Trump administration using Fox News to spread Greenland annexation propaganda | Possibly getting MAGA public ready to approve of it
-
There have been historical reasons for the US to eye Greenland, mostly related to cold war defense strategies. It’s confusing that a Trump would want to realize these thoughts when it would be a offense to his handler in moscow. Suggests that these historical reasons are not his motivation.
Right now there are three "biggest powers" on the world stage. US, China and Russia. China has belligerent rhetoric towards a lot of their neighbors, particularly Taiwan. They want the areas they control, but largely stop short of action. It's why they claim the South China sea, and other nations need to pointedly ignore their claims to delegitimize them.
Russia has been openly annexing, or trying to anyway, their neighbors, and using historical precedent as their excuse.
As the largest power, the US very notably not annexing land nearby shifts the tone way into the realm of it being the norm not to do that.Annexing, or at least threatening to, nearby land makes it more that all major powers do so, or at least are looking for opportunities to do so.
If cold war schemes give the US historical claim to Greenland, then Russias claims on Ukraine start being less unhinged and more generally expansionist. -
"And being friendly to the world is what got us in this mess. We're not in high school. We don't need friends. Every country puts their interest first. And when our interests align, we can do business. And when they don't, that's life. If we have to burn down a few bridges with Denmark to take Greenland, we're big boys. We dropped A-bombs on Japan, and now they're our top ally in the Pacific. We may have to burn a bridge to build a big beautiful new one to the next generation. America's not handcuffed by history. Trump knows what we need."
-
"And being friendly to the world is what got us in this mess. We're not in high school. We don't need friends. Every country puts their interest first. And when our interests align, we can do business. And when they don't, that's life. If we have to burn down a few bridges with Denmark to take Greenland, we're big boys. We dropped A-bombs on Japan, and now they're our top ally in the Pacific. We may have to burn a bridge to build a big beautiful new one to the next generation. America's not handcuffed by history. Trump knows what we need."
So Trump is openly threatening with WW3, because Denmark would certainly invoke article 5 if attacked. Must suck for the MAGA voters who thought Trump wouldn't start any wars...
-
"And being friendly to the world is what got us in this mess. We're not in high school. We don't need friends. Every country puts their interest first. And when our interests align, we can do business. And when they don't, that's life. If we have to burn down a few bridges with Denmark to take Greenland, we're big boys. We dropped A-bombs on Japan, and now they're our top ally in the Pacific. We may have to burn a bridge to build a big beautiful new one to the next generation. America's not handcuffed by history. Trump knows what we need."
Every patriotic American should start "annexing" MAGAs property and let them see how they like it.
-
I really thought the Greenland shit was just rhetoric a month ago. Holy fuck
Canada is likely the distraction (for now). Greenland and Panama are likely serious, as these are US geostrategic greeds.
-
"And being friendly to the world is what got us in this mess. We're not in high school. We don't need friends. Every country puts their interest first. And when our interests align, we can do business. And when they don't, that's life. If we have to burn down a few bridges with Denmark to take Greenland, we're big boys. We dropped A-bombs on Japan, and now they're our top ally in the Pacific. We may have to burn a bridge to build a big beautiful new one to the next generation. America's not handcuffed by history. Trump knows what we need."
I guess that's new, I just reached the age where a political video can make me gag. That line about Japan was foul as fuck. That's disgusting. The whole thing is pure garbage but claiming you can nuclear bomb countries into making best friend is some of the most abhorrent shit I've ever heard.
-
Trump doesn't want it - Putin wants it. Trump takes it, acts friendly with Putin.
Then there's still the last bit of trouble with Canada. Once they figure that shit out, Putin controls the entire Artic.
Brilliant really. I know we all talk about ridding the US of this meddlesome priest, but we all need to really look at the villain over yonder in Russia who needs a bayonet up his bum.
Can we fucking stop pretending that Trump only does bad things because Putin tells him to? Or that he only won the election because of Putin? Wake the fuck up man. Trump is a fascist who is capable of doing atrocious things without outside influence and he won because a majority of voters in America is pro-fascism. He is aligning with Putin because he admires the way Putin terrorizes his neighbors and his own population. That’s the situation you have to deal with now.
-
I'll just say this: if the US goes to WW3 because of the convicted criminal, I want to see him on the front lines of combat, otherwise, I'm out of the question.
otherwise, I'm out of the question.
You say that like there will be a choice to opt out. If the US goes to WW3, the draft and mandatory service are coming back with it.
-
Armchair general indeed. I can 100% guarantee you that all other NATO members wouldn’t enter a war against the US, at least not with the current state of the European military. I’m not even convinced Denmark would, tbh.
Don’t take this as a defense of US fascist imperialism but Europe isn’t going to effectively suicide over Greenland. And you should actually read what article 5 says, because it’s not this automatic switch that’s flicked and everyone is suddenly at war. People are generally very misinformed about that. It says that if article 5 is invoked, all NATO members need to do what they deem necessary to help. This could of course mean entering the war or it could mean sending 500 first aid kits.
-
Canada is likely the distraction (for now). Greenland and Panama are likely serious, as these are US geostrategic greeds.
Canada is serious as well. But they know they’d have to fight a bloody war over it.
-
Not going to say Luigi should pay that fox cunt a visit, but the question has to be asked, what would the world look like if he did?
Just asking questions.
It's ok I'll say it: I wish every fucking fox propagandist would get executed. They're a cancer on society and there's only one way to deal with a malignant cancer. I'm so fucking sick of them.... Decades of their putridity have rotted the brains of at least 30% of the US population...
-
So Trump is openly threatening with WW3, because Denmark would certainly invoke article 5 if attacked. Must suck for the MAGA voters who thought Trump wouldn't start any wars...
I don’t think the situation is that clear. Entering a war against the US would mean destruction for Denmark (and any country that joins via Article 5). I’m not convinced they would do that.
The way things are currently moving, I think it will be more like the following: there’s probably going to be an independence voting in Greenland - this has been in the works for a while now and every major party there is pro-independence. It will be a terrible idea to move forward with it under a Trump presidency but they will. After the ties with Denmark are severed, the US will immediately swoop in and occupy the now entirely defenseless land.
-
Your interests do align you dumb fucks
They very clearly do not.
-
"And being friendly to the world is what got us in this mess. We're not in high school. We don't need friends. Every country puts their interest first. And when our interests align, we can do business. And when they don't, that's life. If we have to burn down a few bridges with Denmark to take Greenland, we're big boys. We dropped A-bombs on Japan, and now they're our top ally in the Pacific. We may have to burn a bridge to build a big beautiful new one to the next generation. America's not handcuffed by history. Trump knows what we need."
Treacherous bastard. I will take pleasure in the day he and his kind are led to the guillotine.
-
Um....there was a reason why we did what we did to Japan. It helped to stop WWII. Oh and Pearl Harbor was a thing too.
Greenland has done nothing other than exist and have some rare earth materials on it. How do these Fox News hosts even sleep at night spouting this nonsense?
I'm pretty sure everyone working at fox news is Russian.
-
I don’t think the situation is that clear. Entering a war against the US would mean destruction for Denmark (and any country that joins via Article 5). I’m not convinced they would do that.
The way things are currently moving, I think it will be more like the following: there’s probably going to be an independence voting in Greenland - this has been in the works for a while now and every major party there is pro-independence. It will be a terrible idea to move forward with it under a Trump presidency but they will. After the ties with Denmark are severed, the US will immediately swoop in and occupy the now entirely defenseless land.
The USA does not has the capacity to win a war against the rest of NATO. The other EU countries will defend Denmark.
-
Armchair general indeed. I can 100% guarantee you that all other NATO members wouldn’t enter a war against the US, at least not with the current state of the European military. I’m not even convinced Denmark would, tbh.
Don’t take this as a defense of US fascist imperialism but Europe isn’t going to effectively suicide over Greenland. And you should actually read what article 5 says, because it’s not this automatic switch that’s flicked and everyone is suddenly at war. People are generally very misinformed about that. It says that if article 5 is invoked, all NATO members need to do what they deem necessary to help. This could of course mean entering the war or it could mean sending 500 first aid kits.
The USA military does not have the capacity to fight the whole EU.
Also the EU membership means they are all in a defense pact (separate from NATO). See Article 42.7 in the Treaty of Lisbon.
The question isn't if the European countries want to fight the USA. The question is if the USA wants to fight the European countries.
-
Why doesn’t Trump and investors pay Greenland 56 billion to be a territory of the US? It’s literary a million dollars for each Greenlander?
Denmark doesn't want to sell their citizens.
-
Armchair general indeed. I can 100% guarantee you that all other NATO members wouldn’t enter a war against the US, at least not with the current state of the European military. I’m not even convinced Denmark would, tbh.
Don’t take this as a defense of US fascist imperialism but Europe isn’t going to effectively suicide over Greenland. And you should actually read what article 5 says, because it’s not this automatic switch that’s flicked and everyone is suddenly at war. People are generally very misinformed about that. It says that if article 5 is invoked, all NATO members need to do what they deem necessary to help. This could of course mean entering the war or it could mean sending 500 first aid kits.
You are quite right. There is no guarantee that other NATO powers would fight for Greenland.
-
I would assume so as well
They'd probably side with Denmark, but what that would amount to in practice is quite uncertain. They would be under a good deal of pressure not to further aggravate the situation and to let it go while making token gestures of solidarity. I don't share people's faith here that they'd fight the USA.
