3 ms·

> Don’t forget, we basically protect Canada. But here’s the problem with Canada. So many friends up there, I love the Canadian people. They’re great, but we’re

> Don’t forget, we basically protect Canada. But here’s the problem with Canada. So many friends up there, I love the Canadian people. They’re great, but we’re spending hundreds of billions a year to protect it. We’re spending hundreds of billions a year to take care of Canada. We lose in trade deficits. Trump is engaging in some light trolling here. He's going off script and just saying whatever comes across his mind. His overall goal is to lay out grievances and trying to upsell their severity. The end goal is, and always is, to make some kind of "deal". He's a Karen, trying to talk to the manager. People shouldn't take his threats literally - but you should take them seriously. I don't think the threat is that the US invades Greenland, but that the US uses it as an excuse to try to sour relations with Europe. Same thing with Panama and renaming the gulf thing. I don't think the US would take over Panama (again). But there is probably going to be a massive effort to get China to stop trading with Cuba and Venezuela.

SavageBeast 2y ago
The Danish government is and has been well under their 2% NATO commitment. I can see a case where in the face of the requirement being moved up from 2%, Denmark may need the money. Lets not forget about the 57K people in Greenland who would love some mailbox money for letting the US exploit their natural resources. The way I see this happening is that the people of Greenland are sold on the idea and the Danish govt. is in the awkward position of trying to stop them, and theres some leverage over them regarding their ability to fund their NATO commitment. Additionally I have a feeling someone is going to have to fund whatever becomes of the war in Ukraine because it seems to me the US is finished. Your take is dead on but there is a case where we actually do get it done and its not as hard as its being made out to be.
- seszett 2y ago
  > The way I see this happening is that the people of Greenland are sold on the idea Since the first time Trump mentioned buying Greenland though, public opinion in Greenland has largely changed in favour of joining the EU instead (while they previously chose not to be part of the EU). It's at 60% in favour now. So I don't really see this happening.
jakeinspace 2y ago
If someone makes off-hand threats to another while brandishing a gun, that’s illegal (assault) and condemnable. The (soon) president of the US wields nuclear weapons and the most powerful military on earth, his words by default cary the threat of violence. The difference between this and an asshole with a gun is that nobody stands above a president, at least between elections. He has impunity, but he does at least merit condemnation.
- IAmGraydon 2y ago
  Having a gun in your top drawer of your bedside table is not the same thing as holding it in your hand and pointing it at someone. Your analogy is a massive stretch, to say the least.
  - jakeinspace 2y ago
    Sure, I guess he wasn’t waving the nuclear football around, but give him time. He does have a flair for the dramatic and ridiculous.
pell 2y ago
> Trump is engaging in some light trolling here. He's going off script and just saying whatever comes across his mind. >People shouldn’t take his threats literally - but you should take them seriously. So, when Trump talks about possibly using force to annex Greenland or control the Panama canal we all should consider this trolling but you also want everyone to take it seriously. I understand you think you’ve made some nuanced point there, however this is a complete contradiction, if you aren’t aware. The lengths some people go to excuse, explain away and play down this man’s words is quite astounding.

SavageBeast 2y ago

The Danish government is and has been well under their 2% NATO commitment. I can see a case where in the face of the requirement being moved up from 2%, Denmark may need the money. Lets not forget about the 57K people in Greenland who would love some mailbox money for letting the US exploit their natural resources. The way I see this happening is that the people of Greenland are sold on the idea and the Danish govt. is in the awkward position of trying to stop them, and theres some leverage over them regarding their ability to fund their NATO commitment. Additionally I have a feeling someone is going to have to fund whatever becomes of the war in Ukraine because it seems to me the US is finished. Your take is dead on but there is a case where we actually do get it done and its not as hard as its being made out to be.

seszett 2y ago
> The way I see this happening is that the people of Greenland are sold on the idea Since the first time Trump mentioned buying Greenland though, public opinion in Greenland has largely changed in favour of joining the EU instead (while they previously chose not to be part of the EU). It's at 60% in favour now. So I don't really see this happening.

jakeinspace 2y ago

If someone makes off-hand threats to another while brandishing a gun, that’s illegal (assault) and condemnable. The (soon) president of the US wields nuclear weapons and the most powerful military on earth, his words by default cary the threat of violence. The difference between this and an asshole with a gun is that nobody stands above a president, at least between elections. He has impunity, but he does at least merit condemnation.

IAmGraydon 2y ago
Having a gun in your top drawer of your bedside table is not the same thing as holding it in your hand and pointing it at someone. Your analogy is a massive stretch, to say the least.
- jakeinspace 2y ago
  Sure, I guess he wasn’t waving the nuclear football around, but give him time. He does have a flair for the dramatic and ridiculous.

pell 2y ago

> Trump is engaging in some light trolling here. He's going off script and just saying whatever comes across his mind. >People shouldn’t take his threats literally - but you should take them seriously. So, when Trump talks about possibly using force to annex Greenland or control the Panama canal we all should consider this trolling but you also want everyone to take it seriously. I understand you think you’ve made some nuanced point there, however this is a complete contradiction, if you aren’t aware. The lengths some people go to excuse, explain away and play down this man’s words is quite astounding.