Axios reports:
“ A group of 15 former senior U.S. officials who worked in administrations of both parties sent a memo to the White House, State Department and members of Congress warning against the use of military force to take over Greenland, according to a copy of the memo shared with Axios.”

Many news outlets reporting trump ordered military to draw up invasion plans.

Uk is planning to send British troops to Greenland to protect citizens from USA.

The above make it seem it is imminent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:❌NEWS UPDATE: U.S. Lawmakers Warn Military Against Unauthorised Use of Force Over Greenland❌

By Annie Koshy

A warning has now been put on the record by the U.S. Congress.

If any member of the U.S. military, from generals to lower ranks, participates in the use of force against Greenland without authorisation from Congress, they would be following illegal orders.

That warning was issued by Ted Lieu, citing the constitutional requirement that Congress authorise the use of military force.

Last I heard Congress does not have the title of “Commander in Chief”, so who gives a f*ck what some two bit Congressman says.

Clearly, you don’t cause you’ll be hiding under your bed at the first sign of any trouble. The actual war fighters they have to do stuff might care about spending time in Leavenworth.

Why don’t you try addressing the substance of the post, instead of saying something completely irrelevant and stupid. Can you do that ? I already know the answer.

You do know that there is life after Trump, right? He's a lame duck, losing influence, and he's rapidly moving toward the end (three years max). And even the Republicans will miraculously rediscover their Congressional oversight responsibilities in 2028. Illegal actions taken now will have consequences beyond Trump's rule.

Ted Lieu doesn’t define what is legal/illegal in the US military. He’s a nobody. But keep shouting your nonsense into the Internet void, I’m sure someone is listening.

What happens to Ukraine if we withdraw support to piss off Europe to force them to give up Greenland?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point I'd rather live in Greenland as a territory of Denmark than in the world Trump is creating. And I hate being cold.

Please go, no one is stopping you. Plenty of space there. Go to REI first and get yourself a nice warm coat.

Do you have an understanding of how to get danish cituzenship?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:❌NEWS UPDATE: U.S. Lawmakers Warn Military Against Unauthorised Use of Force Over Greenland❌

By Annie Koshy

A warning has now been put on the record by the U.S. Congress.

If any member of the U.S. military, from generals to lower ranks, participates in the use of force against Greenland without authorisation from Congress, they would be following illegal orders.

That warning was issued by Ted Lieu, citing the constitutional requirement that Congress authorise the use of military force.

Last I heard Congress does not have the title of “Commander in Chief”, so who gives a f*ck what some two bit Congressman says.

Clearly, you don’t cause you’ll be hiding under your bed at the first sign of any trouble. The actual war fighters they have to do stuff might care about spending time in Leavenworth.

Why don’t you try addressing the substance of the post, instead of saying something completely irrelevant and stupid. Can you do that ? I already know the answer.

You do know that there is life after Trump, right? He's a lame duck, losing influence, and he's rapidly moving toward the end (three years max). And even the Republicans will miraculously rediscover their Congressional oversight responsibilities in 2028. Illegal actions taken now will have consequences beyond Trump's rule.

Anonymous wrote:I may have missed an explanation of this, but I'm not clear on the argument that "if we don't take Greenland, then Russia or China will". Since they are part of NATO (and we are part of NATO, at least for now), wouldn't we defend them against Russia or China? I can't imagine they would want that war, so I don't really understand the argument.

And if this happens, NATO will be disbanded and Russia or China could take any European country they want.

Russia could not take a liquor store. China is winning without firing a shot.

Some European officials even worry that’s the real goal of the MAGA faction driving this plan: force a crisis so intense that NATO fractures, allowing Trump to claim victory without formally withdrawing. There’s also talk that Trump might try to pressure Denmark into a “compromise scenario” where he’s granted expanded military access to Greenland. But even that would shatter trust between allies and destabilize the Arctic region at a time when Russia is already threatening conflict (cont) ...
when Russia is already threatening conflict there. This is the kind of chaos the world is bracing for under Trump. - Via MeidasTouch

to seize the island. British diplomats believe Trump is also desperate to create a distraction from the collapsing U.S. economy ahead of the midterms, which he fears could cost him control of Congress. Diplomats have already run simulations for what they call an “escalatory scenario,” where Trump uses force or political coercion to sever Greenland’s ties to Denmark. One cable bluntly states that the worst-case outcome would be the destruction of NATO from the inside. (Cont) ...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:❌NEWS UPDATE: U.S. Lawmakers Warn Military Against Unauthorised Use of Force Over Greenland❌

By Annie Koshy

A warning has now been put on the record by the U.S. Congress.

If any member of the U.S. military, from generals to lower ranks, participates in the use of force against Greenland without authorisation from Congress, they would be following illegal orders.

That warning was issued by Ted Lieu, citing the constitutional requirement that Congress authorise the use of military force.

Last I heard Congress does not have the title of “Commander in Chief”, so who gives a f*ck what some two bit Congressman says.

Clearly, you don’t cause you’ll be hiding under your bed at the first sign of any trouble. The actual war fighters they have to do stuff might care about spending time in Leavenworth.

Why don’t you try addressing the substance of the post, instead of saying something completely irrelevant and stupid. Can you do that ? I already know the answer.

There was no substance, just a bit of whining that their pedo hero was not getting his way? I answered by the way by telling them that of course they don’t care cause they don’t have any skin in the game, but war fighters do. I mean, you folks really need to get it together.

In case it sounds like senior leadership knows that we’re going to have to head off this tantrum.

🚨 New reporting reveals Donald Trump has ordered his special forces commanders to draw up a plan for the invasion of Greenland. Senior military leaders are reportedly pushing back, calling the idea illegal and warning it would not be supported by Congress. One diplomatic source even said dealing with Trump on this issue is like “dealing with a five-year-old.” According to the new report from The Daily Mail, Trump’s hardline advisers, led by Stephen Miller, are urging him (cont) ...“

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the U.S. takes Greenland, then NATO is dead.

Which is exactly the point of this foolish criminal behavior.

When will white conservative voters wake up and realize that Trump is working on behalf of China and Russia?

I don't know if we are bullying Greenland on behalf of China and Russia. I tend to think that it's because we have become China and Russia.

This strongman idea that we can just take over places because we want to--like Russia invading Ukraine--is anti-democratic and anti-American. Total Stephen Miller thinking.

What I find fascinating is that we supposedly maintain readiness to fight in 2 major conflicts at once, but we are currently threatening conflict Central American, Europe, and the Middle East.

Historically speaking, taking on too many conflicts does not go well. Napoleon and Hitler come to mind.

I may have missed an explanation of this, but I'm not clear on the argument that "if we don't take Greenland, then Russia or China will". Since they are part of NATO (and we are part of NATO, at least for now), wouldn't we defend them against Russia or China? I can't imagine they would want that war, so I don't really understand the argument.

And if this happens, NATO will be disbanded and Russia or China could take any European country they want.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:❌NEWS UPDATE: U.S. Lawmakers Warn Military Against Unauthorised Use of Force Over Greenland❌

By Annie Koshy

A warning has now been put on the record by the U.S. Congress.

If any member of the U.S. military, from generals to lower ranks, participates in the use of force against Greenland without authorisation from Congress, they would be following illegal orders.

That warning was issued by Ted Lieu, citing the constitutional requirement that Congress authorise the use of military force.

Last I heard Congress does not have the title of “Commander in Chief”, so who gives a f*ck what some two bit Congressman says.

Clearly, you don’t cause you’ll be hiding under your bed at the first sign of any trouble. The actual war fighters they have to do stuff might care about spending time in Leavenworth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the U.S. takes Greenland, then NATO is dead.

Which is exactly the point of this foolish criminal behavior.

When will white conservative voters wake up and realize that Trump is working on behalf of China and Russia?

I don't know if we are bullying Greenland on behalf of China and Russia. I tend to think that it's because we have become China and Russia.

This strongman idea that we can just take over places because we want to--like Russia invading Ukraine--is anti-democratic and anti-American. Total Stephen Miller thinking.

What I find fascinating is that we supposedly maintain readiness to fight in 2 major conflicts at once, but we are currently threatening conflict Central American, Europe, and the Middle East.

I just saw a video of Hegseth doing kettle bell swings and at this point I’m not terribly confident that the US military could carry out an operation against an American Girl doll store.

Anonymous wrote:❌NEWS UPDATE: U.S. Lawmakers Warn Military Against Unauthorised Use of Force Over Greenland❌

By Annie Koshy

A warning has now been put on the record by the U.S. Congress.

If any member of the U.S. military, from generals to lower ranks, participates in the use of force against Greenland without authorisation from Congress, they would be following illegal orders.

That warning was issued by Ted Lieu, citing the constitutional requirement that Congress authorise the use of military force.

Last I heard Congress does not have the title of “Commander in Chief”, so who gives a f*ck what some two bit Congressman says.

Anonymous wrote:If the U.S. takes Greenland, then NATO is dead.

Which is exactly the point of this foolish criminal behavior.

When will white conservative voters wake up and realize that Trump is working on behalf of China and Russia?

I don't know if we are bullying Greenland on behalf of China and Russia. I tend to think that it's because we have become China and Russia.

This strongman idea that we can just take over places because we want to--like Russia invading Ukraine--is anti-democratic and anti-American. Total Stephen Miller thinking.

What I find fascinating is that we supposedly maintain readiness to fight in 2 major conflicts at once, but we are currently threatening conflict Central American, Europe, and the Middle East.