politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
The fuck does he even want with Greenland. How did this become a thing. Who planted the idea in his tiny head. Is this some Russian plot putin is making him do.
Probably some misguided thought that somehow it will be more habitable than the rest of the US thanks to climate change (the climate change that doesn’t exist) opening up real resource extraction.
Military dominance in the Arctic. Russia and China are also vying for influence. The US already has a large military base there. Thule Space Base. But taking territory from friends and allies by military force is probably the worst way to go about doing anything.
Maybe that base ought to be closed given the mess the US made with previous bases.
There's a competition going on to see who can convince drump to publicly say the stupidest thing.
Do we have instruments sensitive enough to distinguish between such abyssal levels of idiocy?
Same thing America always wants: oil and control over shipping lanes
But like who told him to do it. This Greenland and Panama canal thing is not something his deep fried brain could come up with in a million years and it came out of him to start which is also weird. Usually the Russian propaganda youtubers start an idea then faux news starts planting seeds then Trump will see it on there and boom we get the tweets. I haven't followed this super close but from what I can gather this originated with him, which is already crazy since he doesn't originate anything on his own except poopy diapers.
Tbh it could've been literally any one of the fascists with which he's surrounded himself this past decade.
Greenland is rich in mineral resources. One of his dozen billionaires got into his empty head.
Gee, I wonder which insecure shitbag with the jr. high mentality it is?
Surely the dems would have been just as bad right?
We'll soon be in the find out phase. This honeymoon has soured.
He's not even President yet and I'm already exhausted by his administration.
Hypotehtically say he sent the amilitary to take Greenland what would the outcome be
I mean
Good question
Essentially that would be the US invading another NATO country (Denmark) and annexing it's territory. Which I think would call for article 5 (In this case an act of war against all of NATO by the largest military of NATO). In practice, would Denmark and the rest of NATO just not call it an invasion? Send a bunch of strongly worded letters about an "unauthorized intrusion" or something? I have no idea.
I mean I think Trump is probably saying these things just to stay in the spotlight or distract from other news, like he often does.
Would probably get Greenland and the US would face a lot of hostility. But he doesn't seem to care about consequences much.
Any other asshole in Washington would be laughed out of office for saying shit like this. This particular asshole gets sanewashed and taken seriously. Why?
He doesn't get taken seriously. By anybody. Ever. It's his singular source of effectiveness.
They all just see him as a wrecking ball to destroy everything with.
Surely 100 dollars out of your yearly taxes to start a pointless war on two fronts is better than 20 cents out of your yearly taxes to stop the greatest threat to human rights, ability for people to self govern and peace in europe against an enemy who has been interfering in everyones internal politics and threatening everyone with nukes constantly.
He's a cult leader. They get to do crazy stuff with no consequences.
What happens when the military just goes "nope"?
Easy: People within its ranks will begin to make choices. Not necessarily take action, just make choices. If things continue small insubordinations will occur and eventually rifts at nearly every level.
If things got really bad the military would split into three:
- Pro Trump
- Pro United States
- Undecided/Everyone else.
If this happens it will be a test of the quality of leadership on both major sides. A fundamental breaking of the chain. It's why Trump wants to replace current military leadership: They've told him no. A pattern we'll continue to see for at least two years.
I read headlines like this and sometimes wonder if someone slipped me crazy pills. It's just so bonkers. Greenland? WTF? Panama, I kind of understand, because reactionary old assholes have been butthurt about Panama being planned to be handed over, then actually handed over, for fucking decades and donvict is the exact type of crotchety and butthurt old dumbass that I've been hearing whine about it for as long as I can remember.
But why the fuck would America use military force to take either? Other than gender-affirming for someone like donvict, what do we stand to gain?
Greenland is just the low-hanging fruit, an easy target. Something for the masses at home. Taking it won't take an afternoon. In fact, they'll just show up, plant a flag, next to it a "No Danes" sign, then call it a day. Then make a biiig celebration of it at home so everybody is distracted while they irreparably dismantle American democracy.
The US? Nothing.
But if you read the classic fascist playbook, a military conflict is an essential stage in grabbing and especially in securing power. A conflict with a near peer like China is too dangerous and costly, but a series of minor to medium conflicts – like war with Panama to "secure" the canal or "liberating" Greenland or Canada might suffice.
People would say that call of duty was extremely unrealistic this time around if they used this as a plot element haha
Greenland has oil, and it'll be prime real-estate in a decade or two once the equatorial regions are inhospitable.