n_huffhines
I want for you what you want for immigrants
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 93,798
- Likes
- 57,530
There's plenty that can be used to resist Trump and it wouldn't need to be a military. This Greenland stuff is complete nonsense from a guy who's clearly losing itFor the folks and countries against the conquering of Greenland there's just not enough firepower (from any country or countries) to resist Trump or the US .gov if they want to truly take it over, not this close to our continent. I currently hold no opinion either way thinking that the US would respond decisively if Greenland came under attack from a foreign invader, especially from our adversaries.
Ha, unless the people here go full blown riot across the country then no. Whatever you have in mind would not stop it. First thing I think of is “sanctions” if that’s what’s on your mind then point me to an issue that sanctions actually fixed. North Korea? Iran?There's plenty that can be used to resist Trump and it wouldn't need to be a military. This Greenland stuff is complete nonsense from a guy who's clearly losing it
I’m so glad I changed my mind from this clearly erroneous July 2024 take. It would have been a real shame to witness all of this and not realize that President Donald J. Trump is actually winning at 4D chess.Donald is close to, if not further gone than Biden was 4 years ago, it’s just hard to tell because his peak performance wasn’t particularly coherent to begin with.
Greenland is part of NA continent.For the folks and countries against the conquering of Greenland there's just not enough firepower (from any country or countries) to resist Trump or the US .gov if they want to truly take it over, not this close to our continent. I currently hold no opinion either way thinking that the US would respond decisively if Greenland came under attack from a foreign invader, especially from our adversaries.
US govt could and would stop him. Boastful talk is one thing but trying to actually take the land would not stand. If it does then just close up shopHa, unless the people here go full blown riot across the country then no. Whatever you have in mind would not stop it. First thing I think of is “sanctions” if that’s what’s on your mind then point me to an issue that sanctions actually fixed. North Korea? Iran?
US govt could and would stop him. Boastful talk is one thing but trying to actually take the land would not stand. If it does then just close up shopHa, unless the people here go full blown riot across the country then no. Whatever you have in mind would not stop it. First thing I think of is “sanctions” if that’s what’s on your mind then point me to an issue that sanctions actually fixed. North Korea? Iran?
The only force that can really stop it is Congress, I suspect.For the folks and countries against the conquering of Greenland there's just not enough firepower (from any country or countries) to resist Trump or the US .gov if they want to truly take it over, not this close to our continent. I currently hold no opinion either way thinking that the US would respond decisively if Greenland came under attack from a foreign invader, especially from our adversaries.
I’ve been losing hope that a desire to maintain some dignity would stop this silliness.US govt could and would stop him. Boastful talk is one thing but trying to actually take the land would not stand. If it does then just close up shop
There is no reason to be optimistic when Republicans make excuses for Trump and blame "bad advice", rather than holding Trump accountable for his actions.I’ve been losing hope that a desire to maintain some dignity would stop this silliness.
I do tend to agree he would be stopped, but seeing how he’s being allowed to make an ass of himself (and us) again and again, I’m not sure what reason I have for optimism.
They usually at least try to make up a lie as to why we need to invade like drugs, terrorist, yellow cake, etc. This is just because our dear leader got his feelings hurt over a medal and then confused Greenland with NorwayThere is another part me is like, the U.S. has been invading, and bombing countries all over the planet for quite a few decades -- what's different about this one?
I think that it's instead 'good Tsar, bad boyars'True, but that’s also what medieval nobles said when they rebelled against Kings.
We've taken two of Russia/China's proxies off the table and are starving both of them for energy, but it's just about the Nobel Prize snubbing. lolThey usually at least try to make up a lie as to why we need to invade like drugs, terrorist, yellow cake, etc. This is just because our dear leader got his feelings hurt over a medal and then confused Greenland with Norway
I was thinking of English history, but I assume it’s common.I think that it's instead 'good Tsar, bad boyars'
