Going after Greenland

  • Thread starter Thread starter dukeman92
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 203
  • Views: 11K
  • Politics 
What other options are those? There are two: with consent, and without consent. With consent is not going to happen, since Greenlanders don't want it, Denmark doesn't want it, and Europe doesn't want it. So now we're at without consent. Pray tell how we are going to get it without consent except a military invasion.

Yesterday you posted multiple times in a way that strongly suggests you view women as little more than tits and ass. Today you're struggling with the concept of consent. Just saying.
Consent would be the best case scenario. Hopefully we could come to some kind of agreement with Denmark and/or Greenland. Trump could also utilize economic pressure to force Denmark to relinquish control of Greenland. Again, not something that is great, but also not something that I think is going to have long-term impacts around the world.

I honestly have no idea what you are referring to in regards to the women comment.
 
Consent would be the best case scenario. Hopefully we could come to some kind of agreement with Denmark and/or Greenland. Trump could also utilize economic pressure to force Denmark to relinquish control of Greenland. Again, not something that is great, but also not something that I think is going to have long-term impacts around the world.

I honestly have no idea what you are referring to in regards to the women comment.
The whole "force people to consent" thing is really impressive. I didn't imagine I could think less of you as a person, but you keep finding ways to lower the bar.
 
1948, Israel: Five years from now, who is going to be pissed off that we displaced these Arabs?
1990, Iraq: Five years from now, who is going to be pissed off that we took over a tiny country with barely any citizens?
1982, Buenos Aires: Five years from now, who is going to be pissed off that we invaded some small islands off our coast?
1948, Dehli: Five years from now, who is going to be pissed off that we annexed Kashmir?

Also, the idea that the US can coerce Denmark into selling Greenland is absurd. Denmark is part of the EU. There's nothing the US can do to it economically.
 
The whole "force people to consent" thing is really impressive. I didn't imagine I could think less of you as a person, but you keep finding ways to lower the bar.
Remember when this board first started and Zen tried to pretend for awhile to be a relatively moderate, nonpartisan, bosiding but sensible poster? Those days are clearly long gone. Whatever he now claims to be, he's definitely well into hardcore Trumper MAGA "will defend at all costs" territory and has moved into full troll mode 24/7.
 
1948, Israel: Five years from now, who is going to be pissed off that we displaced these Arabs?
1990, Iraq: Five years from now, who is going to be pissed off that we took over a tiny country with barely any citizens?
1982, Buenos Aires: Five years from now, who is going to be pissed off that we invaded some small islands off our coast?
1948, Dehli: Five years from now, who is going to be pissed off that we annexed Kashmir?

Also, the idea that the US can coerce Denmark into selling Greenland is absurd. Denmark is part of the EU. There's nothing the US can do to it economically.
as I mentioned earlier, an actual military invasion could have long-term effects, just as displacing millions of Arabs in Gaza could be a significant moral and legal situation.

If Trump is able to peacefully acquire Greenland, I just don't see anyone caring in 5 years. There's also the reality that the world is more likely to attribute the current insanity to Trump rather than the US. When we elect a sane and reasonable president, I don't foresee it taking much to undo any actual damage.

For the record, I absolutely do not support any military action involving Denmark or Greenland.
 
Ah. Got it. Makes sense we shouldn’t be concerned about the people who, you know, actually live there.
Aren’t they like brown or something. Well not white and that’s all that matters. Throw in half of them are women. Maybe we should just gas them all. I mean Greenland would be a lot easier to take over if we just killed them all. And 1950’s America is what life is all about. White power and privilege.
 
I could be wrong. In 5 years from now, which countries, other than Russia, China, Greenland and maybe Denmark are still going to be pissed off?
I was born well before 1980 so maybe you’ll think I’m old fashioned, but I feel like a person’s word, much less an entire country’s, is a measure of their worth. Reneging on long-standing agreements - without good reason, and particularly without trying to resolve legitimate grievances in an amicable manner - is indicative of an absence of character.
 
as I mentioned earlier, an actual military invasion could have long-term effects, just as displacing millions of Arabs in Gaza could be a significant moral and legal situation.

If Trump is able to peacefully acquire Greenland, I just don't see anyone caring in 5 years.
Let me try to say this as clearly as I can. No means no. Greenland has clearly said no, they aren't interested. Denmark has said no, they aren't interested. If Trump nonetheless is able to acquire Greenland, it will be as "peaceful" as raping a woman after giving her a roofie.

No. Means. No.

Why I am having to write this on a message board? Why is this hard to comprehend?
 
Let me try to say this as clearly as I can. No means no. Greenland has clearly said no, they aren't interested. Denmark has said no, they aren't interested. If Trump nonetheless is able to acquire Greenland, it will be as "peaceful" as raping a woman after giving her a roofie.

No. Means. No.

Why I am having to write this on a message board? Why is this hard to comprehend?

The native Alaskan didn't have much say when he US bought Alaska from Russia.
 
Let me try to say this as clearly as I can. No means no. Greenland has clearly said no, they aren't interested. Denmark has said no, they aren't interested. If Trump nonetheless is able to acquire Greenland, it will be as "peaceful" as raping a woman after giving her a roofie.

No. Means. No.

Why I am having to write this on a message board? Why is this hard to comprehend?

I hope I never need to hire you as a lawyer!

 
Last edited:
as I mentioned earlier, an actual military invasion could have long-term effects, just as displacing millions of Arabs in Gaza could be a significant moral and legal situation.

If Trump is able to peacefully acquire Greenland, I just don't see anyone caring in 5 years. There's also the reality that the world is more likely to attribute the current insanity to Trump rather than the US. When we elect a sane and reasonable president, I don't foresee it taking much to undo any actual damage.

For the record, I absolutely do not support any military action involving Denmark or Greenland.
When people get stuck just yacking it up
Reason slips through the cracks in the floor
It's hard to make the distinction
Between fact and fiction for sure
Yeah, for sure

People just love to talk
People just love to talk
If you don't know sometin'
Don't say nothin'
People just love to talk


 
I don't think it's a great idea to just "acquire" Greenland or any other autonomous territory. I also think Greenland is only about 60k people, it doesn't sound like they are big fans of Denmark and I really don't see how this would really piss off anyone, long term, besides Russia and China.
Acquiring Greenland would be amazing for the US. Doing it by force would be an impeachable offense to me but if we could buy it, we absolutely should.

Greenland has the highest alcoholic rate per capita in the world. They have the highest suicide rate per capita in the world.

If Trump had approached them differently and told them about how the deal would make their lives better it might have worked out but he’s an idiot so he ruined any chance of that.
 
Acquiring Greenland would be amazing for the US. Doing it by force would be an impeachable offense to me but if we could buy it, we absolutely should.

Greenland has the highest alcoholic rate per capita in the world. They have the highest suicide rate per capita in the world.

If Trump had approached them differently and told them about how the deal would make their lives better it might have worked out but he’s an idiot so he ruined any chance of that.
I’m guessing their rates of alcoholism and suicide are extremely similar to Alaskans, so it’s not like becoming Americans is a solution to those problems.
 
I hope I never need to hire you as a lawyer!


Now I know what you look like. Only you could think that ripped-out-of-context AOC quote would be used in a courtroom ever.

I can't believe I have to further specify, but here we are. In the context of consent, no means no.
 
If Trump had approached them differently and told them about how the deal would make their lives better it might have worked out but he’s an idiot so he ruined any chance of that.
Why do you think Greenlanders are ignorant and uneducated? They are perfectly well aware of the United States. They know what America is like. They don't want to be part of it.

Just because Trump can pull the wool over your eyes doesn't mean he can do it to anyone.

The idea that Trump could show up with travel brochures and be like, "it's awesome" and Greenlanders would jump at the chance -- I mean, are you serious? What about Greenlanders makes you think they are so silly?

And if they had any interest in joining, they certainly don't now after Trump has been disappearing people.
 
Now I know what you look like. Only you could think that ripped-out-of-context AOC quote would be used in a courtroom ever.

I can't believe I have to further specify, but here we are. In the context of consent, no means no.
My post was actually two separate thoughts. The first being in regard to a lawyer just giving up when told no.

The second was AOC.

Are you under the impression we are talking about a date? You seem very passionate about no means no. Period. No negotiation.
 
Last edited:
My post was actually two separate thoughts. The first being in regard to a lawyer just giving up when told no.

The second was AOC.

Are you under the impression we are talking about a date? You seem very passionate about no means no. Period. No negotiation.
When talking about a hostile takeover of another nation whose populace wants absolutely no part of the United States, no absolutely means no. What the fuck else is there to say? Anything beyond that is an open act of war.
 
Back
Top