• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 19:59
CEST 01:59
KST 08:59
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
BGE Stara Zagora 2025: Info & Preview27Code S RO12 Preview: GuMiho, Bunny, SHIN, ByuN3The Memories We Share - Facing the Final(?) GSL47Code S RO12 Preview: Cure, Zoun, Solar, Creator4[ASL19] Finals Preview: Daunting Task30
Community News
Weekly Cups (June 2-8): herO doubles down1[BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates9GSL Ro4 and Finals moved to Sunday June 15th13Weekly Cups (May 27-June 1): ByuN goes back-to-back0EWC 2025 Regional Qualifier Results26
StarCraft 2
General
RECLAIM YOUR SCAMMED CRYPTOCURRENCY WITH SLAYER CO The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation Best Crypto Asset Recovery Service Providers CN community: Firefly accused of suspicious activities Firefly do had match fixing
Tourneys
Bellum Gens Elite: Stara Zagora 2025 $3,500 WardiTV European League 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament SOOPer7s Showmatches 2025 Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2)
Strategy
[G] Darkgrid Layout Simple Questions Simple Answers [G] PvT Cheese: 13 Gate Proxy Robo
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady Mutation # 476 Charnel House Mutation # 475 Hard Target Mutation # 474 Futile Resistance
Brood War
General
BGH auto balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Will foreigners ever be able to challenge Koreans? Mihu vs Korea Players Statistics BW General Discussion [BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates
Tourneys
[ASL19] Grand Finals NA Team League 6/8/2025 [Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL20] ProLeague Bracket Stage - Day 2
Strategy
I am doing this better than progamers do. [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread What do you want from future RTS games? Armies of Exigo - YesYes? Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
LiquidLegends to reintegrate into TL.net
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Vape Nation Thread European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
Maru Fan Club Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Korean Music Discussion [Manga] One Piece
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Cognitive styles x game perf…
TrAiDoS
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Heero Yuy & the Tax…
KrillinFromwales
I was completely wrong ab…
jameswatts
Need Your Help/Advice
Glider
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Poker
Nebuchad
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 22303 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4875

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 4873 4874 4875 4876 4877 5010 Next
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting!

NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.

Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.


If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread
DarkPlasmaBall
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States44106 Posts
Last Edited: 2025-03-24 14:44:10
March 24 2025 14:18 GMT
#97481
On March 24 2025 22:54 oBlade wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 24 2025 20:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On March 24 2025 20:20 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 19:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On March 24 2025 19:09 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 10:57 Dan HH wrote:
On March 24 2025 10:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
In a recent interview, JD Vance said that Greenland and Denmark were threatening our national security, and that we may need to take "more territorial interest in Greenland" to "solve that problem":
https://x.com/PawlowskiMario/status/1903930497270513792

Even the Fox News chyron had "Vance: Possibility U.S. Acquires Greenland".

My only surprise here is that he can keep himself from laughing when pretending there's anything more to this than Trump playing with a sharpie on the map, inspired no doubt by his idol's attempted annexation of Ukraine which he described as genius.

NATO Secretary General agrees Greenland is of security significance.

We know that the Chinese are using this route and the Russians are using this route. And we know that we lack icebreakers. There are seven Arctic countries in the region that are actually working on this matter under US leadership, that is very important and we have to be there.


Is Denmark contributing or holding back? Maybe the former, maybe the latter. Maybe everyone's needs are best served under a new arrangement.


Please don't misrepresent the NATO Secretary General's words on the matter. You seem to have quote-mined him:

"Rutte agreed that Greenland and the Arctic Circle are critical for security reasons, noting that China and Russia have a growing presence in the region. But he said any discussion about Trump’s attempts to acquire Greenland were outside of his purview. “I don’t want to drag NATO in that,” Rutte said."
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5193242-trump-greenland-nato-secretary/

You citing Mark Rutte here as an advocate for Trump wanting to steal Greenland is actually implying the opposite of what Mark Rutte wants. Rutte isn't advocating for that at all, and doesn't think he/NATO should be involved:

"Rutte told Trump that he would leave the question of Greenland's future to others and that, "I don't want to drag NATO" into the debate." https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-expresses-confidence-that-us-will-annex-greenland-2025-03-13/

From the above Reuters article, these individuals are far more relevant:

"The comments drew a swift rejection from the outgoing prime minister of Greenland. "The U.S. president has once again aired the thought of annexing us," Mute Egede said in a Facebook post. "Enough is enough." Jens-Frederik Nielsen, the leader of the island's pro-business Demokraatit party, which won Greenland's parliamentary election on Tuesday, also rejected the comments. "Trump's statement from the US is inappropriate and just shows once again that we must stand together in such situations," Nielsen wrote on Facebook."

You are having a hard time again.

At no point did I cite him as a reason to steal Greenland, nor suggest that he advocated for stealing Greenland, nor advocate stealing Greenland. On the issue of what if any country Greenland should be a part of, he professionally and diplomatically stayed out rightfully acknowleding it's not his place to say either (any) way.

But you seem read on the issue. How do you view the security concerns related with Greenland that he referred to, and how would you handle them within the status quo framework of NATO and RedWhiteAndBlueLand as it is?
1) Nonexistent/overblown
2) Manageable in ways you can specify
3) Other?


You cited him as a direct counter to how absurd it is for Trump to invade Greenland.

Absolutely not.

You posted an X account's comment on a 20 second clip from an interview almost 2 months ago.


Are you intentionally trying to further obfuscate the issue by pretending that yesterday's interview was "2 months ago"?

"On Sunday March 23, Vice President JD Vance was interviewed by Fox News. During the interview, JD Vance raised doubts about Denmark’s stewardship over the island and suggested it was not a good ally: “Denmark, which controls Greenland, is not doing its job and is not being a good ally.” JD Vance also confirmed the territorial interest of the United States in Greenland: “If that means we need to take more territorial interest in Greenland, that is what President Trump is going to do, because he doesn’t care about what the Europeans scream at us, he cares about putting the interests of America’s citizens first.”" https://www.kyivpost.com/post/49464

The video clip I posted doesn't misrepresent what Vance and Trump want. Your partial quote of what Rutte said absolutely does misrepresent him. Just stop. When you double-down on your defense of invading Greenland and faking other people's support for the takeover, it eventually leaves the realm of what could possibly be attributed as an honest mistake, and enters into frantic desperation and goalpost-moving.

Edit/Update: The above kyivpost source has the interview date wrong. It doesn't detract from the interview itself though.
"There is nothing more satisfying than looking at a crowd of people and helping them get what I love." ~Day[9] Daily #100
DarkPlasmaBall
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States44106 Posts
March 24 2025 14:27 GMT
#97482
Switching gears from Greenland (not our 51st state) to Canada (also not our 51st state), we see that Canada's election is going to include just how well each candidate can supposedly stand up to Trump's threats:

US President Donald Trump will obviously not be on the ballot in Canada – but how each candidate proposes to deal with him is. ...

Carney describes the danger posed by Trump as existential, saying at his campaign kickoff that the US president wants to “break us so America can own us.” “I’m asking Canadians for a strong, positive mandate to deal with President Trump and to build a new Canadian economy that works for everyone because I know we need change, big change, positive change,” added Carney Sunday, as he began a five-week campaign that will end with a national vote on April 28.

His Conservative Party challenger, Pierre Poilievre, sounds near identical in his tone. “I will insist the president recognize the independence and sovereignty of Canada, I will insist that he stop tariffing our nation, and at the same time I will strengthen our country so that we can be capable of standing on our own two feet and standing up to the Americans where and when necessary,” said Poilievre in his first campaign speech Sunday.

Poilievre and Carney’s parties are virtually tied heading into this campaign and how they calibrate their response to Trump for voters, many of whom are equally enraged and terrified by the US leader’s threats, will likely decide this election.
https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/23/world/canada-election-trump-analysis-intl-hnk/index.html

So while Trump has created and exacerbated huge rifts within the United States, he's also unifying other countries against him/us.
"There is nothing more satisfying than looking at a crowd of people and helping them get what I love." ~Day[9] Daily #100
oBlade
Profile Blog Joined December 2008
United States5467 Posts
Last Edited: 2025-03-24 14:29:36
March 24 2025 14:27 GMT
#97483
On March 24 2025 23:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 24 2025 22:54 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 20:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On March 24 2025 20:20 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 19:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On March 24 2025 19:09 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 10:57 Dan HH wrote:
On March 24 2025 10:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
In a recent interview, JD Vance said that Greenland and Denmark were threatening our national security, and that we may need to take "more territorial interest in Greenland" to "solve that problem":
https://x.com/PawlowskiMario/status/1903930497270513792

Even the Fox News chyron had "Vance: Possibility U.S. Acquires Greenland".

My only surprise here is that he can keep himself from laughing when pretending there's anything more to this than Trump playing with a sharpie on the map, inspired no doubt by his idol's attempted annexation of Ukraine which he described as genius.

NATO Secretary General agrees Greenland is of security significance.

We know that the Chinese are using this route and the Russians are using this route. And we know that we lack icebreakers. There are seven Arctic countries in the region that are actually working on this matter under US leadership, that is very important and we have to be there.


Is Denmark contributing or holding back? Maybe the former, maybe the latter. Maybe everyone's needs are best served under a new arrangement.


Please don't misrepresent the NATO Secretary General's words on the matter. You seem to have quote-mined him:

"Rutte agreed that Greenland and the Arctic Circle are critical for security reasons, noting that China and Russia have a growing presence in the region. But he said any discussion about Trump’s attempts to acquire Greenland were outside of his purview. “I don’t want to drag NATO in that,” Rutte said."
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5193242-trump-greenland-nato-secretary/

You citing Mark Rutte here as an advocate for Trump wanting to steal Greenland is actually implying the opposite of what Mark Rutte wants. Rutte isn't advocating for that at all, and doesn't think he/NATO should be involved:

"Rutte told Trump that he would leave the question of Greenland's future to others and that, "I don't want to drag NATO" into the debate." https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-expresses-confidence-that-us-will-annex-greenland-2025-03-13/

From the above Reuters article, these individuals are far more relevant:

"The comments drew a swift rejection from the outgoing prime minister of Greenland. "The U.S. president has once again aired the thought of annexing us," Mute Egede said in a Facebook post. "Enough is enough." Jens-Frederik Nielsen, the leader of the island's pro-business Demokraatit party, which won Greenland's parliamentary election on Tuesday, also rejected the comments. "Trump's statement from the US is inappropriate and just shows once again that we must stand together in such situations," Nielsen wrote on Facebook."

You are having a hard time again.

At no point did I cite him as a reason to steal Greenland, nor suggest that he advocated for stealing Greenland, nor advocate stealing Greenland. On the issue of what if any country Greenland should be a part of, he professionally and diplomatically stayed out rightfully acknowleding it's not his place to say either (any) way.

But you seem read on the issue. How do you view the security concerns related with Greenland that he referred to, and how would you handle them within the status quo framework of NATO and RedWhiteAndBlueLand as it is?
1) Nonexistent/overblown
2) Manageable in ways you can specify
3) Other?


You cited him as a direct counter to how absurd it is for Trump to invade Greenland.

Absolutely not.

You posted an X account's comment on a 20 second clip from an interview almost 2 months ago.


Are you intentionally trying to further obfuscate the issue by pretending that yesterday's interview was "2 months ago"?

"On Sunday March 23, Vice President JD Vance was interviewed by Fox News. During the interview, JD Vance raised doubts about Denmark’s stewardship over the island and suggested it was not a good ally: “Denmark, which controls Greenland, is not doing its job and is not being a good ally.” JD Vance also confirmed the territorial interest of the United States in Greenland: “If that means we need to take more territorial interest in Greenland, that is what President Trump is going to do, because he doesn’t care about what the Europeans scream at us, he cares about putting the interests of America’s citizens first.”" https://www.kyivpost.com/post/49464

Interview is here, dated the beginning of February.



Timecode is 941 seconds (15 minutes and 41 seconds) if the timecode doesn't load for you.

You got duped by a garbage website and take it out on me for God knows what. Apologize at your convenience.

On March 24 2025 23:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The video clip I posted doesn't misrepresent what Vance and Trump want. Your partial quote of what Rutte said absolutely does misrepresent him.

Since this is apparently your hobby, explain to me how the sentence "NATO Secretary General agrees Greenland is of security significance." misrepresents him.

On March 24 2025 23:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Just stop. When you double-down on your defense of invading Greenland and faking other people's support for the takeover, it eventually leaves the realm of what could possibly be attributed as an honest mistake, and enters into frantic desperation and goalpost-moving.

Not a single person here supports the invasion of Greenland.


Person A: We should acquire that TV.
Person X: A wants to steal the TV!
Person B: Maybe there are some good reasons to acquire that TV, interesting.
DPB: B supports A stealing the TV.

This is not mature.
"I read it. You know how to read, you ignorant fuck?" - Andy Dufresne
DarkPlasmaBall
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States44106 Posts
Last Edited: 2025-03-24 14:43:35
March 24 2025 14:32 GMT
#97484
On March 24 2025 23:27 oBlade wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 24 2025 23:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On March 24 2025 22:54 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 20:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On March 24 2025 20:20 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 19:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On March 24 2025 19:09 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 10:57 Dan HH wrote:
On March 24 2025 10:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
In a recent interview, JD Vance said that Greenland and Denmark were threatening our national security, and that we may need to take "more territorial interest in Greenland" to "solve that problem":
https://x.com/PawlowskiMario/status/1903930497270513792

Even the Fox News chyron had "Vance: Possibility U.S. Acquires Greenland".

My only surprise here is that he can keep himself from laughing when pretending there's anything more to this than Trump playing with a sharpie on the map, inspired no doubt by his idol's attempted annexation of Ukraine which he described as genius.

NATO Secretary General agrees Greenland is of security significance.

We know that the Chinese are using this route and the Russians are using this route. And we know that we lack icebreakers. There are seven Arctic countries in the region that are actually working on this matter under US leadership, that is very important and we have to be there.


Is Denmark contributing or holding back? Maybe the former, maybe the latter. Maybe everyone's needs are best served under a new arrangement.


Please don't misrepresent the NATO Secretary General's words on the matter. You seem to have quote-mined him:

"Rutte agreed that Greenland and the Arctic Circle are critical for security reasons, noting that China and Russia have a growing presence in the region. But he said any discussion about Trump’s attempts to acquire Greenland were outside of his purview. “I don’t want to drag NATO in that,” Rutte said."
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5193242-trump-greenland-nato-secretary/

You citing Mark Rutte here as an advocate for Trump wanting to steal Greenland is actually implying the opposite of what Mark Rutte wants. Rutte isn't advocating for that at all, and doesn't think he/NATO should be involved:

"Rutte told Trump that he would leave the question of Greenland's future to others and that, "I don't want to drag NATO" into the debate." https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-expresses-confidence-that-us-will-annex-greenland-2025-03-13/

From the above Reuters article, these individuals are far more relevant:

"The comments drew a swift rejection from the outgoing prime minister of Greenland. "The U.S. president has once again aired the thought of annexing us," Mute Egede said in a Facebook post. "Enough is enough." Jens-Frederik Nielsen, the leader of the island's pro-business Demokraatit party, which won Greenland's parliamentary election on Tuesday, also rejected the comments. "Trump's statement from the US is inappropriate and just shows once again that we must stand together in such situations," Nielsen wrote on Facebook."

You are having a hard time again.

At no point did I cite him as a reason to steal Greenland, nor suggest that he advocated for stealing Greenland, nor advocate stealing Greenland. On the issue of what if any country Greenland should be a part of, he professionally and diplomatically stayed out rightfully acknowleding it's not his place to say either (any) way.

But you seem read on the issue. How do you view the security concerns related with Greenland that he referred to, and how would you handle them within the status quo framework of NATO and RedWhiteAndBlueLand as it is?
1) Nonexistent/overblown
2) Manageable in ways you can specify
3) Other?


You cited him as a direct counter to how absurd it is for Trump to invade Greenland.

Absolutely not.

You posted an X account's comment on a 20 second clip from an interview almost 2 months ago.


Are you intentionally trying to further obfuscate the issue by pretending that yesterday's interview was "2 months ago"?

"On Sunday March 23, Vice President JD Vance was interviewed by Fox News. During the interview, JD Vance raised doubts about Denmark’s stewardship over the island and suggested it was not a good ally: “Denmark, which controls Greenland, is not doing its job and is not being a good ally.” JD Vance also confirmed the territorial interest of the United States in Greenland: “If that means we need to take more territorial interest in Greenland, that is what President Trump is going to do, because he doesn’t care about what the Europeans scream at us, he cares about putting the interests of America’s citizens first.”" https://www.kyivpost.com/post/49464

Interview is here, dated the beginning of February.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npVVFP0uPJE&t=941s

Timecode is 941 seconds (15 minutes and 41 seconds) if the timecode doesn't load for you.

You got duped by a garbage website and take it out on me for God knows what. Apologize at your convenience.

Show nested quote +
On March 24 2025 23:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The video clip I posted doesn't misrepresent what Vance and Trump want. Your partial quote of what Rutte said absolutely does misrepresent him.

Since this is apparently your hobby, explain to me how the sentence "NATO Secretary General agrees Greenland is of security significance." misrepresents him.

Show nested quote +
On March 24 2025 23:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Just stop. When you double-down on your defense of invading Greenland and faking other people's support for the takeover, it eventually leaves the realm of what could possibly be attributed as an honest mistake, and enters into frantic desperation and goalpost-moving.

Not a single person here supports the invasion of Greenland.


Person A: We should acquire that TV.
Person X: A wants to steal the TV!
Person B: Maybe there are some good reasons to acquire that TV, interesting.
DPB: B supports A stealing the TV.

This is not mature.


The interview date actually being in February is a fair correction. I was wrong about that date being more recent. I apologize for posting the wrong date. I've updated my previous post to clarify that.

Keep in mind that the date doesn't change the content of what was said though, both by JD Vance and by you. It seems I was indeed correct that your pivot to the date of the interview was indeed an obfuscation of the content of the interview. Saying that there exists security significance is not the same as saying we should invade Greenland, so responding to the latter with the former is not justified.

And I am happy to hear that you don't support the invasion of Greenland. Me neither. Do you also agree that the man you quoted earlier - the NATO Secretary General - also doesn't support the invasion of Greenland?
"There is nothing more satisfying than looking at a crowd of people and helping them get what I love." ~Day[9] Daily #100
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42427 Posts
March 24 2025 14:50 GMT
#97485
On March 24 2025 23:27 oBlade wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 24 2025 23:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On March 24 2025 22:54 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 20:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On March 24 2025 20:20 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 19:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On March 24 2025 19:09 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 10:57 Dan HH wrote:
On March 24 2025 10:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
In a recent interview, JD Vance said that Greenland and Denmark were threatening our national security, and that we may need to take "more territorial interest in Greenland" to "solve that problem":
https://x.com/PawlowskiMario/status/1903930497270513792

Even the Fox News chyron had "Vance: Possibility U.S. Acquires Greenland".

My only surprise here is that he can keep himself from laughing when pretending there's anything more to this than Trump playing with a sharpie on the map, inspired no doubt by his idol's attempted annexation of Ukraine which he described as genius.

NATO Secretary General agrees Greenland is of security significance.

We know that the Chinese are using this route and the Russians are using this route. And we know that we lack icebreakers. There are seven Arctic countries in the region that are actually working on this matter under US leadership, that is very important and we have to be there.


Is Denmark contributing or holding back? Maybe the former, maybe the latter. Maybe everyone's needs are best served under a new arrangement.


Please don't misrepresent the NATO Secretary General's words on the matter. You seem to have quote-mined him:

"Rutte agreed that Greenland and the Arctic Circle are critical for security reasons, noting that China and Russia have a growing presence in the region. But he said any discussion about Trump’s attempts to acquire Greenland were outside of his purview. “I don’t want to drag NATO in that,” Rutte said."
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5193242-trump-greenland-nato-secretary/

You citing Mark Rutte here as an advocate for Trump wanting to steal Greenland is actually implying the opposite of what Mark Rutte wants. Rutte isn't advocating for that at all, and doesn't think he/NATO should be involved:

"Rutte told Trump that he would leave the question of Greenland's future to others and that, "I don't want to drag NATO" into the debate." https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-expresses-confidence-that-us-will-annex-greenland-2025-03-13/

From the above Reuters article, these individuals are far more relevant:

"The comments drew a swift rejection from the outgoing prime minister of Greenland. "The U.S. president has once again aired the thought of annexing us," Mute Egede said in a Facebook post. "Enough is enough." Jens-Frederik Nielsen, the leader of the island's pro-business Demokraatit party, which won Greenland's parliamentary election on Tuesday, also rejected the comments. "Trump's statement from the US is inappropriate and just shows once again that we must stand together in such situations," Nielsen wrote on Facebook."

You are having a hard time again.

At no point did I cite him as a reason to steal Greenland, nor suggest that he advocated for stealing Greenland, nor advocate stealing Greenland. On the issue of what if any country Greenland should be a part of, he professionally and diplomatically stayed out rightfully acknowleding it's not his place to say either (any) way.

But you seem read on the issue. How do you view the security concerns related with Greenland that he referred to, and how would you handle them within the status quo framework of NATO and RedWhiteAndBlueLand as it is?
1) Nonexistent/overblown
2) Manageable in ways you can specify
3) Other?


You cited him as a direct counter to how absurd it is for Trump to invade Greenland.

Absolutely not.

You posted an X account's comment on a 20 second clip from an interview almost 2 months ago.


Are you intentionally trying to further obfuscate the issue by pretending that yesterday's interview was "2 months ago"?

"On Sunday March 23, Vice President JD Vance was interviewed by Fox News. During the interview, JD Vance raised doubts about Denmark’s stewardship over the island and suggested it was not a good ally: “Denmark, which controls Greenland, is not doing its job and is not being a good ally.” JD Vance also confirmed the territorial interest of the United States in Greenland: “If that means we need to take more territorial interest in Greenland, that is what President Trump is going to do, because he doesn’t care about what the Europeans scream at us, he cares about putting the interests of America’s citizens first.”" https://www.kyivpost.com/post/49464

Interview is here, dated the beginning of February.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npVVFP0uPJE&t=941s

Timecode is 941 seconds (15 minutes and 41 seconds) if the timecode doesn't load for you.

You got duped by a garbage website and take it out on me for God knows what. Apologize at your convenience.

Show nested quote +
On March 24 2025 23:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The video clip I posted doesn't misrepresent what Vance and Trump want. Your partial quote of what Rutte said absolutely does misrepresent him.

Since this is apparently your hobby, explain to me how the sentence "NATO Secretary General agrees Greenland is of security significance." misrepresents him.

Show nested quote +
On March 24 2025 23:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Just stop. When you double-down on your defense of invading Greenland and faking other people's support for the takeover, it eventually leaves the realm of what could possibly be attributed as an honest mistake, and enters into frantic desperation and goalpost-moving.

Not a single person here supports the invasion of Greenland.


Person A: We should acquire that TV.
Person X: A wants to steal the TV!
Person B: Maybe there are some good reasons to acquire that TV, interesting.
DPB: B supports A stealing the TV.

This is not mature.

There is only one tv and that tv is not for sale. Therefore the proposed acquisition is a proposed theft.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
DarkPlasmaBall
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States44106 Posts
March 24 2025 14:59 GMT
#97486
On March 24 2025 23:50 KwarK wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 24 2025 23:27 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 23:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On March 24 2025 22:54 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 20:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On March 24 2025 20:20 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 19:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On March 24 2025 19:09 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 10:57 Dan HH wrote:
On March 24 2025 10:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
In a recent interview, JD Vance said that Greenland and Denmark were threatening our national security, and that we may need to take "more territorial interest in Greenland" to "solve that problem":
https://x.com/PawlowskiMario/status/1903930497270513792

Even the Fox News chyron had "Vance: Possibility U.S. Acquires Greenland".

My only surprise here is that he can keep himself from laughing when pretending there's anything more to this than Trump playing with a sharpie on the map, inspired no doubt by his idol's attempted annexation of Ukraine which he described as genius.

NATO Secretary General agrees Greenland is of security significance.

We know that the Chinese are using this route and the Russians are using this route. And we know that we lack icebreakers. There are seven Arctic countries in the region that are actually working on this matter under US leadership, that is very important and we have to be there.


Is Denmark contributing or holding back? Maybe the former, maybe the latter. Maybe everyone's needs are best served under a new arrangement.


Please don't misrepresent the NATO Secretary General's words on the matter. You seem to have quote-mined him:

"Rutte agreed that Greenland and the Arctic Circle are critical for security reasons, noting that China and Russia have a growing presence in the region. But he said any discussion about Trump’s attempts to acquire Greenland were outside of his purview. “I don’t want to drag NATO in that,” Rutte said."
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5193242-trump-greenland-nato-secretary/

You citing Mark Rutte here as an advocate for Trump wanting to steal Greenland is actually implying the opposite of what Mark Rutte wants. Rutte isn't advocating for that at all, and doesn't think he/NATO should be involved:

"Rutte told Trump that he would leave the question of Greenland's future to others and that, "I don't want to drag NATO" into the debate." https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-expresses-confidence-that-us-will-annex-greenland-2025-03-13/

From the above Reuters article, these individuals are far more relevant:

"The comments drew a swift rejection from the outgoing prime minister of Greenland. "The U.S. president has once again aired the thought of annexing us," Mute Egede said in a Facebook post. "Enough is enough." Jens-Frederik Nielsen, the leader of the island's pro-business Demokraatit party, which won Greenland's parliamentary election on Tuesday, also rejected the comments. "Trump's statement from the US is inappropriate and just shows once again that we must stand together in such situations," Nielsen wrote on Facebook."

You are having a hard time again.

At no point did I cite him as a reason to steal Greenland, nor suggest that he advocated for stealing Greenland, nor advocate stealing Greenland. On the issue of what if any country Greenland should be a part of, he professionally and diplomatically stayed out rightfully acknowleding it's not his place to say either (any) way.

But you seem read on the issue. How do you view the security concerns related with Greenland that he referred to, and how would you handle them within the status quo framework of NATO and RedWhiteAndBlueLand as it is?
1) Nonexistent/overblown
2) Manageable in ways you can specify
3) Other?


You cited him as a direct counter to how absurd it is for Trump to invade Greenland.

Absolutely not.

You posted an X account's comment on a 20 second clip from an interview almost 2 months ago.


Are you intentionally trying to further obfuscate the issue by pretending that yesterday's interview was "2 months ago"?

"On Sunday March 23, Vice President JD Vance was interviewed by Fox News. During the interview, JD Vance raised doubts about Denmark’s stewardship over the island and suggested it was not a good ally: “Denmark, which controls Greenland, is not doing its job and is not being a good ally.” JD Vance also confirmed the territorial interest of the United States in Greenland: “If that means we need to take more territorial interest in Greenland, that is what President Trump is going to do, because he doesn’t care about what the Europeans scream at us, he cares about putting the interests of America’s citizens first.”" https://www.kyivpost.com/post/49464

Interview is here, dated the beginning of February.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npVVFP0uPJE&t=941s

Timecode is 941 seconds (15 minutes and 41 seconds) if the timecode doesn't load for you.

You got duped by a garbage website and take it out on me for God knows what. Apologize at your convenience.

On March 24 2025 23:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The video clip I posted doesn't misrepresent what Vance and Trump want. Your partial quote of what Rutte said absolutely does misrepresent him.

Since this is apparently your hobby, explain to me how the sentence "NATO Secretary General agrees Greenland is of security significance." misrepresents him.

On March 24 2025 23:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Just stop. When you double-down on your defense of invading Greenland and faking other people's support for the takeover, it eventually leaves the realm of what could possibly be attributed as an honest mistake, and enters into frantic desperation and goalpost-moving.

Not a single person here supports the invasion of Greenland.


Person A: We should acquire that TV.
Person X: A wants to steal the TV!
Person B: Maybe there are some good reasons to acquire that TV, interesting.
DPB: B supports A stealing the TV.

This is not mature.

There is only one tv and that tv is not for sale. Therefore the proposed acquisition is a proposed theft.


Yeah, there is some serious gaslighting going on when the leaders and the people of a country (like Canada) or territory (like Greenland) overwhelmingly want nothing to do with being added to the United States, yet Trump and Vance use terms like "acquire" or "take territorial interest", as if these places were for sale and/or not already settled. It's a huge misrepresentation by oBlade to imply that this is like window shopping for a television being sold by a shopkeeper.
"There is nothing more satisfying than looking at a crowd of people and helping them get what I love." ~Day[9] Daily #100
oBlade
Profile Blog Joined December 2008
United States5467 Posts
March 24 2025 15:19 GMT
#97487
On March 24 2025 23:32 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 24 2025 23:27 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 23:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On March 24 2025 22:54 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 20:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On March 24 2025 20:20 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 19:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On March 24 2025 19:09 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 10:57 Dan HH wrote:
On March 24 2025 10:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
In a recent interview, JD Vance said that Greenland and Denmark were threatening our national security, and that we may need to take "more territorial interest in Greenland" to "solve that problem":
https://x.com/PawlowskiMario/status/1903930497270513792

Even the Fox News chyron had "Vance: Possibility U.S. Acquires Greenland".

My only surprise here is that he can keep himself from laughing when pretending there's anything more to this than Trump playing with a sharpie on the map, inspired no doubt by his idol's attempted annexation of Ukraine which he described as genius.

NATO Secretary General agrees Greenland is of security significance.

We know that the Chinese are using this route and the Russians are using this route. And we know that we lack icebreakers. There are seven Arctic countries in the region that are actually working on this matter under US leadership, that is very important and we have to be there.


Is Denmark contributing or holding back? Maybe the former, maybe the latter. Maybe everyone's needs are best served under a new arrangement.


Please don't misrepresent the NATO Secretary General's words on the matter. You seem to have quote-mined him:

"Rutte agreed that Greenland and the Arctic Circle are critical for security reasons, noting that China and Russia have a growing presence in the region. But he said any discussion about Trump’s attempts to acquire Greenland were outside of his purview. “I don’t want to drag NATO in that,” Rutte said."
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5193242-trump-greenland-nato-secretary/

You citing Mark Rutte here as an advocate for Trump wanting to steal Greenland is actually implying the opposite of what Mark Rutte wants. Rutte isn't advocating for that at all, and doesn't think he/NATO should be involved:

"Rutte told Trump that he would leave the question of Greenland's future to others and that, "I don't want to drag NATO" into the debate." https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-expresses-confidence-that-us-will-annex-greenland-2025-03-13/

From the above Reuters article, these individuals are far more relevant:

"The comments drew a swift rejection from the outgoing prime minister of Greenland. "The U.S. president has once again aired the thought of annexing us," Mute Egede said in a Facebook post. "Enough is enough." Jens-Frederik Nielsen, the leader of the island's pro-business Demokraatit party, which won Greenland's parliamentary election on Tuesday, also rejected the comments. "Trump's statement from the US is inappropriate and just shows once again that we must stand together in such situations," Nielsen wrote on Facebook."

You are having a hard time again.

At no point did I cite him as a reason to steal Greenland, nor suggest that he advocated for stealing Greenland, nor advocate stealing Greenland. On the issue of what if any country Greenland should be a part of, he professionally and diplomatically stayed out rightfully acknowleding it's not his place to say either (any) way.

But you seem read on the issue. How do you view the security concerns related with Greenland that he referred to, and how would you handle them within the status quo framework of NATO and RedWhiteAndBlueLand as it is?
1) Nonexistent/overblown
2) Manageable in ways you can specify
3) Other?


You cited him as a direct counter to how absurd it is for Trump to invade Greenland.

Absolutely not.

You posted an X account's comment on a 20 second clip from an interview almost 2 months ago.


Are you intentionally trying to further obfuscate the issue by pretending that yesterday's interview was "2 months ago"?

"On Sunday March 23, Vice President JD Vance was interviewed by Fox News. During the interview, JD Vance raised doubts about Denmark’s stewardship over the island and suggested it was not a good ally: “Denmark, which controls Greenland, is not doing its job and is not being a good ally.” JD Vance also confirmed the territorial interest of the United States in Greenland: “If that means we need to take more territorial interest in Greenland, that is what President Trump is going to do, because he doesn’t care about what the Europeans scream at us, he cares about putting the interests of America’s citizens first.”" https://www.kyivpost.com/post/49464

Interview is here, dated the beginning of February.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npVVFP0uPJE&t=941s

Timecode is 941 seconds (15 minutes and 41 seconds) if the timecode doesn't load for you.

You got duped by a garbage website and take it out on me for God knows what. Apologize at your convenience.

On March 24 2025 23:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The video clip I posted doesn't misrepresent what Vance and Trump want. Your partial quote of what Rutte said absolutely does misrepresent him.

Since this is apparently your hobby, explain to me how the sentence "NATO Secretary General agrees Greenland is of security significance." misrepresents him.

On March 24 2025 23:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Just stop. When you double-down on your defense of invading Greenland and faking other people's support for the takeover, it eventually leaves the realm of what could possibly be attributed as an honest mistake, and enters into frantic desperation and goalpost-moving.

Not a single person here supports the invasion of Greenland.


Person A: We should acquire that TV.
Person X: A wants to steal the TV!
Person B: Maybe there are some good reasons to acquire that TV, interesting.
DPB: B supports A stealing the TV.

This is not mature.


The interview date actually being in February is a fair correction. I was wrong about that date being more recent. I apologize for posting the wrong date. I've updated my previous post to clarify that.

Keep in mind that the date doesn't change the content of what was said though, both by JD Vance and by you. It seems I was indeed correct that your pivot to the date of the interview was indeed an obfuscation of the content of the interview.

Right, don't apologize for accusing me of faking a date.

On March 24 2025 23:32 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Saying that there exists security significance is not the same as saying we should invade Greenland, so responding to the latter with the former is not justified.

Thank God I didn't respond to the latter.

On March 24 2025 23:32 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
And I am happy to hear that you don't support the invasion of Greenland. Me neither. Do you also agree that the man you quoted earlier - the NATO Secretary General - also doesn't support the invasion of Greenland?

You're looping. We did this on the last page. You went through great pains to prove that he didn't support the invasion of Greenland that I never said he supported, which we both stipulated. And think about what you're asking. Why would I be citing someone's supposed support of invading Greenland as something to defend my support of not invading Greenland. Your question is inconsistent bait. I'll tell you what I told WombaT. I'm truly sorry you want to give Vance a piece of your mind because you think he wants to invade Greenland but you can't get to him. But I don't have his number. You need to figure out a way to reach him yourself.

On March 24 2025 23:50 KwarK wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 24 2025 23:27 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 23:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On March 24 2025 22:54 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 20:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On March 24 2025 20:20 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 19:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On March 24 2025 19:09 oBlade wrote:
On March 24 2025 10:57 Dan HH wrote:
On March 24 2025 10:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
In a recent interview, JD Vance said that Greenland and Denmark were threatening our national security, and that we may need to take "more territorial interest in Greenland" to "solve that problem":
https://x.com/PawlowskiMario/status/1903930497270513792

Even the Fox News chyron had "Vance: Possibility U.S. Acquires Greenland".

My only surprise here is that he can keep himself from laughing when pretending there's anything more to this than Trump playing with a sharpie on the map, inspired no doubt by his idol's attempted annexation of Ukraine which he described as genius.

NATO Secretary General agrees Greenland is of security significance.

We know that the Chinese are using this route and the Russians are using this route. And we know that we lack icebreakers. There are seven Arctic countries in the region that are actually working on this matter under US leadership, that is very important and we have to be there.


Is Denmark contributing or holding back? Maybe the former, maybe the latter. Maybe everyone's needs are best served under a new arrangement.


Please don't misrepresent the NATO Secretary General's words on the matter. You seem to have quote-mined him:

"Rutte agreed that Greenland and the Arctic Circle are critical for security reasons, noting that China and Russia have a growing presence in the region. But he said any discussion about Trump’s attempts to acquire Greenland were outside of his purview. “I don’t want to drag NATO in that,” Rutte said."
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5193242-trump-greenland-nato-secretary/

You citing Mark Rutte here as an advocate for Trump wanting to steal Greenland is actually implying the opposite of what Mark Rutte wants. Rutte isn't advocating for that at all, and doesn't think he/NATO should be involved:

"Rutte told Trump that he would leave the question of Greenland's future to others and that, "I don't want to drag NATO" into the debate." https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-expresses-confidence-that-us-will-annex-greenland-2025-03-13/

From the above Reuters article, these individuals are far more relevant:

"The comments drew a swift rejection from the outgoing prime minister of Greenland. "The U.S. president has once again aired the thought of annexing us," Mute Egede said in a Facebook post. "Enough is enough." Jens-Frederik Nielsen, the leader of the island's pro-business Demokraatit party, which won Greenland's parliamentary election on Tuesday, also rejected the comments. "Trump's statement from the US is inappropriate and just shows once again that we must stand together in such situations," Nielsen wrote on Facebook."

You are having a hard time again.

At no point did I cite him as a reason to steal Greenland, nor suggest that he advocated for stealing Greenland, nor advocate stealing Greenland. On the issue of what if any country Greenland should be a part of, he professionally and diplomatically stayed out rightfully acknowleding it's not his place to say either (any) way.

But you seem read on the issue. How do you view the security concerns related with Greenland that he referred to, and how would you handle them within the status quo framework of NATO and RedWhiteAndBlueLand as it is?
1) Nonexistent/overblown
2) Manageable in ways you can specify
3) Other?


You cited him as a direct counter to how absurd it is for Trump to invade Greenland.

Absolutely not.

You posted an X account's comment on a 20 second clip from an interview almost 2 months ago.


Are you intentionally trying to further obfuscate the issue by pretending that yesterday's interview was "2 months ago"?

"On Sunday March 23, Vice President JD Vance was interviewed by Fox News. During the interview, JD Vance raised doubts about Denmark’s stewardship over the island and suggested it was not a good ally: “Denmark, which controls Greenland, is not doing its job and is not being a good ally.” JD Vance also confirmed the territorial interest of the United States in Greenland: “If that means we need to take more territorial interest in Greenland, that is what President Trump is going to do, because he doesn’t care about what the Europeans scream at us, he cares about putting the interests of America’s citizens first.”" https://www.kyivpost.com/post/49464

Interview is here, dated the beginning of February.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npVVFP0uPJE&t=941s

Timecode is 941 seconds (15 minutes and 41 seconds) if the timecode doesn't load for you.

You got duped by a garbage website and take it out on me for God knows what. Apologize at your convenience.

On March 24 2025 23:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The video clip I posted doesn't misrepresent what Vance and Trump want. Your partial quote of what Rutte said absolutely does misrepresent him.

Since this is apparently your hobby, explain to me how the sentence "NATO Secretary General agrees Greenland is of security significance." misrepresents him.

On March 24 2025 23:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Just stop. When you double-down on your defense of invading Greenland and faking other people's support for the takeover, it eventually leaves the realm of what could possibly be attributed as an honest mistake, and enters into frantic desperation and goalpost-moving.

Not a single person here supports the invasion of Greenland.


Person A: We should acquire that TV.
Person X: A wants to steal the TV!
Person B: Maybe there are some good reasons to acquire that TV, interesting.
DPB: B supports A stealing the TV.

This is not mature.

There is only one tv and that tv is not for sale. Therefore the proposed acquisition is a proposed theft.

I find your syllogism unsound.

"Hey, nice car, what if I gave you $5k for it."
"Thief."

The fundamental theorem of thousands of pages of this thread is that Republican voters are incapable of knowing/voting for what is in their best interests. The fact that x or y surveys don't support public opinion for Canada or Greenland joining the US, while true, these shouldn't be treated as thought-enders so long as our theory of mind includes the concept of "persuasion." Especially as the process might not legally require a referendum in one or the other case. And that convincing would obviously be easier if it were objectively true that being in the US was the better option for them. So they, like our good friends the Republican voters, may also simply not know what is in their best interests at the moment. America is an idea - why not work to expand it.
"I read it. You know how to read, you ignorant fuck?" - Andy Dufresne
Velr
Profile Blog Joined July 2008
Switzerland10665 Posts
March 24 2025 15:38 GMT
#97488
The fundamental theorem of thousands of pages of this thread is that Republican voters are incapable of knowing/voting for what is in their best interests.


Why would I (or we) assume it's stupidity when maliciousness fits way better?
Stupidity was maybe an explanation before Trumps first term. We are way past that.
Jockmcplop
Profile Blog Joined February 2012
United Kingdom9561 Posts
March 24 2025 15:48 GMT
#97489
On March 25 2025 00:19 oBlade wrote:

"Hey, nice car, what if I gave you $5k for it."
"Thief."


This works pretty well but its missing a piece. Its more like:

"Hey, nice car, what if I gave you $5k for it." (turns to a group of watching people and very loudly says "I'm having that car no matter what he says")
"Thief."
RIP Meatloaf <3
Gorsameth
Profile Joined April 2010
Netherlands21584 Posts
March 24 2025 15:56 GMT
#97490
Canada, Ontario, Denmark and Greenland have all repeatedly told Trump to fuck off. Pretend like Trump is just window shopping and pitching ideas is blatant bullshit and everyone knows it.
It ignores such insignificant forces as time, entropy, and death
DarkPlasmaBall
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States44106 Posts
Last Edited: 2025-03-24 16:23:27
March 24 2025 15:59 GMT
#97491
On March 25 2025 00:19 oBlade wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 24 2025 23:32 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Saying that there exists security significance is not the same as saying we should invade Greenland, so responding to the latter with the former is not justified.

Thank God I didn't respond to the latter.


You literally did, but okay: + Show Spoiler +

On March 24 2025 19:09 oBlade wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 24 2025 10:57 Dan HH wrote:
On March 24 2025 10:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
In a recent interview, JD Vance said that Greenland and Denmark were threatening our national security, and that we may need to take "more territorial interest in Greenland" to "solve that problem":
https://x.com/PawlowskiMario/status/1903930497270513792

Even the Fox News chyron had "Vance: Possibility U.S. Acquires Greenland".

My only surprise here is that he can keep himself from laughing when pretending there's anything more to this than Trump playing with a sharpie on the map, inspired no doubt by his idol's attempted annexation of Ukraine which he described as genius.

NATO Secretary General agrees Greenland is of security significance.



You were just conveniently avoiding what "acquiring" truly entails.

On March 25 2025 00:19 oBlade wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 24 2025 23:32 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
And I am happy to hear that you don't support the invasion of Greenland. Me neither. Do you also agree that the man you quoted earlier - the NATO Secretary General - also doesn't support the invasion of Greenland?

You're looping. We did this on the last page. You went through great pains to prove that he didn't support the invasion of Greenland that I never said he supported, which we both stipulated. And think about what you're asking. Why would I be citing someone's supposed support of invading Greenland as something to defend my support of not invading Greenland.


It is not lost on me that you're still unwilling to answer my very simple question (hence the looping). The answer, by the way, should have been "Yes".

As for your question: You incorrectly citing the NATO Secretary General as a supporter of Trump's Greenland desires doesn't mean you necessarily agree with Trump's Greenland desires. I never said that it "defended your support of not invading Greenland". When I correctly cited that Vance supports Trump's Greenland desires, that doesn't mean I'm talking about myself in any way.

I do agree with you that we're looping at this point. I'm happy to move on.
"There is nothing more satisfying than looking at a crowd of people and helping them get what I love." ~Day[9] Daily #100
Sermokala
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
United States13837 Posts
March 24 2025 17:05 GMT
#97492
I don't get where people think that they want to turn Greenland and Panama into states.

They want to turn them into nonvoteing territories like pr and Guam. Oblade trying to dance around Greenland just being important to trump for its ability to claim artic space under the current system exposes the rot of their thinking. If you refuse to follow the system of self determination that the western world agrees on, that Greenland and Denmark have followed and respected, then you don't get to follow the other rules of the system.

I've been to Greenland for the record. It's not even the size of a metropolitan zone. They had a legitimate Independence struggle where they had to come to terms with the Scandinavian immigrants and the native peoples. They cannot sustain being a fully independent nation and are very happy with the arraignment they made with Denmark and the EU.

On the plus side Denmark and the EU are talking about making a serious indoor stadium for Greenland to play in concacaf with this new attention so it's not all horrific imperialism.
A wise man will say that he knows nothing. We're gona party like its 2752 Hail Dark Brandon
Wala.Revolution
Profile Blog Joined November 2006
7582 Posts
Last Edited: 2025-03-24 17:49:32
March 24 2025 17:24 GMT
#97493
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/03/trump-administration-accidentally-texted-me-its-war-plans/682151/

National Security Advisor accidentally adds jounalist to Signal conversation with highest-level government officials (VP, secretaries) to discuss bombing Houthis.

[image loading]


[operation security]

edit: better quote
Stuck.
DarkPlasmaBall
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States44106 Posts
March 24 2025 17:30 GMT
#97494
On March 25 2025 02:24 Wala.Revolution wrote:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/03/trump-administration-accidentally-texted-me-its-war-plans/682151/

National Security Advisor accidentally adds jounalist to Signal conversation with highest-level government officials (VP, secretaries) to discuss bombing Houthis.

[image loading]


[operation security]


"Pete Hegseth, the secretary of defense, had texted me the war plan"

Yikes.

Not to minimize the leak here, but I kind of just assumed that by now, Trump was probably revealing classified information on social media and to his friends, just to show off how cool he is.
"There is nothing more satisfying than looking at a crowd of people and helping them get what I love." ~Day[9] Daily #100
hexhaven
Profile Joined July 2014
Finland929 Posts
March 24 2025 19:31 GMT
#97495
On March 25 2025 02:24 Wala.Revolution wrote:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/03/trump-administration-accidentally-texted-me-its-war-plans/682151/

National Security Advisor accidentally adds jounalist to Signal conversation with highest-level government officials (VP, secretaries) to discuss bombing Houthis.

[image loading]


[operation security]

edit: better quote


This is the perfect picture to sump both the last two months and the next four years.
WriterI shoot events. | http://www.jussi.co/esports
Falling
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
Canada11340 Posts
Last Edited: 2025-03-24 19:39:28
March 24 2025 19:38 GMT
#97496
There's one part which is that the journalist was invited in and nobody seemed to know or remember.
The other part is that they are using Signal in the first place for their classified information.

What's that all about? Actively avoiding FOIA requests no doubt, especially as messages were set to be deleted after one week and four weeks.

Trump found the best people, people you wouldn't even believe.
He's right on the second part. The degree and extent of this administration's incompetence beggars belief.
Moderator"In Trump We Trust," says the Golden Goat of Mars Lago. Have faith and believe! Trump moves in mysterious ways. Like the wind he blows where he pleases...
decafchicken
Profile Blog Joined January 2005
United States20008 Posts
March 24 2025 20:04 GMT
#97497
The group chat screenshots read like some teenagers chatting about weekend plans jesus christ. This would be grounds for immediate dismissal in any other administration but i suppose all that's going to happen is Trump will praise them and say the woke leftist are trying to DEI his patriotic department of defense.
how reasonable is it to eat off wood instead of your tummy?
hexhaven
Profile Joined July 2014
Finland929 Posts
March 24 2025 20:09 GMT
#97498
The big question is of course, how many other times has this happened?
WriterI shoot events. | http://www.jussi.co/esports
DarkPlasmaBall
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States44106 Posts
March 24 2025 20:20 GMT
#97499
On March 25 2025 05:04 decafchicken wrote:
The group chat screenshots read like some teenagers chatting about weekend plans jesus christ. This would be grounds for immediate dismissal in any other administration but i suppose all that's going to happen is Trump will praise them and say the woke leftist are trying to DEI his patriotic department of defense.


The sad part, of course, is that Pete Hegseth is an unqualified white man gifted the position instead of anyone qualified (regardless of sex or race). DEI could have actually prevented this snafu from happening, because then the job would have been given to someone who knew what they were doing.
"There is nothing more satisfying than looking at a crowd of people and helping them get what I love." ~Day[9] Daily #100
Wala.Revolution
Profile Blog Joined November 2006
7582 Posts
March 24 2025 20:23 GMT
#97500
Read a good joke about this:

"How the fuck does this level of incompetence even exist?"

"DUI hires."
Stuck.
Prev 1 4873 4874 4875 4876 4877 5010 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 1m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
PiGStarcraft364
UpATreeSC 130
-ZergGirl 52
StarCraft: Brood War
Horang2 671
Artosis 605
firebathero 110
yabsab 15
Icarus 2
Dota 2
NeuroSwarm87
febbydoto21
monkeys_forever14
Counter-Strike
fl0m6722
olofmeister2085
Stewie2K365
rGuardiaN84
Super Smash Bros
Mew2King66
Other Games
summit1g9583
Grubby2320
shahzam1252
Maynarde102
RuFF_SC27
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick741
BasetradeTV69
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• davetesta20
• intothetv
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• Azhi_Dahaki27
• RayReign 15
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Doublelift4628
Other Games
• Scarra1065
• imaqtpie838
Upcoming Events
Replay Cast
1m
CranKy Ducklings17
Replay Cast
10h 1m
WardiTV Invitational
11h 1m
WardiTV Invitational
11h 1m
PiGosaur Monday
1d
GSL Code S
1d 9h
Rogue vs GuMiho
Maru vs Solar
Online Event
2 days
Replay Cast
2 days
GSL Code S
2 days
herO vs Zoun
Classic vs Bunny
The PondCast
2 days
[ Show More ]
Replay Cast
3 days
WardiTV Invitational
3 days
OSC
3 days
Korean StarCraft League
4 days
CranKy Ducklings
4 days
WardiTV Invitational
4 days
Cheesadelphia
4 days
GSL Code S
5 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Season 17: Qualifier 2
BGE Stara Zagora 2025
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
BSL Season 20
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
NPSL S3
Rose Open S1
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
2025 GSL S2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
ECL Season 49: Europe
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025
YaLLa Compass Qatar 2025
PGL Bucharest 2025
BLAST Open Spring 2025

Upcoming

Copa Latinoamericana 4
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
SEL Season 2 Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
HSC XXVII
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.