the old fart wants greenland

SmartSelect_20260326_101823_Samsung Internet.jpgSmartSelect_20260326_101850_Samsung Internet.jpg
 
Mitigating Factors:
A total of 37 troops were initially deployed by European NATO countries to Greenland in January 2026 as part of Operation Arctic Endurance, a response to U.S. President Trump’s annexation threats. The breakdown by country was: France – 15 soldiers, Germany – 13, Sweden – 3, Norway – 2, Finland – 2, United Kingdom – 1, and Netherlands – 1.

Jan 29.
Denmark already has 150 soldiers stationed in Greenland under its Joint Arctic Command.

https://thefederal.com/category/international/how-serious-is-europe-about-defending-greenland-225936
 
Likeicare said:
whats public
Click to expand...
I can't believe a master troll as yourself cannot recognize Trump amateurish trolling efforts.

1. Most of the population of Greenland doesn't want to be in the US. Which I can agree, why would they want to be run by jews and have trannies everywhere?
2. Threatening to "take Greenland by any means necessary," motivated the EU to lethargically step up their efforts to thwart any Russian encroachment into the Artic.
3. The US is in no position to military take or strike the EU. In spite of all of Trump's saber rattling.
...a. The EU troops stationed there are political pawns to be sacrificed if Russia makes a move.
...b. The EU couldn't sustain a long scale conflict with Russia at the moment, or in the near future. Maybe by 2029. But even given that amount of time, it's unlikely they would be ready.
...c. Russia doesn't want to get into another conflict, especially with the EU and make the "predictions" of Russia steamrolling west come true.
...d. The number of US troops in Greenland, though outnumbering the EU in manpower and equipment, are also sacrificial pawns.
...e. The US will soon be bogged down in Iran / Strait of Hormuz if the situation is not closed soon. So diverting resources and manpower would be highly retarded.
...f. Iran is determined to fight. Why not. They are the regional power, (asides Turkey) and Iran is looking forward to embarrassing the US militarily, humiliating israel, and severing the ties to the other muslim states aligned with the US. Iran would have to colossally fuck up to lose this thing. Luckily for Iran they don't have losers in the government that want to lose.
 
Call Me Tim said:
depends on how you look at it.

Bad term IF you think Trump is not compromised.

Meh, term if you think Trump is America First.

Fantastic term because Trump is israel first.
Click to expand...
Well, I was pretty sure I was sold a bill of goods with on the tariff front. If the job was to wreck the economy instead make it better, then great job.
 
Heidi the girl said:
Well, I was pretty sure I was sold a bill of goods with on the tariff front. If the job was to wreck the economy instead make it better, then great job.
Click to expand...
To blame tariffs or see tariffs as the solution to the US' economic woes when the real culprit is insane amounts of deficit spending is mega-retarded.

To have a net gain, and therefore a return to the average American taxpayer that is of any real amount, the tariffs would have to increase at a rate at least twice the inflation rate per year.
**
The U.S. federal budget deficit for fiscal year 2025 totaled $1.8 trillion
**

It is impossible for the tarifs to increase or maintain that level of increase. I speculate it won't even be able to match the amount in deficit spending. There simply isn't enough goods being manufactured, shipped or sold to/in the US. That's why it will fail.

We don't have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom