Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Seems like a bad idea to send Usha Vance and their child there when her husband said this in February. Trump's minions are probably trying to provoke a confrontation and an excuse to invade.
Asked whether he believed the U.S. could acquire Greenland during an interview with Fox News host Maria Bartiromo in February, Vance said: “I think it’s possible, Maria.”
“Here’s the thing which I think a lot of folks don’t appreciate about Greenland.
“It’s really important to our national security,” the vice president claimed.
Vance explained that there are “sea lanes” surrounding Greenland, used by the Chinese and the Russians. The former Ohio senator accused the Danish government of restricting U.S. access and, therefore, “not doing its job” and “not being a good ally.”
During the Fox News interview, which discussed several of Trump’s measures, Vance suggested that the only real solution to the national security issue was to take “more territorial interest in Greenland.”
He stressed that Trump would take the island if necessary, saying, “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 American citizens first.”
https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/jd-vance-denmark-greenland-bad-ally-b2720363.html
Truly sickening. Never forget this.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Seems like a bad idea to send Usha Vance and their child there when her husband said this in February. Trump's minions are probably trying to provoke a confrontation and an excuse to invade.
Asked whether he believed the U.S. could acquire Greenland during an interview with Fox News host Maria Bartiromo in February, Vance said: “I think it’s possible, Maria.”
“Here’s the thing which I think a lot of folks don’t appreciate about Greenland.
“It’s really important to our national security,” the vice president claimed.
Vance explained that there are “sea lanes” surrounding Greenland, used by the Chinese and the Russians. The former Ohio senator accused the Danish government of restricting U.S. access and, therefore, “not doing its job” and “not being a good ally.”
During the Fox News interview, which discussed several of Trump’s measures, Vance suggested that the only real solution to the national security issue was to take “more territorial interest in Greenland.”
He stressed that Trump would take the island if necessary, saying, “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 American citizens first.”
https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/jd-vance-denmark-greenland-bad-ally-b2720363.html
Truly sickening. Never forget this.
Anonymous wrote:Seems like a bad idea to send Usha Vance and their child there when her husband said this in February. Trump's minions are probably trying to provoke a confrontation and an excuse to invade.
Asked whether he believed the U.S. could acquire Greenland during an interview with Fox News host Maria Bartiromo in February, Vance said: “I think it’s possible, Maria.”
“Here’s the thing which I think a lot of folks don’t appreciate about Greenland.
“It’s really important to our national security,” the vice president claimed.
Vance explained that there are “sea lanes” surrounding Greenland, used by the Chinese and the Russians. The former Ohio senator accused the Danish government of restricting U.S. access and, therefore, “not doing its job” and “not being a good ally.”
During the Fox News interview, which discussed several of Trump’s measures, Vance suggested that the only real solution to the national security issue was to take “more territorial interest in Greenland.”
He stressed that Trump would take the island if necessary, saying, “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 American citizens first.”
https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/jd-vance-denmark-greenland-bad-ally-b2720363.html
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t Greenland just deny their visas? Deny them entry. That would send a strong message.
Because the IS has a military base there (space force!)
I do not care about first and second family member travel. It’s always happened and it should be diplomatic. I do care about her going at all in this specific case, and certainly while dragging a kid, to a country that is telling he not to come because it’s “highly aggressive”. That is not diplomacy. She shouldn’t go. And since there will be strong Anti-American protests in Greenland, she shouldn’t take the kid. That’s just decent parenting.
Currently. But it is there at the host nations allowance. Keep pushing and that too will be expelled.
Asked whether he believed the U.S. could acquire Greenland during an interview with Fox News host Maria Bartiromo in February, Vance said: “I think it’s possible, Maria.”
“Here’s the thing which I think a lot of folks don’t appreciate about Greenland.
“It’s really important to our national security,” the vice president claimed.
Vance explained that there are “sea lanes” surrounding Greenland, used by the Chinese and the Russians. The former Ohio senator accused the Danish government of restricting U.S. access and, therefore, “not doing its job” and “not being a good ally.”
During the Fox News interview, which discussed several of Trump’s measures, Vance suggested that the only real solution to the national security issue was to take “more territorial interest in Greenland.”
He stressed that Trump would take the island if necessary, saying, “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 American citizens first.”
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t Greenland just deny their visas? Deny them entry. That would send a strong message.
Because the IS has a military base there (space force!)
I do not care about first and second family member travel. It’s always happened and it should be diplomatic. I do care about her going at all in this specific case, and certainly while dragging a kid, to a country that is telling he not to come because it’s “highly aggressive”. That is not diplomacy. She shouldn’t go. And since there will be strong Anti-American protests in Greenland, she shouldn’t take the kid. That’s just decent parenting.
Was she ordered to go or is she fine with this? Who makes these kinds of decisions about where political spouses travel and what they do? Could she refuse this trip?
Real talk though: wouldn't you take any possible opportunity to get away from JD? I would...
She's shady af, and problematic in her own right, but who wants to hang out with him if it's not absolutely mandatory?
Okay fine. Get away as often as possible. But why intentionally drag a young child through this political storm?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t Greenland just deny their visas? Deny them entry. That would send a strong message.
Because the IS has a military base there (space force!)
I do not care about first and second family member travel. It’s always happened and it should be diplomatic. I do care about her going at all in this specific case, and certainly while dragging a kid, to a country that is telling he not to come because it’s “highly aggressive”. That is not diplomacy. She shouldn’t go. And since there will be strong Anti-American protests in Greenland, she shouldn’t take the kid. That’s just decent parenting.
Was she ordered to go or is she fine with this? Who makes these kinds of decisions about where political spouses travel and what they do? Could she refuse this trip?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t Greenland just deny their visas? Deny them entry. That would send a strong message.
Because the IS has a military base there (space force!)
I do not care about first and second family member travel. It’s always happened and it should be diplomatic. I do care about her going at all in this specific case, and certainly while dragging a kid, to a country that is telling he not to come because it’s “highly aggressive”. That is not diplomacy. She shouldn’t go. And since there will be strong Anti-American protests in Greenland, she shouldn’t take the kid. That’s just decent parenting.
Was she ordered to go or is she fine with this? Who makes these kinds of decisions about where political spouses travel and what they do? Could she refuse this trip?
Real talk though: wouldn't you take any possible opportunity to get away from JD? I would...
She's shady af, and problematic in her own right, but who wants to hang out with him if it's not absolutely mandatory?
Okay fine. Get away as often as possible. But why intentionally drag a young child through this political storm?
The same question could be posed of Leon. The kids are props. They are shields. They are a distraction. People will talk about what a good mother she is vs talking the whys of the trip
Using a kid as a human shield makes you a good mother or father? Wrong.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t Greenland just deny their visas? Deny them entry. That would send a strong message.
Because the IS has a military base there (space force!)
I do not care about first and second family member travel. It’s always happened and it should be diplomatic. I do care about her going at all in this specific case, and certainly while dragging a kid, to a country that is telling he not to come because it’s “highly aggressive”. That is not diplomacy. She shouldn’t go. And since there will be strong Anti-American protests in Greenland, she shouldn’t take the kid. That’s just decent parenting.
Was she ordered to go or is she fine with this? Who makes these kinds of decisions about where political spouses travel and what they do? Could she refuse this trip?
Real talk though: wouldn't you take any possible opportunity to get away from JD? I would...
She's shady af, and problematic in her own right, but who wants to hang out with him if it's not absolutely mandatory?
Okay fine. Get away as often as possible. But why intentionally drag a young child through this political storm?
The same question could be posed of Leon. The kids are props. They are shields. They are a distraction. People will talk about what a good mother she is vs talking the whys of the trip
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t Greenland just deny their visas? Deny them entry. That would send a strong message.
Because the IS has a military base there (space force!)
I do not care about first and second family member travel. It’s always happened and it should be diplomatic. I do care about her going at all in this specific case, and certainly while dragging a kid, to a country that is telling he not to come because it’s “highly aggressive”. That is not diplomacy. She shouldn’t go. And since there will be strong Anti-American protests in Greenland, she shouldn’t take the kid. That’s just decent parenting.
Was she ordered to go or is she fine with this? Who makes these kinds of decisions about where political spouses travel and what they do? Could she refuse this trip?
Real talk though: wouldn't you take any possible opportunity to get away from JD? I would...
She's shady af, and problematic in her own right, but who wants to hang out with him if it's not absolutely mandatory?
Okay fine. Get away as often as possible. But why intentionally drag a young child through this political storm?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t Greenland just deny their visas? Deny them entry. That would send a strong message.
Because the IS has a military base there (space force!)
I do not care about first and second family member travel. It’s always happened and it should be diplomatic. I do care about her going at all in this specific case, and certainly while dragging a kid, to a country that is telling he not to come because it’s “highly aggressive”. That is not diplomacy. She shouldn’t go. And since there will be strong Anti-American protests in Greenland, she shouldn’t take the kid. That’s just decent parenting.
Was she ordered to go or is she fine with this? Who makes these kinds of decisions about where political spouses travel and what they do? Could she refuse this trip?
Real talk though: wouldn't you take any possible opportunity to get away from JD? I would...
She's shady af, and problematic in her own right, but who wants to hang out with him if it's not absolutely mandatory?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t Greenland just deny their visas? Deny them entry. That would send a strong message.
Because the IS has a military base there (space force!)
I do not care about first and second family member travel. It’s always happened and it should be diplomatic. I do care about her going at all in this specific case, and certainly while dragging a kid, to a country that is telling he not to come because it’s “highly aggressive”. That is not diplomacy. She shouldn’t go. And since there will be strong Anti-American protests in Greenland, she shouldn’t take the kid. That’s just decent parenting.
Was she ordered to go or is she fine with this? Who makes these kinds of decisions about where political spouses travel and what they do? Could she refuse this trip?
Real talk though: wouldn't you take any possible opportunity to get away from JD? I would...
She's shady af, and problematic in her own right, but who wants to hang out with him if it's not absolutely mandatory?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t Greenland just deny their visas? Deny them entry. That would send a strong message.
Because the IS has a military base there (space force!)
I do not care about first and second family member travel. It’s always happened and it should be diplomatic. I do care about her going at all in this specific case, and certainly while dragging a kid, to a country that is telling he not to come because it’s “highly aggressive”. That is not diplomacy. She shouldn’t go. And since there will be strong Anti-American protests in Greenland, she shouldn’t take the kid. That’s just decent parenting.
Was she ordered to go or is she fine with this? Who makes these kinds of decisions about where political spouses travel and what they do? Could she refuse this trip?
Real talk though: wouldn't you take any possible opportunity to get away from JD? I would...
She's shady af, and problematic in her own right, but who wants to hang out with him if it's not absolutely mandatory?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t Greenland just deny their visas? Deny them entry. That would send a strong message.
Because the IS has a military base there (space force!)
I do not care about first and second family member travel. It’s always happened and it should be diplomatic. I do care about her going at all in this specific case, and certainly while dragging a kid, to a country that is telling he not to come because it’s “highly aggressive”. That is not diplomacy. She shouldn’t go. And since there will be strong Anti-American protests in Greenland, she shouldn’t take the kid. That’s just decent parenting.