Second ('Third') Trump Presidency Thread

it is worth noting that countries like Poland and the Czech Republic worked quite hard to qualify for EU membership...they all underwent deep, ambitious, and often challenging political, economic, legal, and institutional reforms to meet the EU's Copenhagen criteria for membership

no one put a gun to their heads to do this...they did it out of self-interest

as for Australia, I will rely on anecdotal impressions from a recent visit...they are not impressed with what is going on here...to put it mildly
They also wouldn't allow their residents to job for more than a 2 mile radius from their homes during COVID I believe. Get to speak to a lot of Auzzies through work.
 
it is worth noting that countries like Poland and the Czech Republic worked quite hard to qualify for EU membership...they all underwent deep, ambitious, and often challenging political, economic, legal, and institutional reforms to meet the EU's Copenhagen criteria for membership

no one put a gun to their heads to do this...they did it out of self-interest

as for Australia, I will rely on anecdotal impressions from a recent visit...they are not impressed with what is going on here...to put it mildly
Australia is just Western Europe with deadlier animals. We can’t trust them either. Didn’t you see they had that one mass shooting event?
 
What will be funny is in the history books they'll talk about how great of an idea it was to acquire Greeland and there will be little to no talk about the 'tact' that was taken.
It’s an obvious move. Trump has brought it into the spotlight but the need has been talked about by various strategists and think tanks for years. The problem now is Trump has made it public that he wants it, so Western Europe and half of the US have to oppose it. They won’t sell and he can’t invade, so coercion is about all that’s left. Greenland doesn’t have much incentive to leave the EU for protection, because now they get social welfare handouts from the EU and free defense from the US. NATO has become a weakness for the US, but again, Trump will never be allowed to leave because he would like to.

My guess is we start making those “NATO” positions in Greenland all US positions by removing European personnel “for security reasons.” Then start Coast Guard and Navy patrols just outside their ports, set up ocean platform sensing stations just outside the 7 mile limit, maybe even airborne patrols. Make it clear to everyone that we control it whether they like it or not. Eventually the US fills needs for them because no one else is there, and the US exerts more influence.

The problem is, it’s a 20 year play, and that doesn’t get Trump any accolades and it also relies on strategic thinking successors. In the past we would have made deals for US corporations to invest heavily in their economy but today’s multinational ESG obsessed board members would revolt at the thought or sell out US interests.

It’s a pickle.
 
It’s an obvious move. Trump has brought it into the spotlight but the need has been talked about by various strategists and think tanks for years. The problem now is Trump has made it public that he wants it, so Western Europe and half of the US have to oppose it. They won’t sell and he can’t invade, so coercion is about all that’s left. Greenland doesn’t have much incentive to leave the EU for protection, because now they get social welfare handouts from the EU and free defense from the US. NATO has become a weakness for the US, but again, Trump will never be allowed to leave because he would like to.

My guess is we start making those “NATO” positions in Greenland all US positions by removing European personnel “for security reasons.” Then start Coast Guard and Navy patrols just outside their ports, set up ocean platform sensing stations just outside the 7 mile limit, maybe even airborne patrols. Make it clear to everyone that we control it whether they like it or not. Eventually the US fills needs for them because no one else is there, and the US exerts more influence.

The problem is, it’s a 20 year play, and that doesn’t get Trump any accolades and it also relies on strategic thinking successors. In the past we would have made deals for US corporations to invest heavily in their economy but today’s multinational ESG obsessed board members would revolt at the thought or sell out US interests.

It’s a pickle.

I think its as easy as we will stop helping Ukraine and offer no further security guarantee to the general EU.

Not sure what type of bilateral agreements can be made with eastern european nations while under the EU purview but we could exert pressure on those nations to leave the EU (a position I think is popular). Ultimately, the move is away from western europe so I'm ok doing things that upsets them. THey'll be irrelevant in 25 years while their populations are raped and pillages by the oncoming Mulsim majority.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaw
it is worth noting that countries like Poland and the Czech Republic worked quite hard to qualify for EU membership...they all underwent deep, ambitious, and often challenging political, economic, legal, and institutional reforms to meet the EU's Copenhagen criteria for membership

no one put a gun to their heads to do this...they did it out of self-interest

as for Australia, I will rely on anecdotal impressions from a recent visit...they are not impressed with what is going on here...to put it mildly
The Poles and Czechs absolutely had an economic gun to their heads to join the EU. They would gladly decouple from the rest of the arrangement if they could. As for Australia, I suspect most of the people in charge are aware of election cycles in the US, and likely hyperventilate less when they aren’t publicly virtue signaling and clutching pearls.
 
It’s an obvious move. Trump has brought it into the spotlight but the need has been talked about by various strategists and think tanks for years. The problem now is Trump has made it public that he wants it, so Western Europe and half of the US have to oppose it. They won’t sell and he can’t invade, so coercion is about all that’s left. Greenland doesn’t have much incentive to leave the EU for protection, because now they get social welfare handouts from the EU and free defense from the US. NATO has become a weakness for the US, but again, Trump will never be allowed to leave because he would like to.

My guess is we start making those “NATO” positions in Greenland all US positions by removing European personnel “for security reasons.” Then start Coast Guard and Navy patrols just outside their ports, set up ocean platform sensing stations just outside the 7 mile limit, maybe even airborne patrols. Make it clear to everyone that we control it whether they like it or not. Eventually the US fills needs for them because no one else is there, and the US exerts more influence.

The problem is, it’s a 20 year play, and that doesn’t get Trump any accolades and it also relies on strategic thinking successors. In the past we would have made deals for US corporations to invest heavily in their economy but today’s multinational ESG obsessed board members would revolt at the thought or sell out US interests.

It’s a pickle.
It’s not, though. Just because it’d make strategic sense for the United States to own Greenland doesn’t mean we get to. We just don’t get to have the thing we want and that’s fine.
 
It’s not, though. Just because it’d make strategic sense for the United States to own Greenland doesn’t mean we get to. We just don’t get to have the thing we want and that’s fine.

Yeah - the rest of the world gets a massive subsidy while we protect them.

But hey, if western europe wants to step up they can remove all their welfare programs and pay for a military. Here is a shocker though - They won't do that and rely on the US while bitching the US needs land for strategic dominance.

That makes much more sense!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaw
Yeah - the rest of the world gets a massive subsidy while we protect them.

But hey, if western europe wants to step up they can remove all their welfare programs and pay for a military. Here is a shocker though - They won't do that and rely on the US while bitching the US needs land for strategic dominance.

That makes much more sense!
Just spend less on defense and tell Europe to defend themselves without coercing an ally into giving us their land.
 
Australia is just Western Europe with deadlier animals. We can’t trust them either. Didn’t you see they had that one mass shooting event?
They love their rules and are indeed very much like the Europeans in that regard. I spent a day at Queens Park and marvelled at the long list of rules. For dogs, cyclists, people riding their horses. Otoh everyone was having a good time.

Also went to a cricket match between England and Australia. A strange affair known as the Ashes. Don't think I'll be going back. Did get to try my hand batting at a pickup game in the park. I managed to foul off a few balls, which apparently is good because there is no foul territory.

Oh and Sydney is almost 50% immigrant. A beautiful harmonious city. The harbor is amazing. Got to spend a day on the committee boat officiating at a regatta.
 
It’s not, though. Just because it’d make strategic sense for the United States to own Greenland doesn’t mean we get to. We just don’t get to have the thing we want and that’s fine.
You’re ignoring millennia of human history because of modern sensibilities. Ultimately Greenland isn’t strong enough to hold what they have. Denmark or even NATO sans the US aren’t strong enough. That means someone else will. The strategic result of that is unacceptable to the US, the US is strong enough to hold it. That’s the equation. Everything else is just showing the work in the margins.
 
Just spend less on defense and tell Europe to defend themselves without coercing an ally into giving us their land.
BRILLIIANT IDEA!

Lets spend less in the age of AI/Robotics while the CCP invests heavily. That will work out great!

Its incredible the ideas that come from the left.
 
You’re ignoring millennia of human history because of modern sensibilities. Ultimately Greenland isn’t strong enough to hold what they have. Denmark or even NATO sans the US aren’t strong enough. That means someone else will. The strategic result of that is unacceptable to the US, the US is strong enough to hold it. That’s the equation. Everything else is just showing the work in the margins.
I think he'd rather the CCP take it. Or maybe he wants to do nothing so in 30 years we have a world war over the territory.
 
You’re ignoring millennia of human history because of modern sensibilities. Ultimately Greenland isn’t strong enough to hold what they have. Denmark or even NATO sans the US aren’t strong enough. That means someone else will. The strategic result of that is unacceptable to the US, the US is strong enough to hold it. That’s the equation. Everything else is just showing the work in the margins.
My view is that human history is filled with bad actors making immoral choices. I’d prefer not to be one of those historically bad actors. This rationale can be used to defend any act of aggression on our part.
 
So *we* must continue to defend Europe then?

I'd rather walk away from countries that enslave their people due to social media posts and don't protect them from Muslim rape gangs.

My preference would be to outright buy it but if they say no I'd just fucking take it. These Atlantisits who think they are still the power in the world need a dose of reality.
 
The Poles and Czechs absolutely had an economic gun to their heads to join the EU. They would gladly decouple from the rest of the arrangement if they could. As for Australia, I suspect most of the people in charge are aware of election cycles in the US, and likely hyperventilate less when they aren’t publicly virtue signaling and clutching pearls.
The EU makes it very difficult to gain membership. They were not eager to take on the riffraff from the East.
 
I think he'd rather the CCP take it. Or maybe he wants to do nothing so in 30 years we have a world war over the territory.
We have a military alliance and privileges in Greenland already to stop this from happening. We’ve had endless success on the “stop the CCP from taking Greenland” plan before this.
 
I'd rather walk away from countries that enslave their people due to social media posts and don't protect them from Muslim rape gangs.

My preference would be to outright buy it but if they say no I'd just fucking take it. These Atlantisits who think they are still the power in the world need a dose of reality.
I don’t know how else to say this, this is simply Nazi shit.
 
France is a shithole. Soon to be a Muslim majority nation with nukes. I’d much rather ally with Russia. I don’t see any benefit of an alliance with France at this time.

We should be do in everything possible to disarm Western Europe while we still can.
Russia has 20 million Muslims and growing at a faster rate than France
 
Back
Top