economic benefit to USA from it. There's a little. But nowhere near what it costs.

Bearing in mind that "Europe" wasn't really a thing before the Treaty of Rome, and that the EEC, and now the EU, still doesn't have a defence role - Without NATO, the EU members would each have their own entirely separate defence forces, and would be incapable of wielding any military power whatsoever - unless they built a European army.

There is no European army, navy, or airforce; Just individual national forces.

And the US has kept these forces small and weak, by integrating them into a NATO that is dominated by American forces. No European nation could afford to match the US singlehandedly, and there is no multilateral force except NATO itself.

The US pays for the defence of Europe, and in return all she gets is to rule the world.

Yes. Agreed. And now Trump wants to change it, so that Europe forms a united military force, to help carry the burden. Ie, shares in ruling the world.

It's not the one-sided act of charity that Trump and his neocon backers would have you believe.

Isn't it? What's the benefit of ruling the world? Certainly not financial. It's mostly a cost. It's mostly vanity. It's prestige.

If the EU does decide to build an integrated and unified European armed force, then the US goes from having two foreign peers (China and Russia), who can challenge her domination of the world, to having three, and her global influence starts to be increasingly constrained to the Americas.

A European Army would save the US a lot of money, but could not be required, nor expected, to act in the US interest.

This narrow, small-minded and shortsighted attitude, that knows the price of everything but the value of nothing, will (perhaps) save a lot of dollars, while literally costing Americans the world.

Why is it small-minded and shortsighted? If anything, isn't it a more long term solution? Putting all ones eggs in one basket is hardly a sign of intelligence.

No, it won't act in US interests. But why would USA continue to act in European interests? You seem to worry about what a militarily dominant Europe might do to USA. But you're, for some reason, not worried what a militarily dominant USA might do to Europe. Why? Here's a hypothesis... USA might gnab Greenland. Ever thought about that?

 

[DrZoidberg]

I have a friend in Davos. I have no idea of how much he said is published news, but here it goes.

Trump backed down on the tariffs because all EU countries threatened to hit USA with 30% tariffs. Not just those Trump had targetted for tariffs.

The talk that made most diplomats excited and got all the attention was this talk by Zelensky. It's basically Zelensky telling Europe that they're pathetic and can't do anything without USA leading them. Implied that since USA doesn't care about Ukraine Europe isn't helping them.



The US team have still no respect for EU or the European NATO members. They think Europe is all talk and no action. Which still is true. No EU country is willing to sacrifice anything in order to beef up their military spendinig. Their increased military spending so far has not impacted the economy of European citizens one iota. They've just reprioritised. Ie, taken money from symbolic nonsense programs, and put it on defense. They think Europe have been, and still are, embarrasingly useless in their lack of support for Ukraine (and I agree). If Europe isn't willing to defend Ukraine, then why would USA sacrifice anything to do so. Also a valid critique.

Why are you gaslighting for the Trump Admin. The Trump Admin isn't upset that the EU isn't contributing enough, the Trump Admin doesn't want to support Ukraine, period.

It's not gaslighting. Just look at the numbers of equipment sent to Ukraine by European countries. We didn't start getting our act together before Trump withdrew support. From the end of WW2 NATO has been a "let USA pay for Europe's defence"-club. It's a mystery why American presidents have been so cool about it until now.

Your ignorance of America is astounding for a person who thinks they know so much about America. Why are American president "so cool" about it? The Military Industrial Complex. Military aid to Ukraine is military contractor welfare to the US.

Yeah, exactly. Good point. I should have said, why US voters have been so cool about it is a mystery. It's benefitted a tiny little cabal of nefarious US business owners. Which is why US presidents have kept pushing for it.

Why do you think American voters keep putting up with it? USA is chosing between being the world police and having European style social welfare programs. Why would American voters put up with it indefinitely?

Nobody knows what goes on in Trump's ping pong ball of a brain. He's an idiot.

It is less important to know what is happening in Trump's fragile mind than to look at the big foreign policy picture and see how things are shifting, and Trump's actions have been shifting centrally and away from our allies. And not in a diplomatically way, but adversarial.

Like I said, he's an idiot.

Everyone thinks Trump is an idiot. Even their own team. But the going theory on why Trump made a play for Greenland is because Trump didn't think EU had the balls to oppose USA, (or anyone else) from taking it. His critique that he doesn't want Russia to grab Greenland is valid. There's very little, now, preventing Russia from grabbing Greenland.

Just the minor issue of Greenland having no infrastructure whatsoever, along almost the entire island.

Why is that relevant?

It makes "taking" or more importantly "keeping" an island that size very hard! No food, no electricity, no roads, no airstrips. Taking it (in theory) might not be too hard, but keeping it would be quite difficult.

I think you're babbling now. Whoever has it has the same problem holding onto it.


Why do you think Greenland doesn't have airstrips? How do you think people come and go from Greenland? In viking longships?

Trumps worry isn't that Russia gets a hold of Greenland's oil and mineral wealth. It's that Russia takes it and sells it to China. Trump thinks that Russia is a corrupt basket case of a nation and mostly doesn't pose a genuine threat to anyone but themselves. While China is a genuine long term threat.

Wha?

This is what my friends says is what the diplomats and other big wigs are saying at Davos.

Seeing Trump's actions are benefiting Russia and no one else, not certain I buy that for a second.

The problem is that Russia will be irrelevant in the future. Russia is completely dependent on Chinese money to keep the war going.

I'd say Russia is now, in practice, a vassal state of China.

My friend thinks that Europe is doomed. They're still mostly all talk and no action.

Europe's lack of action comes from centuries of experience of murdering each other, culminating in the near total destruction of Europe in the 1930/40s.

So one would have thought we'd have learned by now the cost of not having a defence. It's worth remembering that France slimmed it's defence in 1937 because the world seemed so peaceful at the time.

France put all of its chips on the Maginot Line and Germany cut around it.

So you're clearly capable of drawing intelligent conclusions. Are you still against Europe arming themselves?

It's like you and me look at the same history and draw the diametrically opposite conclusions.

He thinks USA (ie Trump) are mostly worried about complete bullshit issues, and lacks focus. He described Trumps diplomatic "strategy" as "cacaphony".

He still thinks the future will be dominated by USA because USA has balls (for good and for ill) and has wise domestic economic policies.

Your friend isn't that wise on America and what Americans are thinking and what Trump is doing. Trump is disengaging the US from Europe and our other allies, including our largest trading partner. This shit started with the Neocons in the W Admin and accelerated under Trump. The Neocons did it because they had an old school agenda they wanted to follow through on. Trump is doing it because of Russian cockroaches speaking into his ear while he sleeps. Americans... are dumb. Trump was elected because he convinced enough Americans that Biden was the cause of inflation. Oh, and that 30% of the population is sold on totalitarianism after 30 years of far-right wing media ingestion.

What? Lot's of Americans are against free speech because of 30 years of extreme left wing media ingestion.

Yeah, that isn't remotely true. "Extreme left wing"? The idea that corporate media would be presenting "extreme left wing media" is just ridiculous. In the 80s and early 90s, CNN was the only go to, and they reported the news. They didn't need to compete. So reporting news wasn't a problem. The whole "liberal media" bs was invented by Rush Limbaugh in order to make his highly partisan crap look professional. The right-wing media got more and more partisan and now we have two right-wing "news" stations (OANN and Newsmax) that are nothing but far-right propaganda.

It's like you and me see the same things but draw opposite conclusions.

I've lived inside of it, you are over 1,000 miles away.

Cultural mass hysteria is often easier to spot for an outsider. I didn't realise how fucked Swedish culture is until I moved to Denmark. While I was in it, I was pretty blind to how extreme it is.

As far as I can tell the American right are liberal (in the classical sense) and the American left are PoMo wokesters who live in fantasy land and want to limit people's freedoms. Whoever is the most liberal has my vote. I don't think American "liberals" are liberal.

What right-wing? The US right now has a MAGA movement which is nothing but a nationalist movement with little principal behind it but nationalism. There aren't many conservatives left in the US. Lots of Reagan Republicans are Democrats now. Dick Cheney's daughter was excommunicated from the GOP. Lynne "conservative as all fuck" Cheney was kicked out of the GOP.

The American Left is powerless. The progressive caucus is a minority of the Democrat party. There hasn't been a liberal candidate for President except John Kerry in 30 years. Clinton, Obama, Biden were effectively moderates.

Again... good points. You're probably right. There perhaps aren't any liberals left in USA.

Also, for a "liberal" you seem quite susceptible to using alt-right talking points.

I don't think I am. I think it's perhaps more that my ideology (liberalism) doesn't fit the current US ideological dichotomy.

I think it's more like USA has slid so far down the woke slippery slope (authoritarian progressiveness) that any reaction to it will accidentally say reasonable things some times, even though they're nationalist reactionaries.

 

[bilby]

The Brittish empire was a vanity project. The Brits had a couple of fun centuries. But the empire was always a net loss. The reason the empire fell apart was because Great Britain couldn't afford it anymore, (because of the the cost of winning the world wars).

USA is in a similar position. It's now the world's greatest superpower. But there's less benefit to the US economy than the cost of swinging around it's large penis. It's a vanity project. Ie, Americans get to have the lovely feeling of creating world peace, and getting to feel being the saviour of the world. That's the transaction. But there's little economic benefit to USA from it. There's a little. But nowhere near what it costs.

I agree, ruling the world is not particularly profitable. But I am bemused as to why you think it should be, and why you imagine that economic benefit is the only kind of benefit worth having.

Everyone seems to have become crazy economic rationalists, who demand that everything must either be profitable or be discarded. This is inhuman.

What is the value of being rich, if you live like a penniless bum because you hoard your money and only spend it on absolute necessities, and invest the rest toward the sole objective of getting richer still?

The British imperials of the C19th understood this; They wanted to turn a profit, but never at the expense of making things drab and utilitarian. When London needed a way to pump shit into the Thames estuary and away from the city, they didn't build this:



They built this:


...and the world was a better place for it.

It made no economic sense. Bjt then, tbe idea that economic sense is the only sense, or the only sense worth having, makes no sense at all.

 

[bilby]

And now Trump wants to change it, so that Europe forms a united military force, to help carry the burden. Ie, shares in ruling the world.

Do you really think that Trump wants to share power with anyone?

He thinks he can have his cake and eat it; That if Europe becomes a military force that is the peer of the US, they will still line up to do what the Commander in Chief orders them to do.

They won't.

And Trump and his base will be shocked and angry when they don't.

When idiots have a big nuclear arsenal, it's a bad thing for the world, for them to be shocked and angry.

 

[bilby]

You seem to worry about what a militarily dominant Europe might do to USA. But you're, for some reason, not worried what a militarily dominant USA might do to Europe. Why?

Because it has already happened. We just talked about the collapse of the British Empire. All that ugly racist bollocks spouted by Farage and his Reform Party is basically rage at what has been lost - and it went across the Atlantic.

The French and Germans, Spanish, Portuguese, Danes, Dutch and Italians all used to jostle for power; But now the US has reduced them to mere members of the EU; It is the EU, not Germany, or France, or Britain, that could challenge the USA, and none of the member states are particularly happy about it - but they have no army, so they have no choice. The UK hated the EU so much that they left (and became instantly irrelevant, with neither military nor economic clout); The rest of the EU has become entirely militarily dependent on NATO, and that's just another way of saying that they are dependent on the USA.

My question is not what might a militarily dominant USA might do to Europe, but rather, having done it for eighty years, and successfully eliminated Europe as a military rival, why they would stop.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I have a friend in Davos. I have no idea of how much he said is published news, but here it goes.

Trump backed down on the tariffs because all EU countries threatened to hit USA with 30% tariffs. Not just those Trump had targetted for tariffs.

The talk that made most diplomats excited and got all the attention was this talk by Zelensky. It's basically Zelensky telling Europe that they're pathetic and can't do anything without USA leading them. Implied that since USA doesn't care about Ukraine Europe isn't helping them.



The US team have still no respect for EU or the European NATO members. They think Europe is all talk and no action. Which still is true. No EU country is willing to sacrifice anything in order to beef up their military spendinig. Their increased military spending so far has not impacted the economy of European citizens one iota. They've just reprioritised. Ie, taken money from symbolic nonsense programs, and put it on defense. They think Europe have been, and still are, embarrasingly useless in their lack of support for Ukraine (and I agree). If Europe isn't willing to defend Ukraine, then why would USA sacrifice anything to do so. Also a valid critique.

Why are you gaslighting for the Trump Admin. The Trump Admin isn't upset that the EU isn't contributing enough, the Trump Admin doesn't want to support Ukraine, period.

It's not gaslighting. Just look at the numbers of equipment sent to Ukraine by European countries. We didn't start getting our act together before Trump withdrew support. From the end of WW2 NATO has been a "let USA pay for Europe's defence"-club. It's a mystery why American presidents have been so cool about it until now.

Your ignorance of America is astounding for a person who thinks they know so much about America. Why are American president "so cool" about it? The Military Industrial Complex. Military aid to Ukraine is military contractor welfare to the US.

Yeah, exactly. Good point. I should have said, why US voters have been so cool about it is a mystery. It's benefitted a tiny little cabal of nefarious US business owners. Which is why US presidents have kept pushing for it.

Why do you think American voters keep putting up with it? USA is chosing between being the world police and having European style social welfare programs. Why would American voters put up with it indefinitely?

The better question to ask yourself is why do the US First people support foreign military actions. It happened in 2003 after all of the 'no nation building' crap from W in his campaign, and the far right-wing stepped right back up for Iranian and Venezuelan actions after Trump's US first domestic campaigning.

It's like you and me see the same things but draw opposite conclusions.

I've lived inside of it, you are over 1,000 miles away.

Cultural mass hysteria is often easier to spot for an outsider. I didn't realise how fucked Swedish culture is until I moved to Denmark. While I was in it, I was pretty blind to how extreme it is.

That is the thing, I like to get my news coverage from NPR (US), NY Times (US), CBC (Canada), BBC (England), and Reuters (more international news coverage). It is always good to see how the outside sees the US.

However, you are so far outside the culture in the US (If you can say the US has a culture), you are oblivious to what is going on, even regarding recent political history. The MAGA movement dates all the way back to Nixon, but let's concentrate on the more recent history when the astroturf'd Tea Party became a thing and the GOP instigated protests against Obama in 2009. AM Radio began pushing the idea of majority power through minority leadership in Government. They argued they shouldn't not be in charge simply because they held the minority of seats. The GOP fed into this strongly. So strongly, though that the MAGA movement emerges and pushes back (against the GOP) in 2012 when the far-right had had it with the establishment in the Republican Party. They fought Romney's nomination tooth and nail. MAGA is making major progress when Eric Cantor lost his election in a primary, things really were rolling for this movement. The 2016 GOP primary was stuffed, but only one candidate was outside the establishment, and he won. The astroturf'd Tea Party movement that the GOP and Fox News created in 2009 (after they hijacked a Ron Paul group) had transformed into something the GOP hadn't expected.

Also, for a "liberal" you seem quite susceptible to using alt-right talking points.

I don't think I am.

That isn't particularly relevant, as the nomenclature you use is alt-right wing terminology. You don't talk about the US like a liberal or conservative, but as a Newsmax watching knuckle dragger.

I think it's more like USA has slid so far down the woke slippery slope (authoritarian progressiveness) that any reaction to it will accidentally say reasonable things some times, even though they're nationalist reactionaries.

You always say this shit and it is utterly ridiculous. "Wokeness" didn't change anything in the US. The Courts did. Gay rights came about in the courtrooms, not legislation. In general, emergent rights in the US almost always come via the courts.

"Wokeness" impacts social culture in the US. That's it. The MAGA movement is trying to turn back the clock to the 1950s before Brown v Board of Education. "Woke" wasn't even a thing yet when this whole absurdity really got running. Stephen Miller isn't hiring people in ICE saying to protect America, he is using Anti-Semitism (the real anti-Semitism) and White Nationalism imagery and references.

 

[bilby]

Here's a hypothesis... USA might gnab Greenland. Ever thought about that?

No sane person has ever thought about that. It's batshit crazy nutso insane. The USA already has the right to put any military force they want into Greenland. Why the fuck would they want to "grab" political control of the place?

Despite desparate efforts to sanewash the idea as 'necessary to defend the US against Russia and/or China' (it's not; see 'any military force', supra), I have yet to see a single actual reason why anyone sane would ever even think of this.

 

[bilby]

It's benefitted a tiny little cabal of nefarious US business owners. Which is why US presidents have kept pushing for it.

Why do you think American voters keep putting up with it?

They are very carefully excluded from having a say.

What, did you think the US President was elected by the voters? The voters get to pick absolutely anyone they want to be president, out of the entire field of two candidates chosen by a tiny little cabal of nefarious US business owners.