how far is trump to go for greenland

mark46 · Wednesday at 10:36 PM

MarkSB said:
Yeah… because I said that nowhere.

Well, I think the western world wins if the EU is strengthened. But I tend to think there are other ways to go about reaching that goal. Ways that, you know, don’t squander our credibility and continue to fill the economy with uncertainty. The impact on the economies of the US and our allies alone is taking an unnecessarily stupid toll.

And good luck with those mining operations. Major mining operations seem very unlikely to start on Greenland anytime soon. Let’s stop back here in 6 months to a year and see what progress has been made on that front.

1) Not you, but others, have suggested that Trump had started a war and ended NATO.

2) I do believe that this action as well as the tariffs have strengthened both NATO and the EU, as well as Trump's Ukraine policies. I certainly agree that Trump's methods are misguided at best.

3) As with the development of any new mining area, especially in harsh climates, it will take a decade or more to see real results. I do understand that many are interested in seeing results in 6 months. Trump and the mining companies might expect to start to see results in 6 years. If resulrs were easy and doable in 6 months, there would already be thriving industries.

MarkSB · Wednesday at 11:10 PM

mark46 said:
1) Not you, but others, have suggested that Trump had started a war and ended NATO.

2) I do believe that this action as well as the tariffs have strengthened both NATO and the EU, as well as Trump's Ukraine policies. I certainly agree that Trump's methods are misguided at best.

3) As with the development of any new mining area, especially in harsh climates, it will take a decade or more to see real results. I do understand that many are interested in seeing results in 6 months. Trump and the mining companies might expect to start to see results in 6 years. If resulrs were easy and doable in 6 months, there would already be thriving industries.

Oh, I wasn’t saying that there needed to be mines in 6 months (though my wording may have been misleading). I’m saying that Trump will have made little to no progress on even securing an agreement to set up mining operations there. He hasn’t even secured a deal to get land for military bases yet. (Even though, as said, we could have had military bases on “leased” land - owning isn’t necessary).

For the mining, I think at best Trump would announce some sort of verbal agreement like he usually does. Since it’s verbal, nothing is guaranteed, but that won’t stop his base from praising him as the greatest deal maker ever.

That’s at best. At worst (and probably more likely) Greenland will resist any agreement to add mining operations. That will result in: A) more threats, or B) Trump moving on from the mining thing altogether, and hoping that no one notices. Scenario B is what I would wager on. Trump will be causing trouble and controversy somewhere else by that point, which will distract everyone from the fact that his great Greenland mining initiative failed.

Meanwhile, our economy and the economies of our allies continue to be hindered by the uncertainty and price increases created by all this tariff nonsense.

It all sounds like a great recipe for success to me. The best thing that could happen to Trump is for the Supreme Court to take his IEEPA tariff powers away, and for him to just move on from being tariff happy altogether. The economy would likely get a boost from it, and he could take all the credit for it. (Hopefully not, but his base will believe it’s so). He just needs the Supreme Court to save him (and us) from his own stupidity.

Oompa Loompa · Thursday at 12:32 AM

Bradskii said:
He probably thinks it's an option. Let's face it, he confuses Iceland with Greenland and declares tariffs on an island populated by penguins.

And just as a heads up, discussing security in the arctic with someone from NATO has absolutely zip to do with taking over Greenland. So this concept of a framework for a possible deal sometime in the future gives Trump nada. Rien. A big, fat nothing.

He's backing down, canned the tariffs and is looking for an off ramp so he doesn't look foolish.

Hey, if you weren't aware, it's waaaaay too late for that.

You are just repeating what you where told.

Bradskii · Thursday at 3:08 AM

Oompa Loompa said:
You are just repeating what you where told.

No, what I have heard Trump actually say.

He literally called Greenland 'Iceland'.
He literally imposed tariffs on an uninhabited island.
Discussing NATO activities with a NATO representative literally has nothing to do with Greenland's self determination.
And he has literally backed down on his threatened tariffs.

All these things are facts. They are undeniable. Anyone who who thinks they didn't happen is denying reality.

Luke81718 · Thursday at 3:22 AM

loveofourlord said:
Multiple countries like france, denmark and such are prepared to go to war with the US over greenland, is trump really going to attack or invade? Apparently his newest plan is to bribe greenlanders with up to 100k each to be willing to join the US. This isn't venezuela with a dictator, it's one of the US's allies, yet trump is treating it like it's just something he's allowed to do.

Do you think trump will invade?

Trump will do whatever his handlers tell him to do.
"All the worlds a stage..."
Trump is merely the latest carnival barker to occupy the Oval Office.
The media does not exist to inform, but to move the masses to think and feel and act in particular ways.
The government and those who participate in government are not there to preserve the American way of life or Make America Great Again as so many foolishly believe.
They are there to enact the agenda handed down from the top.
If Satan is called the God of this world, which he is. How is it that so many Christians cannot accept the fact that he has the institutions of this world firmly within his grasp?
Worse, not only do they seem oblivious to this reality, but they adamantly oppose even the possibility of it.

"A common failing of honorable people, is their inability to recognize just how dishonorable other people can be, and how dangerous it is to trust them."
Thomas Sowell

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.'
H.L. Mencken

eclipsenow · Thursday at 4:07 AM

Europe is about to take some DRASTIC economic measures against Trump unless someone tells the Narcissist-in-Chief that his appetite for ever more territory, and ever more grandiose lies and gambits, is about to backfire.

If Europe enacts their "Economic bazooka" - Trump's billionaire bros are going to boo their boy.
This will kick Silicon Valley in the guts.
It doesn't have to be this way.
American medical authorities need to enact the 25th now.
Trump needs a cookie, warm mug of milk, and nice holiday.
A permanent one.

PS:
He can even have his gold caddies cheat for him and drop balls where-ever he wants. I don't care.
As the Denmark protests and Greenland protests said "MAGA". Make America GO AWAY!
At least this MAGA America. Trump's bizarre and unhinged behaviour makes even Ronald Reagan's insane capitulation to corporations look rational!

Nithavela · Thursday at 5:34 AM

I think that part of Trump's genius is that people will take whatever they want to hear from his rambling, often contradictory statements and then base their entire reaction on that, forgetting everything said before or after it.

eclipsenow · Thursday at 6:14 AM

It's not genius when he actually holds contradictory beliefs in his own head at the same time.

It's not genius when he cannot construct a coherent sentence, and hides his ignorance behind claims of satire or sarcasm.

It's not genius when hundreds of psychiatrists have diagnosed him from thousands of hours of footage as having malignant narcissistic personality disorder.

It's not genius to claim paracetamol causes autism, that F35s are actually invisible if you're standing right next to them, or that climate change is a hoax, or that he wants Greenland because Norway didn't give him the Nobel Peace prize! (Where did he get the idea that Norway even issued the thing?)

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
Obama got one, it just isn't fair!
For crying out loud what an ugly look! An American president pouting because he hasn't been given the peace prize. How Americans are not cringing with embarrassment every time this guy opens his mouth is beyond me.

The amazing and encouraging thing about Davos is what really happened. Not what Fox News would report of course. Not what the narcissist in chief claims happened, that he made some sort of deal and he won.

Here's what really happened.

Carney spoke.
Then 24 hours later, Trump retreated.

The BOOKS that are going to come out about who had to talk Trump down after Carney rebelled! Imagine being the staff in the administration that had to act the adult, and go into the narcissist in chief and explain to him what just happened!

Carney's manifesto is genius. Carney's manifesto is going to be studied for decades.

Trump and trumpism is going to be psychoanalyzed for decades. Future historians will want to know how America failed a collective IQ test in electing this guy.

But Carney? Wow.
He laid down the new world order. I don't think Trump really understands what happened. He'll probably be sulking for months over this. He simply doesn't have the words or categories of thought to begin to process what just happened.

The middle powers said enough is enough.

The bully backed down.

Oh how he had to walk away with his tail between his legs!

Aryeh Jay · Thursday at 6:30 AM

MarkSB said:
Yeah, I agree. It sets a precedent. Let him win this time, and he'll continue to use these tactics again and again.

I hope their strategy is to stall him and look for a different solution. It also raises questions about if there were actually serious discussions of a deal or not. I think Trump tries to make it look like he has achieved spectacular things, when in reality he didn't make much progress. His supporters eat that stuff up.

Well I disagree, appeasement worked like a charm in the 1930s and it will work again. The President has repeatedly stated that the acquisition of Greenland is all he wants.

Larniavc · Thursday at 6:48 AM

essentialsaltes said:
Trump Davos speech - live: US president demands 'immediate negotiations' on Greenland
Nato leaders watch as Donald Trump delivers speech to World Economic Forum.
The US president told the World Economic Forum that since the US election, the stock market has set 52 "all time records".

Trump said: "People are very happy with me.

"Just over one year ago, we were a dead country. Now we're the hottest country anywhere in the world," he added.

...inflation has been defeated."

Donald Trump has said Europe is not heading in the right direction.

He said green energy and mass migration has "hurt Europe".

He continued: "Certain places in Europe are not recognisable any more."

Trump speaks about splitting oil with Venezuela
"Those 150 (oil) million barrels, we're going to split them with them."

Greenland

"I have tremendous respect for the people of Greenland and Denmark," he said.

"The fact is, no nation or group of nations is in a position to secure Greenland other than the US.

"I think they found that out two weeks ago in Venezuela."

He added: "We saved Greenland, and successfully saved our enemies from gaining a foothold.

"Without us, you'd all be speaking German... and a little Japanese.

"After the war, we gave Greenland back to Denmark," he said, referring to the US's occupation of Greenland during the Second World War in order to defend it from possible Nazi invasion. [In just a few hours in 1940, Denmark had fallen to the Nazis, who broke a non-aggression pact to invade. Greenland declared its independence from Occupied Denmark.]

"How stupid we were to do that? How ungrateful they are now.

Trump says he wants "immediate negotiations to discuss the acquisition of Greenland."

"This unsecured land is actually our territory."

Speaking on Europe and NATO, Trump said: "They don't appreciate what we do."

"All I'm asking for is a little place called Greenland," he added.

"All we're asking for is to get Greenland, including the right title and ownership, and you can't defend it on a lease."

Trump has claimed people in "ice land" called him "daddy", and that he is well thought of and respected in Greenland.

"You can say yes, and we will be appreciative.

"Or you can say no, and we will remember."

[Now he's confusing Iceland with Greenland.]

Clearly Trump is clearly doing a clear Reagan/Biden declinationism.

Clearly.

Desk trauma · Thursday at 8:18 AM

Aryeh Jay said:
Well I disagree, appeasement worked like a charm in the 1930s and it will work again. The President has repeatedly stated that the acquisition of Greenland is all he wants.

Appeasement is like communism, it’s not real appeasement if it failed.

Say it aint so · Thursday at 9:58 AM

Bradskii said:
No, what I have heard Trump actually say.

He literally called Greenland 'Iceland'.
He literally imposed tariffs on an uninhabited island.
Discussing NATO activities with a NATO representative literally has nothing to do with Greenland's self determination.
And he has literally backed down on his threatened tariffs.

All these things are facts. They are undeniable. Anyone who who thinks they didn't happen is denying reality.

What's that syndrome again? Having to deny the obvious and defend the indefensible.

Deborah1$ · Thursday at 10:11 AM

mark46 said:
The difference is that PUTIN actually invaded a major power in Europe and killed hundreds of thousands AFTER occupying Crimea in the first war.

TRUMP blustered and THREATENED to invade a Danish territory of 55,000 people.

For some of us, there is a MAJOR, MAJOR difference between these two situations.

You're minimizing what Trump was going to do. What I'm trying to convey is the concept of taking over a country because you WANT it What stopped him was the markets tumbling and Europe standing up to him finally. I'm sure he was surprised at all the opposition he got. Had they not shown some backbone he would have taken Greenland, not necessarily with force, but he would have taken over.

mark46 · Thursday at 10:12 AM

MarkSB said:
Oh, I wasn’t saying that there needed to be mines in 6 months (though my wording may have been misleading). I’m saying that Trump will have made little to no progress on even securing an agreement to set up mining operations there. He hasn’t even secured a deal to get land for military bases yet. (Even though, as said, we could have had military bases on “leased” land - owning isn’t necessary).

For the mining, I think at best Trump would announce some sort of verbal agreement like he usually does. Since it’s verbal, nothing is guaranteed, but that won’t stop his base from praising him as the greatest deal maker ever.

That’s at best. At worst (and probably more likely) Greenland will resist any agreement to add mining operations. That will result in: A) more threats, or B) Trump moving on from the mining thing altogether, and hoping that no one notices. Scenario B is what I would wager on. Trump will be causing trouble and controversy somewhere else by that point, which will distract everyone from the fact that his great Greenland mining initiative failed.

Meanwhile, our economy and the economies of our allies continue to be hindered by the uncertainty and price increases created by all this tariff nonsense.

It all sounds like a great recipe for success to me. The best thing that could happen to Trump is for the Supreme Court to take his IEEPA tariff powers away, and for him to just move on from being tariff happy altogether. The economy would likely get a boost from it, and he could take all the credit for it. (Hopefully not, but his base will believe it’s so). He just needs the Supreme Court to save him (and us) from his own stupidity.

I'm confused. You speak as if there are no mining companies or US economic interests already present in Greenland's mining.

Billionaires invest in AI mining firms as Greenland’s strategic value grows | Engineer Live

Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates and Michael Bloomberg are among the investors

www.engineerlive.com

Google Search

It is unclear what Trump wants, perhaps ownership of certain land, perhaps special treatment with regard to regulation and licensing, perhaps first dibs on the purchase any future production.

mark46 · Thursday at 10:29 AM

Deborah1$ said:
You're minimizing what Trump was going to do. What I'm trying to convey is the concept of taking over a country because you WANT it What stopped him was the markets tumbling and Europe standing up to him finally. I'm sure he was surprised at all the opposition he got. Had they not shown some backbone he would have taken Greenland, not necessarily with force, but he would have taken over.

And you seem to believe the word of Trump, a strange approach at best.

There is a name for Trump's threats and tariffs: TACO

I agree that the market got Trump to back down faster than he wanted, but barring a takeover of the US military and ending Congress, there was very little chance that Trump would done anything near "invading" Greenland. I expect that, at most, Trump might have increased the number of troops at the US base with notice to Denmark.

Congress already has passed legislation supporting our NATO membership. We already have a treaty arrangement with Denmark. A stated Invasion would have directly violated NATO's charter and almost assuredly ended its existence. Congress doesn't act often, but in this case they would have acted quickly. Discussions were already started on legislation. The vote on Venezuela was 51-50. The vote on an actual invasion of Greenland would have been veto-proof. Venezuela was a Russian ally; Greenland/Denmark is a NATO ally.

Say it aint so · Thursday at 10:48 AM

mark46 said:
1) Not you, but others, have suggested that Trump had started a war and ended NATO.

2) I do believe that this action as well as the tariffs have strengthened both NATO and the EU, as well as Trump's Ukraine policies. I certainly agree that Trump's methods are misguided at best.

3) As with the development of any new mining area, especially in harsh climates, it will take a decade or more to see real results. I do understand that many are interested in seeing results in 6 months. Trump and the mining companies might expect to start to see results in 6 years. If resulrs were easy and doable in 6 months, there would already be thriving industries.

NATO is only as strong as the commitments made for those participating countries to be there when called upon. Kind of like when those countries were there when duty called for the only country that declared an article 5 emergency, that country in need being the United States of America. Trump actions have indeed undermined that. If anyone thinks Trump's actions and comments have strengthened NATO, they may want to think again. Because no one else has those assurances.

mark46 · Thursday at 10:56 AM

Say it aint so said:
NATO is only as strong as the commitments made for those participating countries to be there when called upon. Kind of like when those countries were there when duty called for the only country that declared an article 5 emergency, that country in need being the United States of America. Trump actions have indeed undermined that. If anyone thinks Trump's actions and comments have strengthened NATO, they may want to think again. Because no one else has those assurances.

You seem to be focusing on the last month with regard to NATO.

1) BTW, what ACTIONS has Trump taken with regard to Greenland. All I've seen is a couple of servings of TACOs.

2) Trump threatening got NATO members to greatly increase their military spending, thus strengthening NATO. This has included plans to build more of their own weapons, relying less on the US.

3) Trump's transferring responsibility for Ukraine military aid from the US to Europe has strengthened NATO, even to the extent of adding members and securing a large NATO border with Russia, this with the needed unanimous vote. Finland says a big Thank You to Trump.

Say it aint so · Thursday at 11:06 AM

mark46 said:
You seem to be focusing on the last month with regard to NATO.

1) BTW, what ACTIONS has Trump taken with regard to Greenland. All I've seen is a couple of servings of TACOs.

2) Trump threatening got NATO members to greatly increase their military spending, thus strengthening NATO. This has included plans to build more of their own weapons, relying less on the US.

3) Trump's transferring responsibility for Ukraine military aid from the US to Europe has strengthened NATO, even to the extent of adding members and securing a large NATO border with Russia, this with the needed unanimous vote. Finland says a big Thank You to Trump.

I am focusing on Trump's actions and comments as a whole ever since his first term. Military spending doesn't mean a thing if there is no assurance that allies can be depended on when called. That is the whole point of NATO. Trump is destroying the assurance.

Deborah1$ · Thursday at 12:11 PM

mark46 said:
And you seem to believe the word of Trump, a strange approach at best.

There is a name for Trump's threats and tariffs: TACO

I agree that the market got Trump to back down faster than he wanted, but barring a takeover of the US military and ending Congress, there was very little chance that Trump would done anything near "invading" Greenland. I expect that, at most, Trump might have increased the number of troops at the US base with notice to Denmark.

Congress already has passed legislation supporting our NATO membership. We already have a treaty arrangement with Denmark. A stated Invasion would have directly violated NATO's charter and almost assuredly ended its existence. Congress doesn't act often, but in this case they would have acted quickly. Discussions were already started on legislation. The vote on Venezuela was 51-50. The vote on an actual invasion of Greenland would have been veto-proof. Venezuela was a Russian ally; Greenland/Denmark is a NATO ally.

Trump has bypassed Congress so often, they seem totally unnecessary in the scheme of things. They, along with the Supreme Court, rubber-stamp all his foolish demands because they're afraid he will primary them. He could care less about NATO because he wants to end NATO. You seem to think that his rantings and ravings are just bluffs. They are not. What are we arguing about?

mark46 · Thursday at 1:09 PM

Deborah1$ said:
Trump has bypassed Congress so often, they seem totally unnecessary in the scheme of things. They, along with the Supreme Court, rubber-stamp all his foolish demands because they're afraid he will primary them. He could care less about NATO because he wants to end NATO. You seem to think that his rantings and ravings are just bluffs. They are not. What are we arguing about?

no arguing, just disagreeing

1) There are very, very people in this world who fail to understand that Trump often bluffs. His policies are called TACO for good reason.

2) Trump cannot end NATO. And no, Supreme Court would not rubber stamp such action. BTW, SCOTUS has often decided against Trump.

3) Some Republicans were willing to vote against Trump with regard to arresting a criminal in Venezuela. The vote was 50-50 in the Senate. The Senate would easily vote against pulling out of NATO again and against any invasion of Greenland. And, yes, the Courts would uphold the Senate.

4) Clearly, you think very little of the US military. They would not invade a NATO country without authorization from Congress. Invading a NATO country is a clear act of war. As was the case with regard to Viet Nam and Iraq, Congress would take a vote on an invasion of Greenland.

We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

how far is trump to go for greenland

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Under the Southern Cross I stand...

Active Member

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

you're in charge you can do it just get louis

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

Stuck on a ship.

"Larniavc sir, how are you so smart?"

Trump Davos speech - live: US president demands 'immediate negotiations' on Greenland​

Nato leaders watch as Donald Trump delivers speech to World Economic Forum.​

Trump speaks about splitting oil with Venezuela​

[redacted]

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Trump Davos speech - live: US president demands 'immediate negotiations' on Greenland

Nato leaders watch as Donald Trump delivers speech to World Economic Forum.

Trump speaks about splitting oil with Venezuela