4 ms·

And this is why NATO ends is it, because Mr Orange didn't get his medal? Time is running out, his private storm troops are already flooding the cities of the o

And this is why NATO ends is it, because Mr Orange didn't get his medal? Time is running out, his private storm troops are already flooding the cities of the opposition.

rayiner 9mo ago
[flagged]
- piva00 9mo ago
  The US was allowed to do businesses deals in Greenland, American billionaires have bought companies to do exactly that there, it was never an issue and the Danish and Greenland governments were always open for that. I don't understand how you can defend this, a supposedly smart person on Hacker News is advocating for the invasion of an allied nation. It's flabbergasting to watch this kind of opinion appear even here.
  - mdhb 9mo ago
    His entire account is dedicated to saying outlandish shit like this. There’s no position he won’t defend. Just downvote and move on.
  - SauciestGNU 9mo ago
    I don't understand how any immigrant, let alone someone visibly darker skinned than the average European, could be in favor of this imperial expansion and domestic repression. Bro will be next on the boxcars spouting off about "it might be genocide but at least it's not woke".
    - deleted 9mo ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 9mo ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 9mo ago
      [deleted]
  - rayiner 9mo ago
    [flagged]
    - piva00 9mo ago
      Denmark is a founding member of NATO, deployed troops to Afghanistan when the US was attacked on 9/11 and lost 40+ soldiers. Denmark has spilled blood for the US. It's an ally as much as it could be, the US's presence in Greenland is entirely because it is in US's interests, and for that, as an ally, Denmark has always allowed the US to deploy as many troops as it wanted. Also as an ally it allowed Americans to do business in Greenland. What else do you want? You aren't even American for the Trump administration, do not understand how you got so entangled in this bizarre worldview.
      - rayiner 9mo ago
        [flagged]
        piva00 9mo ago
        How are you unsure? You don't think the USA benefitted from the world order it set after WW2, with NATO, setting up a global system of economical hegemony and become the wealthiest nation on the history of mankind? What else do you want? More? It's fucking bonkers that's even an argument to be had, it seems it's never enough for the empire. The US's expenditure on its military was never to protect anyone from the Soviets but to impose its own world order against the Soviets, it's been always self-serving and for someone so educated it's a bit ignorant to not understand that. > And what does my background have it do with my point? What Trump thinks of me has nothing to do with my analysis of any particular policy It has to do with you aligning with the agenda, repeating the rhetoric about US's allies as not being worthy even though it built the USA as it exists today in 2026. The same applies to your background, it helped to build the USA as it exists today but given how you look [0] you'll also be considered not worthy when it's convenient by the agenda of the same administration you're aligning with to betray allies. Good luck thinking the USA as it exists can do so without allies, it's a shame that "when education is not liberating, the dream of the oppressed is to become the oppressor". [0] https://www.linkedin.com/in/rayiner-hashem-3481b58/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/rayiner-hashem-3481b58/
  - nec4b 9mo ago
    >> It's flabbergasting to watch this kind of opinion appear even here. I don't agree with rayiner's opinion, but it's a completely rational point of view. Every empire thinks like that. Which part of it is so flabbergasting that is has no precedent many times over in our human history?
- pupppet 9mo ago
  With that argument we should give the US all of Europe.
- _DeadFred_ 9mo ago
  Aren't you a lawyer? Article 6 of the United States Constitution says international law is United States law. US courts are the enforcement mechanism as far as the United States Constitution is concerned. "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land" https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-6/ https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-6/ In the Treaty of the Danish West Indies (so according to the US Constitution, the law of the USA unless Congress withdraws from the treaty) the US will "not object to the Danish Government extending their political and economic interests to the whole of Greenland" https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-39/pdf/STATUTE-39-Pg1706.pdf#page=1 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-39/pdf/STATUTE-3... Why do you so carelessly and reckless disregard the Constitution of the United States, especially being a lawyer?
  - rayiner 9mo ago
    The Supremacy Clause is about federal law overriding state law. It doesn’t elevate treaties to the level of constitutional law. > Why do you so carelessly and reckless disregard the Constitution of the United States, especially being a lawyer? We have an entire generation of jurisprudence based on the idea that “emanations from penumbras” are constitutional law and you’re lecturing me about Article VI?
    - _DeadFred_ 9mo ago
      Got it. You don't believe the Constitution is in effect any longer because cases have gone in ways you disagree with. You think nothing of ignoring an Article of the Constitution. The Supremacy Clause IS IN the Constitution. And IT (the Supremacy Clause) elevates treaties to be equal to and effectively law of the nation. Not treating treaties as such IS violating the Constitution.
      - rayiner 9mo ago
        I think one side thinks the constitution is fake because they offer facially disingenuous pretenses like “emanations from penumbras” and “the living constitution.” There’s also that whole fourth branch of government they created that’s nowhere in the constitution. People who have spent a century advancing creative interpretations of the constitution don’t get to nit pick about Article VI: https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/462732-when-i-am-weaker-thn-you-i-ask-you-for https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/462732-when-i-am-weaker-thn... But again, the Treaty Clause doesn’t elevate treaties to the same status as the constitution or laws. Treaties aren’t even self executing—that means they have no effect domestically unless Congress passes a law implementing the treaty. Treaties aren’t even necessarily self-executing, which means they have no legal power domestically unless congress passes a separate law: https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C2-1-4/ALDE_00012955/ https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C2-1...
NedF 9mo ago
[dead]
throwerxyz 9mo ago
[flagged]
tim333 9mo ago
Mr Orange has been going on about anti NATO stuff since the Russians flew him to Moscow in 1987. Here's the ad he paid for after that https://flaglerlive.com/wp-content/uploads/donald-trump-1987-nyt-ad_edited-1.pdf https://flaglerlive.com/wp-content/uploads/donald-trump-1987... That was before he was orange or a politician. If you are trying to find the cause of some odd effect, look what happened when it first appeared.

And this is why NATO ends is it, because Mr Orange didn't get his medal? Time is running out, his private storm troops are already flooding the cities of the opposition.

rayiner 9mo ago

[flagged]

piva00 9mo ago
The US was allowed to do businesses deals in Greenland, American billionaires have bought companies to do exactly that there, it was never an issue and the Danish and Greenland governments were always open for that. I don't understand how you can defend this, a supposedly smart person on Hacker News is advocating for the invasion of an allied nation. It's flabbergasting to watch this kind of opinion appear even here.
- mdhb 9mo ago
  His entire account is dedicated to saying outlandish shit like this. There’s no position he won’t defend. Just downvote and move on.
- SauciestGNU 9mo ago
  I don't understand how any immigrant, let alone someone visibly darker skinned than the average European, could be in favor of this imperial expansion and domestic repression. Bro will be next on the boxcars spouting off about "it might be genocide but at least it's not woke".
  - deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]
- rayiner 9mo ago
  [flagged]
  - piva00 9mo ago
    Denmark is a founding member of NATO, deployed troops to Afghanistan when the US was attacked on 9/11 and lost 40+ soldiers. Denmark has spilled blood for the US. It's an ally as much as it could be, the US's presence in Greenland is entirely because it is in US's interests, and for that, as an ally, Denmark has always allowed the US to deploy as many troops as it wanted. Also as an ally it allowed Americans to do business in Greenland. What else do you want? You aren't even American for the Trump administration, do not understand how you got so entangled in this bizarre worldview.
    - rayiner 9mo ago
      [flagged]
      - piva00 9mo ago
        How are you unsure? You don't think the USA benefitted from the world order it set after WW2, with NATO, setting up a global system of economical hegemony and become the wealthiest nation on the history of mankind? What else do you want? More? It's fucking bonkers that's even an argument to be had, it seems it's never enough for the empire. The US's expenditure on its military was never to protect anyone from the Soviets but to impose its own world order against the Soviets, it's been always self-serving and for someone so educated it's a bit ignorant to not understand that. > And what does my background have it do with my point? What Trump thinks of me has nothing to do with my analysis of any particular policy It has to do with you aligning with the agenda, repeating the rhetoric about US's allies as not being worthy even though it built the USA as it exists today in 2026. The same applies to your background, it helped to build the USA as it exists today but given how you look [0] you'll also be considered not worthy when it's convenient by the agenda of the same administration you're aligning with to betray allies. Good luck thinking the USA as it exists can do so without allies, it's a shame that "when education is not liberating, the dream of the oppressed is to become the oppressor". [0] https://www.linkedin.com/in/rayiner-hashem-3481b58/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/rayiner-hashem-3481b58/
- nec4b 9mo ago
  >> It's flabbergasting to watch this kind of opinion appear even here. I don't agree with rayiner's opinion, but it's a completely rational point of view. Every empire thinks like that. Which part of it is so flabbergasting that is has no precedent many times over in our human history?
pupppet 9mo ago
With that argument we should give the US all of Europe.
_DeadFred_ 9mo ago
Aren't you a lawyer? Article 6 of the United States Constitution says international law is United States law. US courts are the enforcement mechanism as far as the United States Constitution is concerned. "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land" https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-6/ https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-6/ In the Treaty of the Danish West Indies (so according to the US Constitution, the law of the USA unless Congress withdraws from the treaty) the US will "not object to the Danish Government extending their political and economic interests to the whole of Greenland" https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-39/pdf/STATUTE-39-Pg1706.pdf#page=1 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-39/pdf/STATUTE-3... Why do you so carelessly and reckless disregard the Constitution of the United States, especially being a lawyer?
- rayiner 9mo ago
  The Supremacy Clause is about federal law overriding state law. It doesn’t elevate treaties to the level of constitutional law. > Why do you so carelessly and reckless disregard the Constitution of the United States, especially being a lawyer? We have an entire generation of jurisprudence based on the idea that “emanations from penumbras” are constitutional law and you’re lecturing me about Article VI?
  - _DeadFred_ 9mo ago
    Got it. You don't believe the Constitution is in effect any longer because cases have gone in ways you disagree with. You think nothing of ignoring an Article of the Constitution. The Supremacy Clause IS IN the Constitution. And IT (the Supremacy Clause) elevates treaties to be equal to and effectively law of the nation. Not treating treaties as such IS violating the Constitution.
    - rayiner 9mo ago
      I think one side thinks the constitution is fake because they offer facially disingenuous pretenses like “emanations from penumbras” and “the living constitution.” There’s also that whole fourth branch of government they created that’s nowhere in the constitution. People who have spent a century advancing creative interpretations of the constitution don’t get to nit pick about Article VI: https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/462732-when-i-am-weaker-thn-you-i-ask-you-for https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/462732-when-i-am-weaker-thn... But again, the Treaty Clause doesn’t elevate treaties to the same status as the constitution or laws. Treaties aren’t even self executing—that means they have no effect domestically unless Congress passes a law implementing the treaty. Treaties aren’t even necessarily self-executing, which means they have no legal power domestically unless congress passes a separate law: https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C2-1-4/ALDE_00012955/ https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C2-1...

NedF 9mo ago

[dead]

throwerxyz 9mo ago

[flagged]

tim333 9mo ago

Mr Orange has been going on about anti NATO stuff since the Russians flew him to Moscow in 1987. Here's the ad he paid for after that https://flaglerlive.com/wp-content/uploads/donald-trump-1987-nyt-ad_edited-1.pdf https://flaglerlive.com/wp-content/uploads/donald-trump-1987... That was before he was orange or a politician. If you are trying to find the cause of some odd effect, look what happened when it first appeared.