Will He Pull it Off?? (Greenland)

Beth Gallagher

Beth Gallagher

Well-known member
Happening today--

GREENLAND MEETING: "Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio hosted the foreign ministers of Denmark and Greenland today amid President Donald Trump's efforts to take over the vast, semi-autonomous Danish territory. The Danish foreign minister said the two sides "have a fundamental disagreement, but we also agree to disagree, and therefore we will, however, continue to talk.”

I have to wonder if Greenland/Denmark don't have a similar mindset as the Venezuelans... when it comes to American, Chinese or Russian control, which is actually the most desirable? It is no secret that Greenland's "two dogsleds" defense would not stand a chance against an actual invasion.
 
It's still not obvious to me exactly why he wants Greenland, other than keeping it from Chinese or Russian control. But I'm often not privy to inside information. :D. Are there natural resources there or what? Looks like a bunch of ice with a misnomer ("Green"land) to me.
 
Beth Gallagher said:
It's still not obvious to me exactly why he wants Greenland, other than keeping it from Chinese or Russian control. But I'm often not privy to inside information. :D. Are there natural resources there or what? Looks like a bunch of ice with a misnomer ("Green"land) to me.
Click to expand...
There are all kinds of natural resources, rare and precious metals, and other stuff that is important for technology. Europe has had control for all these years and never even tried to use any of the natural resources from there; but now it looks like China and Russia will take it if we do not; plus it is in our part of the hemisphere.
It is closer for us than it is for any European country, and it is an important place for us to have our defenses set up, just in case we need it.

This is also going to psychologically affect Canada, because once we have Greenland, we will have Canada completely surrounded. We already have Alberta signing petitions to leave Canada and they want to become part of the US, and maybe people in some of the other parts want that, too. I think that there is a good chance that we will have worked out some kind of a deal with Canada as well, probably before President Trump leaves office.


IMG_1358.jpeg
 
Beth Gallagher said:
Happening today--

GREENLAND MEETING: "Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio hosted the foreign ministers of Denmark and Greenland today amid President Donald Trump's efforts to take over the vast, semi-autonomous Danish territory. The Danish foreign minister said the two sides "have a fundamental disagreement, but we also agree to disagree, and therefore we will, however, continue to talk.”

I have to wonder if Greenland/Denmark don't have a similar mindset as the Venezuelans... when it comes to American, Chinese or Russian control, which is actually the most desirable? It is no secret that Greenland's "two dogsleds" defense would not stand a chance against an actual invasion.
Click to expand...

"Two dogsleds". LOL
 
Russia is laughing heartily at Europe's effort to "defend Greenland" from the U.S. They sent a total of 34 troops from all participating European nations. They are ready to withstand the U.S. military. I suspect that was all they could get there. Russian X post said "The Gallic cock has crowed". Russia now sees the "massive European military force" that would stand against it should Ukraine fall.
 
Beth Gallagher said:
It is no secret that Greenland's "two dogsleds" defense would not stand a chance against an actual invasion.
Click to expand...
By themselves? No. But that is Trump's problem here. Denmark (which includes Greenland) is a member of NATO, a political and military alliance of 32 countries (including the US) all of which are supposedly committed to defend each other. An armed attack against one member is considered an armed attack against all of them. It kind of makes me wonder if Trump knows that, or is that one more thing that he doesn't care about? Is he really willing to take on 31 Allied countries to take something we already have because we're Allies?
 
The point is clearly hemisphere consolidation in the wake of deglobalization. The latter is necessary because the financial and cultural burdens have simply become too great over time and our "partners" have shown themselves to be too unreliable.

Just as the UN was constructed as a political containment system for the monsters repeatedly faced by the US, NATO served as a military containment system. The monsters have not managed to escape too seriously up to now, but they are on a path toward taking those containment systems over.

The consequences of this have now been wargamed out for several decades, not only in the real world but also by many authors publishing such scenarios as fiction or fictional backdrops to other stories.​
​
One likely outcome was explored on the 2015 TV series "The Expanse." This exploration took place throughout its 6 season run, but especially within its original 3 seasons. And you can even get the gist of things from just Season 1.​

While things are far from perfect coming out of this Administration, I'm surprised over and over gain. For those most part things seem to be positive and solid. Where they don't it usually means I've failed to take something into account and/or have been ignorant of it.
 
Supposedly He is not the only president having wanted Greenland. Still His ways of going about getting the country is some what questionable. They should not have to be forced to be under His rule. If they really have resources we can use, then He needs to work around how to get them to share their resources vs. trying to take them over.
I am now and have been for sometime, the Embarrassed American.
 
Axel Slingerland said:
By themselves? No. But that is Trump's problem here. Denmark (which includes Greenland) is a member of NATO, a political and military alliance of 32 countries (including the US) all of which are supposedly committed to defend each other. An armed attack against one member is considered an armed attack against all of them. It kind of makes me wonder if Trump knows that, or is that one more thing that he doesn't care about? Is he really willing to take on 31 Allied countries to take something we already have because we're Allies?
Click to expand...
Please examine the two posts before yours. Looks like the "allies" are mobilizing, lol. And as for what Trump knows, please don't foolishly underestimate him. As for what he cares about, it is obvious to anyone with eyes and a brain that he cares about the USA, which is really refreshing for a change.
 
Axel Slingerland said:
By themselves? No. But that is Trump's problem here. Denmark (which includes Greenland) is a member of NATO, a political and military alliance of 32 countries (including the US) all of which are supposedly committed to defend each other. An armed attack against one member is considered an armed attack against all of them. It kind of makes me wonder if Trump knows that, or is that one more thing that he doesn't care about? Is he really willing to take on 31 Allied countries to take something we already have because we're Allies?
Click to expand...
I don't think there would be any "armed attack" The U.S. military could just move in en masse and nobody would stop them. Do you really think the rest of NATO could take on the U.S. so close to their own shores? Last I heard, the rest of NATO doesn't have aerial refueling or search and rescue to pick up downed pilots and sailors. Britain and Canada once did, but I think they handed all that over to the U.S.
 
Those puppeteering the Biden Administration pulled the stunt of freezing Russia out of SWIFT and locking up banked assets. That single foolish aggressive action basically forced BRICS into existence and is now causing mass chaos in global finance. It did nothing to stabilize relations in general either.

This is far from unrelated. It the need for the timeframe for change to be rapidly accelerated. Like Venezuela, Greenland is another piece of the puzzle being assembled to stand against the stinking fish of the other side of the world.
 
Jacob Petersheim said:
Those puppeteering the Biden Administration pulled the stunt of freezing Russia out of SWIFT and locking up banked assets. That single foolish aggressive action basically forced BRICS into existence and is now causing mass chaos in global finance. It did nothing to stabilize relations in general either.

This is far from unrelated. It the need for the timeframe for change to be rapidly accelerated. Like Venezuela, Greenland is another piece of the puzzle being assembled to stand against the stinking fish of the other side of the world.
Click to expand...
The SWIFT action and the Afghanistan retreat did so much to damage the U.S. (and its allies) that Trump has had to struggle to overcome. If Biden (and the puppeteers) or Harris (and the puppeteers including one of the most corrupt people on the political stage) had gained the Presidency, NATO and the U.S. would either have been in a society-ending war, or would simply have gone out of existence in bankruptcy.
 
Beth Gallagher said:
Yes, we all saw that, too. But thankfully Biden didn't get re-elected so those days are over.
Click to expand...
That is one of the best examples of being conned that you could have said.



Edit: Beth, I owe you an apology. I am very sorry for the comment above, that is actually not what intended to say. However as I often do, I was thinking ahead of myself and wrote what I was thinking at that moment. So if I may, please let me try again, with what I intended to say...

That is one of the best examples of the Presidential Credit Game I mentioned Here that you could have said. Specifically:

If a previous President does something that people don't like that will become law years later, the current President at the time will get blamed for it. And when something that people like that was created by a previous President becomes law, the current President will get credit for it.
Click to expand...

I know we will never agree on a lot of things political, but there's no need to be rude about it. So I sincerely apologize for that statement.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top