One more time........AOC.......................................plus 3. Believe me.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
This is so fucking hillarious, like the Denmark issue. I wonder if he intentionally says dumb shit like this to get more media coverage or does he honestly believe this.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones (Old Spike)
Jews =/= Israel
+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
Dagambit (Long Spike)
that is what is wrong with religion today, its followers don't take it seriously.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
puttefnask (Old Spike)
He's doing it to shape the debate going forward.
Greenland voted to leave the EU in 1981 and left in 1985, but is still a part of the Kingdom of Denmark maintaining homerule. The main reason was Greenland's disagreements with EU's Common Fisheries Policy to regain their control of Greenlandic fish resources in the region. The citizens are still EU citizens within EU treaties and Danish nationality law.
Bringing Greenland up for no apparent reason during Brexit times, can be to reveal past events where EU let certain things go in order to secure another member state. He might be doing it in order to "be the guy" who led to a solution to the current Brexit mess. It could also be to publicize EU's previous shortcomings.
But at the same time he is annoying Russia and China, both having interests in the region. Russia is trying to secure areas from the EU with increased military presence because the ice in Greenland is melting rapidly because of global warming, revealing the vast amounts of resources hiding underneath.
China and Russia are right now expanding all of their territorial waters, with China building military bases where they promised not to. Greenland has become a major strategic interest point because of global warming, and if Greenland has to choose between China, Russia and USA to protect their interests, which is avoiding the drilling of oil in their fishing waters, which would threaten their way of life, they'll probably go for USA in the end.
NATO is of course a thing, but it still gives Trump another reason to bring up other countries' failure to fund NATO, Denmark being one of the many not reaching the 2% requirement. And I just checked, he just did on twitter, so no surprise there.
The EU still has no army, despite trying. Which means they will look useless in this potential future conflict in the quest for resources. They already look useless because USA just offered to buy a country from under them.
The Danish Prime Minister retorted with insults, as if the offer was absurd, while simultaneously having China investing in the country. But by doing that, and Trump cancelling the trip, she became responsible for the cancellation of his meeting with the Danish royal family which has been planned for a long time. You don't want to piss off your own royalty as a Prime Minister. It's like cancelling your own grandmother's birthday party.
So now she's giving statements insinuating it was terrible of Trump to cancel his trip to Greenland and Denmark after publically ridiculing him for the idea in the first place. Which makes her look even worse.
All I'm saying is that this is a setup. He will come out on top. And he's getting coverage. He's got China by the balls by saying if they reproduce Tiananman Square in Hong King, he won't contribute to fixing the trade agreements.
Not saying he's the architect or playing four-dimensional chess.
But everyone has become so goddamned predictable, why would anyone not take advantage of that?
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
WOW, you are reading a lot into a knee jerk "offended" reaction.
Greenland is not for sale, the real insult was offering to buy it.
If he were serious he would go there and make his case and give them a price. Of course he does not have either.
If it were to "aid brexit" it would be meddling with internal politics of allies.
Everybody negotiating brexit (minus boris johnson, it seems, but even he has somewhat come to his senses) knows more about this (and greenland) than trump, he actually proved various times he has not got a clue what EU is and how EU works, neither do any of his supporters it seems. Thebritish side really don't need another opinionated ignoramus to help them out.
As the EU is not a country creating an army is a huge task and it would probably be more like a UN blue helmets force than anything else, other solutions would make more sense
All this is nothing but publicity stunts for the election, trying to be more in the news than the competition, regardless of what this news is, nothing more nothing less. Possibly diverting attention from a certain "suicide" is also part o the reason.
Of course his base supporters are gobbling this up hungrily and those with more than half a brain even come up with long winded and far fetched justifications / explanations. How this will affect the undecided remains to be seen. There is hope that they learned from last time, though.
+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
puttefnask (Old Spike)
I never said his agenda was to "aid brexit". That was only part of my second point, where I proposed that if he is the one who brings up a solution, it would humiliate the EU. Which is why I added: "It could also be to publicize EU's previous shortcomings." to ensure no one could misinterpret it. One of their shortcomings being another member(Greenland) that left without the chaos currently being displayed and a sensible deal was made.
Despite whatever Trump's plan really was, he is still shaping the debate. He know he is. We can see he is, because whatever crazy sounding thing he tweets or say is what the media covers, thus whatever you are talking about leading up to another election cycle.
My first sentence was: "He's doing it to shape the debate going forward."
What were you doing with your comment? You were engaging in a topic which is only being discussed because Donald Trump brought it up.
"This is so fucking hillarious, like the Denmark issue. I wonder if he intentionally says dumb shit like this to get more media coverage or does he honestly believe this."
It's both! And more! Which is why I added all the stuff about China and Russia's interest in Greenland. I only knew that because I saw SkyNews and BBC report on it.
As for your point about an EU army:
"As the EU is not a country creating an army is a huge task and it would probably be more like a UN blue helmets force than anything else, other solutions would make more sense"
The EU are the ones who are saying they can't rely on the United States to protect them anymore.
And Merkel has come out openly asking for a "True European army", so I don't know what you're trying to allude to. No one is being called conspiracy nut for it anymore.
Yes, it would be a huge task, but these people are power hungry enough to go through with it, despite NATO's existence.
Comments
(Long Spike)
One more time........AOC.......................................plus 3. Believe me.
(Old Spike)
This is so fucking hillarious, like the Denmark issue. I wonder if he intentionally says dumb shit like this to get more media coverage or does he honestly believe this.
(Old Spike)
Jews =/= Israel
(Long Spike)
that is what is wrong with religion today, its followers don't take it seriously.
(Old Spike)
He's doing it to shape the debate going forward.
Greenland voted to leave the EU in 1981 and left in 1985, but is still a part of the Kingdom of Denmark maintaining homerule. The main reason was Greenland's disagreements with EU's Common Fisheries Policy to regain their control of Greenlandic fish resources in the region. The citizens are still EU citizens within EU treaties and Danish nationality law.
Bringing Greenland up for no apparent reason during Brexit times, can be to reveal past events where EU let certain things go in order to secure another member state. He might be doing it in order to "be the guy" who led to a solution to the current Brexit mess. It could also be to publicize EU's previous shortcomings.
But at the same time he is annoying Russia and China, both having interests in the region. Russia is trying to secure areas from the EU with increased military presence because the ice in Greenland is melting rapidly because of global warming, revealing the vast amounts of resources hiding underneath.
China and Russia are right now expanding all of their territorial waters, with China building military bases where they promised not to. Greenland has become a major strategic interest point because of global warming, and if Greenland has to choose between China, Russia and USA to protect their interests, which is avoiding the drilling of oil in their fishing waters, which would threaten their way of life, they'll probably go for USA in the end.
NATO is of course a thing, but it still gives Trump another reason to bring up other countries' failure to fund NATO, Denmark being one of the many not reaching the 2% requirement. And I just checked, he just did on twitter, so no surprise there.
The EU still has no army, despite trying. Which means they will look useless in this potential future conflict in the quest for resources. They already look useless because USA just offered to buy a country from under them.
The Danish Prime Minister retorted with insults, as if the offer was absurd, while simultaneously having China investing in the country. But by doing that, and Trump cancelling the trip, she became responsible for the cancellation of his meeting with the Danish royal family which has been planned for a long time. You don't want to piss off your own royalty as a Prime Minister. It's like cancelling your own grandmother's birthday party.
So now she's giving statements insinuating it was terrible of Trump to cancel his trip to Greenland and Denmark after publically ridiculing him for the idea in the first place. Which makes her look even worse.
All I'm saying is that this is a setup. He will come out on top. And he's getting coverage. He's got China by the balls by saying if they reproduce Tiananman Square in Hong King, he won't contribute to fixing the trade agreements.
Not saying he's the architect or playing four-dimensional chess.
But everyone has become so goddamned predictable, why would anyone not take advantage of that?
(Old Spike)
WOW, you are reading a lot into a knee jerk "offended" reaction.
All this is nothing but publicity stunts for the election, trying to be more in the news than the competition, regardless of what this news is, nothing more nothing less. Possibly diverting attention from a certain "suicide" is also part o the reason.
Of course his base supporters are gobbling this up hungrily and those with more than half a brain even come up with long winded and far fetched justifications / explanations. How this will affect the undecided remains to be seen. There is hope that they learned from last time, though.
(Old Spike)
I never said his agenda was to "aid brexit". That was only part of my second point, where I proposed that if he is the one who brings up a solution, it would humiliate the EU. Which is why I added: "It could also be to publicize EU's previous shortcomings." to ensure no one could misinterpret it. One of their shortcomings being another member(Greenland) that left without the chaos currently being displayed and a sensible deal was made.
Despite whatever Trump's plan really was, he is still shaping the debate. He know he is. We can see he is, because whatever crazy sounding thing he tweets or say is what the media covers, thus whatever you are talking about leading up to another election cycle.
My first sentence was: "He's doing it to shape the debate going forward."
What were you doing with your comment? You were engaging in a topic which is only being discussed because Donald Trump brought it up.
"This is so fucking hillarious, like the Denmark issue. I wonder if he intentionally says dumb shit like this to get more media coverage or does he honestly believe this."
It's both! And more! Which is why I added all the stuff about China and Russia's interest in Greenland. I only knew that because I saw SkyNews and BBC report on it.
As for your point about an EU army:
"As the EU is not a country creating an army is a huge task and it would probably be more like a UN blue helmets force than anything else, other solutions would make more sense"
The EU are the ones who are saying they can't rely on the United States to protect them anymore.
And Merkel has come out openly asking for a "True European army", so I don't know what you're trying to allude to. No one is being called conspiracy nut for it anymore.
Yes, it would be a huge task, but these people are power hungry enough to go through with it, despite NATO's existence.