Donald Trump ridicules Denmark and insists US will take Greenland
Donald Trump ridicules Denmark and insists US will take Greenland
www.ft.com
Donald Trump ridicules Denmark and insists US will take Greenland
You're viewing a single thread.
88 comments
-
I wonder what the real problem play is here.
- Distraction to soak up outrage and attention?
- Actual desire to take Greenland because they global warming will unveil riches beneath the ice?
- Naively thinking NATO will abandon the USA as quickly as Trump would abandon NATO?
- Thinking they can divert NATO defenses to Greenland instead of Ukraine?
No scenario seems like a smart play but that’s MAGA for you.
-
- Dementia-addled brain latches onto a stupid obsession for random reasons and everyone ends up trying to figure out what 4-D chess move is really behind it.
It's still a problem the world needs to deal with, but I don't think it's as deep as everyone thinks.
-
I agree. He just wants to have it because he floated the idea once and people disagreed with him. The dangerous part is when it eventually becomes an embarrassment to him because Denmark and the EU won't budge.
-
...just give him a sharpie and let him doodle on a big wall map; problem solved...
-
I think that invading greenland is an effective way to destroy nato. Russia and China would be pleased.
-
Its a smart play for china.
China will be happy to pump this with trump.
Trump will happily be told by china he can have it if they can have Taiwan. He won't care about the second part, just hearing he is ok to proceed will send him signing orders
Then Europe/NATO will object complain, block fight etc.
Suddenly dollar isn't the Petro dollar anymore because of their stability issues. China will step up and trumpet themselves as the stable one so use them.
Once Petro dollar isn't USA anymore all hell breaks lose economy wise.
-
Other post on topic had comment on new shipping lanes near Arctic thawing and already being used by Chinese ships illegally and the rich fucks want control.
-
1 seems the most likely to me. 2 won't be relevant for at least another 60 years or so, 3 I hope is not true, 4 seems absurd to me.
88 comments