Mar-a-Lago North is going to be so good pic.twitter.com/Kpd5FptC5V
— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) January 7, 2025
Mar-a-Lago North is going to be so good pic.twitter.com/Kpd5FptC5V
— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) January 7, 2025
wc22 said:
Greenland is as independent as Puerto Rico. I don't know why all the recent headlines don't mention it is owned by the Danes.
BREAKING: President Trump just announced that he will place massive tariffs on Denmark if they don't immediately relinquish all control of Greenland.
— George (@BehizyTweets) January 7, 2025
"We need Greenland for national security purposes."
LET THE 3D CHESS COMMENCE! pic.twitter.com/mZaqY3V2Y6
Gee, you think so?Cal88 said:
Time to stock up on these before the tariffs.
Seriously though, this kind of openly heavy-handed approach to diplomacy aimed at allies might backfire.
Trump says we lost 38k lives building Panama Canal.
— Ana Navarro-Cárdenas (@ananavarro) January 7, 2025
False. 5,609 of 56k workers -mostly from Barbados, Jamaica, and other Caribbean islands- died during construction.
Trump says Chinese soldiers running the Canal. False. It’s run by Panama Canal Authority, staffed entirely by…
Eastern Oregon Bear said:Gee, you think so?Cal88 said:
Time to stock up on these before the tariffs.
Seriously though, this kind of openly heavy-handed approach to diplomacy aimed at allies might backfire.
Unfortunately, bullying friends is part of Trump's mindset.
chazzed said:Trump says we lost 38k lives building Panama Canal.
— Ana Navarro-Cárdenas (@ananavarro) January 7, 2025
False. 5,609 of 56k workers -mostly from Barbados, Jamaica, and other Caribbean islands- died during construction.
Trump says Chinese soldiers running the Canal. False. It’s run by Panama Canal Authority, staffed entirely by…
Fox’s @JesseBWatters: “The fact that Canada 🇨🇦 doesn’t want us to take them over makes me want to invade. I want to quench my imperialist thirst.”
— The Tennessee Holler (@TheTNHoller) January 7, 2025
Fox is poison, exhibit infinity. pic.twitter.com/odf0swiaPi
tequila4kapp said:
Renaming the Gulf of Mexico and Canada being the 51st state are just mind numbingly dumb wastes of time and energy.
Panama Canal and Greenland represent actual national security interests. Denmark is our NATO ally. We have a base on Greenland. If we need additional military anything why not work through NATO?
philly1121 said:
Yeah, and these guys are supposed to be the non-interventionist party? 003, 34, 88 and Goggles are meeting to try and figure out how they can be non-interventionist with Ukraine, but then take Panama and Greenland and make glorious their Orange Co-Leader.
What amazes me is that whatever Trump says, no matter how absurd, it is AUTOMATICALLY a great idea. An infallible idea to MAGA supporters. There is no space between them. And its absurdity after absurdity.
— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) January 7, 2025
Yep!Cal88 said:calpoly said:Except when it comes to Russia and Putin.Cal88 said:concordtom said:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/hours-suggesting-seize-panama-canal-132929397.html
What a joker.
As a leader of foreign policy, he's not supposed to say stuff like this. We don't take over countries by buying them or conquering them outright, we do it by buying local politicians (much cheaper option), through the IMF, World Bank, the fiat currency, NGOs, soft power, color revolutions and the not-so-occasional coup.
Only when all this fails we use the military option.
Russia has been a tough nut to crack the last decade or so, the good old days where we could place a corrupt leader providing access to its immense wealth are over.In 1996, not only did the Clinton team influence Russia's election to Boris Yeltsin (who collapsed their economy and made the life expectancy go down by 5 years), they bragged about it in Time Magazine. https://t.co/y3orjzbRSU pic.twitter.com/k5uNa9fQ4L
— Historic.ly (@historic_ly) July 13, 2018
bear2034 said:tequila4kapp said:
Renaming the Gulf of Mexico and Canada being the 51st state are just mind numbingly dumb wastes of time and energy.
Panama Canal and Greenland represent actual national security interests. Denmark is our NATO ally. We have a base on Greenland. If we need additional military anything why not work through NATO?
Based on defense expenditures, the US. is NATO.
cbbass1 said:Yep!Cal88 said:calpoly said:Except when it comes to Russia and Putin.Cal88 said:concordtom said:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/hours-suggesting-seize-panama-canal-132929397.html
What a joker.
As a leader of foreign policy, he's not supposed to say stuff like this. We don't take over countries by buying them or conquering them outright, we do it by buying local politicians (much cheaper option), through the IMF, World Bank, the fiat currency, NGOs, soft power, color revolutions and the not-so-occasional coup.
Only when all this fails we use the military option.
Russia has been a tough nut to crack the last decade or so, the good old days where we could place a corrupt leader providing access to its immense wealth are over.In 1996, not only did the Clinton team influence Russia's election to Boris Yeltsin (who collapsed their economy and made the life expectancy go down by 5 years), they bragged about it in Time Magazine. https://t.co/y3orjzbRSU pic.twitter.com/k5uNa9fQ4L
— Historic.ly (@historic_ly) July 13, 2018
When Trump was elected in 2016, I posted that "Trump is Putin's revenge for Boris Yeltsin."
IMO, this has been a learning experience for everyone.
Breshnev / Andropov / Gorbachev -- these guys realized how hard & how expensive it was to lead & maintain a global military empire. By the time it collapsed under its own weight, there was no turning back. It just couldn't survive in its previous form.
The CIA had no idea...
The U.S. is now in the same boat. We spent ourselves into oblivion. And now we (U.S., Europe, Canada, UK, Japan, S Korea) are collapsing under our own collective weight.
On top of that, our unsustainable economic policies, which we've spread around the world at gunpoint, are now failing on a grand scale.
Now, with Netanyahu, Blinken, and Sullivan running U.S. foreign policy, the U.S. has lost its grip on sanity & decency. Genocide Joe will, apparently, pass the torch to Genocide Donald.
God help us.
philly1121 said:
This conversation, and even the thought of us "purchasing" Greenland, "taking back" the Canal, Canada "becoming" our 51st state, is intellectual starvation advanced by the less critical thought processors on this board, 88, 34 and 003.
Those free thinkers rely on Russian propaganda, Jesse Watters and Tommy Tuberville to process political "discourse". lol Jesse wants to quench his "imperialist thirst". With Whiskey Pete, Ka$h Money and Tulsi Assad at the wheel, what could possibly go wrong?
philly1121 said:
This conversation, and even the thought of us "purchasing" Greenland, "taking back" the Canal, Canada "becoming" our 51st state, is intellectual starvation advanced by the less critical thought processors on this board, 88, 34 and 003.
Those free thinkers rely on Russian propaganda, Jesse Watters and Tommy Tuberville to process political "discourse". lol Jesse wants to quench his "imperialist thirst". With Whiskey Pete, Ka$h Money and Tulsi Assad at the wheel, what could possibly go wrong?
003, why you so bitter? Did your Orange Leader not just win an election? Are you upset that Dems didn't purposefully s**t on the Capital walls or throw a Biden flag at a police officer two days ago? You're an awfully bitter person to be complaining so much when you just won. I'm calling out all of Trumps nonsense. I would accept an, "uh yeah, that's crap. I don't support that". But you won't even do that.oski003 said:philly1121 said:
This conversation, and even the thought of us "purchasing" Greenland, "taking back" the Canal, Canada "becoming" our 51st state, is intellectual starvation advanced by the less critical thought processors on this board, 88, 34 and 003.
Those free thinkers rely on Russian propaganda, Jesse Watters and Tommy Tuberville to process political "discourse". lol Jesse wants to quench his "imperialist thirst". With Whiskey Pete, Ka$h Money and Tulsi Assad at the wheel, what could possibly go wrong?
What the heck is your problem? I don't recall ever commenting on purchasing Greenland, taking back the canal, or Canada becoming a state. Do you need Alzheimer's meds or do you just purposely make stuff up? Go screw yourself, you apparently unpaid shill.
philly1121 said:003, why you so bitter? Did your Orange Leader not just win an election? Are you upset that Dems didn't purposefully s**t on the Capital walls or throw a Biden flag at a police officer two days ago? You're an awfully bitter person to be complaining so much when you just won. I'm calling out all of Trumps nonsense. I would accept an, "uh yeah, that's crap. I don't support that". But you won't even do that.oski003 said:philly1121 said:
This conversation, and even the thought of us "purchasing" Greenland, "taking back" the Canal, Canada "becoming" our 51st state, is intellectual starvation advanced by the less critical thought processors on this board, 88, 34 and 003.
Those free thinkers rely on Russian propaganda, Jesse Watters and Tommy Tuberville to process political "discourse". lol Jesse wants to quench his "imperialist thirst". With Whiskey Pete, Ka$h Money and Tulsi Assad at the wheel, what could possibly go wrong?
What the heck is your problem? I don't recall ever commenting on purchasing Greenland, taking back the canal, or Canada becoming a state. Do you need Alzheimer's meds or do you just purposely make stuff up? Go screw yourself, you apparently unpaid shill.
tequila4kapp said:bear2034 said:tequila4kapp said:
Renaming the Gulf of Mexico and Canada being the 51st state are just mind numbingly dumb wastes of time and energy.
Panama Canal and Greenland represent actual national security interests. Denmark is our NATO ally. We have a base on Greenland. If we need additional military anything why not work through NATO?
Based on defense expenditures, the US. is NATO.
What is the point of raising the well known spending disparity in this context?
Buying Greenland costs more money than not.
Working through the NATO construct gives us a better chance of realizing additional usage of Greenland for security concerns.
Or perhaps this isn't about security at all and Trump just want all those natural resources for iPhones and EVs. Valid economic points, but a different paradigm entirely from national security
A large portion of the US Defense spending occurs in countries that aren't part of NATO, so your comparison is mostly apples vs oranges.bear2034 said:tequila4kapp said:
Renaming the Gulf of Mexico and Canada being the 51st state are just mind numbingly dumb wastes of time and energy.
Panama Canal and Greenland represent actual national security interests. Denmark is our NATO ally. We have a base on Greenland. If we need additional military anything why not work through NATO?
Based on defense expenditures, the US. is NATO.
Eastern Oregon Bear said:A large portion of the US Defense spending occurs in countries that aren't part of NATO, so your comparison is mostly apples vs oranges.bear2034 said:tequila4kapp said:
Renaming the Gulf of Mexico and Canada being the 51st state are just mind numbingly dumb wastes of time and energy.
Panama Canal and Greenland represent actual national security interests. Denmark is our NATO ally. We have a base on Greenland. If we need additional military anything why not work through NATO?
Based on defense expenditures, the US. is NATO.
Anarchistbear said:
Why are we looking at these s$ithole countries like Greenland and Canada?
Mexico s the obvious answer. Rich country, richer culture. They come to California to work; all of California heads there to retire in cheap housing
DiabloWags said:
He's gonna make CANADA our 51st state too!
tequila4kapp said:bear2034 said:tequila4kapp said:
Renaming the Gulf of Mexico and Canada being the 51st state are just mind numbingly dumb wastes of time and energy.
Panama Canal and Greenland represent actual national security interests. Denmark is our NATO ally. We have a base on Greenland. If we need additional military anything why not work through NATO?
Based on defense expenditures, the US. is NATO.
What is the point of raising the well known spending disparity in this context?
Buying Greenland costs more money than not.
Working through the NATO construct gives us a better chance of realizing additional usage of Greenland for security concerns.
Or perhaps this isn't about security at all and Trump just want all those natural resources for iPhones and EVs. Valid economic points, but a different paradigm entirely from national security
bear2034 said:Anarchistbear said:
Why are we looking at these s$ithole countries like Greenland and Canada?
Mexico s the obvious answer. Rich country, richer culture. They come to California to work; all of California heads there to retire in cheap housing
We already took half of Mexico during our war with them in the 1840's.