Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

Anonymous wrote:This is inane. Every day the rationale changes and the real reason is Trump wants a Noble peace prize.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

You could save yourself a lot of typing just by stating "might makes right".

Tell me again - how did Denmark come to "own" Greenland? Oh, right - the European colonial regimes just showed up and took it, without regard for the handful of Inuit people living there, then traded it around like a poker chip. Sounds a lot like "might make right" to me.

Denmark wouldn't even exist if not for America. Denmark was invaded by Germany during WW2 and we liberated it. The least they can do is not make a fuss about returning this chunk of ice in North America to its logical owners, when we have such a clear need of it for our national defense.

Why is the US the logical owner? I suppose you’d advocate turning Guam over to Japan?

Your posts demonstrate a terrible weakness to MAGA thinking about the world. While there’s nothing wrong with a dose of Realpolitik, you guys see the world as “us against everyone else”. In your world view there is only space for confrontation and domination, never collaboration and alliance. You think that makes you tough and smart, but it’s actually quite stupid and simple minded. As a previous poster noted, the US owes its privileged position in the world to both strength AND collaboration. A previous Republican characterized this as “walk softly but carry a big stick”. You’ll never grasp the wisdom of that philosophy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

You could save yourself a lot of typing just by stating "might makes right".

Tell me again - how did Denmark come to "own" Greenland? Oh, right - the European colonial regimes just showed up and took it, without regard for the handful of Inuit people living there, then traded it around like a poker chip. Sounds a lot like "might make right" to me.

Denmark wouldn't even exist if not for America. Denmark was invaded by Germany during WW2 and we liberated it. The least they can do is not make a fuss about returning this chunk of ice in North America to its logical owners, when we have such a clear need of it for our national defense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

You could save yourself a lot of typing just by stating "might makes right".

Tell me again - how did Denmark come to "own" Greenland? Oh, right - the European colonial regimes just showed up and took it, without regard for the handful of Inuit people living there, then traded it around like a poker chip. Sounds a lot like "might make right" to me.

Denmark wouldn't even exist if not for America. Denmark was invaded by Germany during WW2 and we liberated it. The least they can do is not make a fuss about returning this chunk of ice in North America to its logical owners, when we have such a clear need of it for our national defense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

You could save yourself a lot of typing just by stating "might makes right".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was talking to inside the beltway types of folks who are very tuned into international affairs. They tried to give me the most unbiased take they could on what's going on and how they think the current admin views the world.

First, global order has already been upended for years. China already expanded by building artifical islands in the SCS along with their 9 dash line claims. China has a strategy of trying to control all shipping and trade from China, to Europe, to Africa - see the strand of pearls theory. Russia has also upended global order years ago due to obvious reasons. So who is left playing by rules? The west, including the US. What did the world do as China illegally expanded in the SCS with their artificial islands? Nothing. What did the rest of the world do about Ukraine except the US? Pretty much nothing. If Russia and China get to ignore all the rules, then so should the US.

With respect to Greenland/Europe, they pretty much summarized Europe down to 3 things: soccer, socialism, and site seeing. The point they were trying to make was that Europe is basically worthless from both a military strategic and economic standpoint. Europe was described as basically a museum. For decades Europe has refused to fund and maintain an adequate military. Europe has socialist tendencies that are strangling innovation and their economy. AI is going nowhere in Europe while China and the US are accelerating integration into the economy at breakneck speeds. Europe's economy is going to be left in the dust over the next 50 years. They also pointed out that Europe is anemic when it comes to starting companies, which is why they basically don't even have a European version of the S&P 500 - because they're incapble of starting that many companies due to overtaxing socialist policies and regulations smothering them.

To summarize, world order has already been fragmented years ago with expansionist and rising China and the Russia invasion of Ukraine. US has to accept it and live in a multipolar world. Europe is useless due to lack of military and because all economics are moving east. US has to accept the multipolar world and make hard adjustments. China can do whatever they want in their sphere and Russia as well, as long as they both stay the F outta our backyard (i.e., the Americas). That's why you see so much attention about securing Greenland.

It's frightening to see such misinformation from supposed Beltway experts. First, what the hell does Greenland have to do with China's ambitions in the South China Sea? Nobody has provided any evidence that China wants to invade/control territory outside of its immediate geographic neighborhood, especially Greenland. Yes, it has global economic interests and attempts to sway the developing world, just like very other major power. As the Chinese stated this morning, using China as an excuse to invade Greenland is simply covering up Trump's personal amibitions with a fig leaf.

As far as Europe's status, they have the third largest GDP in the world, accounting for 1/6 of the global economy. Quite a statement to say they are "worthless", especially when you look at the dollar compared to the Euro since Trump took office.

If this is the caliber of Stephen Miller's foreign affairs team, we really are screwed.

Also, it isn’t just about where Europe's economy is today, but where it'll be in the future. The argument was that they are stifling rollout of AI, which is going to kneecap them in the decades coming. Economies are shifting east while Europe increasingly relies on massive govt bureaucracies for employment. It is expected that Europe is just going to continue getting poorer over ensuing decades, so they're increasingly not worth our time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was talking to inside the beltway types of folks who are very tuned into international affairs. They tried to give me the most unbiased take they could on what's going on and how they think the current admin views the world.

First, global order has already been upended for years. China already expanded by building artifical islands in the SCS along with their 9 dash line claims. China has a strategy of trying to control all shipping and trade from China, to Europe, to Africa - see the strand of pearls theory. Russia has also upended global order years ago due to obvious reasons. So who is left playing by rules? The west, including the US. What did the world do as China illegally expanded in the SCS with their artificial islands? Nothing. What did the rest of the world do about Ukraine except the US? Pretty much nothing. If Russia and China get to ignore all the rules, then so should the US.

With respect to Greenland/Europe, they pretty much summarized Europe down to 3 things: soccer, socialism, and site seeing. The point they were trying to make was that Europe is basically worthless from both a military strategic and economic standpoint. Europe was described as basically a museum. For decades Europe has refused to fund and maintain an adequate military. Europe has socialist tendencies that are strangling innovation and their economy. AI is going nowhere in Europe while China and the US are accelerating integration into the economy at breakneck speeds. Europe's economy is going to be left in the dust over the next 50 years. They also pointed out that Europe is anemic when it comes to starting companies, which is why they basically don't even have a European version of the S&P 500 - because they're incapble of starting that many companies due to overtaxing socialist policies and regulations smothering them.

To summarize, world order has already been fragmented years ago with expansionist and rising China and the Russia invasion of Ukraine. US has to accept it and live in a multipolar world. Europe is useless due to lack of military and because all economics are moving east. US has to accept the multipolar world and make hard adjustments. China can do whatever they want in their sphere and Russia as well, as long as they both stay the F outta our backyard (i.e., the Americas). That's why you see so much attention about securing Greenland.

It's frightening to see such misinformation from supposed Beltway experts. First, what the hell does Greenland have to do with China's ambitions in the South China Sea? Nobody has provided any evidence that China wants to invade/control territory outside of its immediate geographic neighborhood, especially Greenland. Yes, it has global economic interests and attempts to sway the developing world, just like very other major power. As the Chinese stated this morning, using China as an excuse to invade Greenland is simply covering up Trump's personal amibitions with a fig leaf.

As far as Europe's status, they have the third largest GDP in the world, accounting for 1/6 of the global economy. Quite a statement to say they are "worthless", especially when you look at the dollar compared to the Euro since Trump took office.

If this is the caliber of Stephen Miller's foreign affairs team, we really are screwed.

Also, it isn’t just about where Europe's economy is today, but where it'll be in the future. The argument was that they are stifling rollout of AI, which is going to kneecap them in the decades coming. Economies are shifting east while Europe increasingly relies on massive govt bureaucracies for employment. It is expected that Europe is just going to continue getting poorer over ensuing decades, so they're increasingly not worth our time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was talking to inside the beltway types of folks who are very tuned into international affairs. They tried to give me the most unbiased take they could on what's going on and how they think the current admin views the world.

First, global order has already been upended for years. China already expanded by building artifical islands in the SCS along with their 9 dash line claims. China has a strategy of trying to control all shipping and trade from China, to Europe, to Africa - see the strand of pearls theory. Russia has also upended global order years ago due to obvious reasons. So who is left playing by rules? The west, including the US. What did the world do as China illegally expanded in the SCS with their artificial islands? Nothing. What did the rest of the world do about Ukraine except the US? Pretty much nothing. If Russia and China get to ignore all the rules, then so should the US.

With respect to Greenland/Europe, they pretty much summarized Europe down to 3 things: soccer, socialism, and site seeing. The point they were trying to make was that Europe is basically worthless from both a military strategic and economic standpoint. Europe was described as basically a museum. For decades Europe has refused to fund and maintain an adequate military. Europe has socialist tendencies that are strangling innovation and their economy. AI is going nowhere in Europe while China and the US are accelerating integration into the economy at breakneck speeds. Europe's economy is going to be left in the dust over the next 50 years. They also pointed out that Europe is anemic when it comes to starting companies, which is why they basically don't even have a European version of the S&P 500 - because they're incapble of starting that many companies due to overtaxing socialist policies and regulations smothering them.

To summarize, world order has already been fragmented years ago with expansionist and rising China and the Russia invasion of Ukraine. US has to accept it and live in a multipolar world. Europe is useless due to lack of military and because all economics are moving east. US has to accept the multipolar world and make hard adjustments. China can do whatever they want in their sphere and Russia as well, as long as they both stay the F outta our backyard (i.e., the Americas). That's why you see so much attention about securing Greenland.

It's frightening to see such misinformation from supposed Beltway experts. First, what the hell does Greenland have to do with China's ambitions in the South China Sea? Nobody has provided any evidence that China wants to invade/control territory outside of its immediate geographic neighborhood, especially Greenland. Yes, it has global economic interests and attempts to sway the developing world, just like very other major power. As the Chinese stated this morning, using China as an excuse to invade Greenland is simply covering up Trump's personal amibitions with a fig leaf.

As far as Europe's status, they have the third largest GDP in the world, accounting for 1/6 of the global economy. Quite a statement to say they are "worthless", especially when you look at the dollar compared to the Euro since Trump took office.

If this is the caliber of Stephen Miller's foreign affairs team, we really are screwed.

China and Russia have been militarizing the Arctic for years already. China expansion in SCS and the world does nothing. Then point they were trying to make is that it China is allowed to expand using security excuses, then so should the US. No one is playing by the rules anymore, basically.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was talking to inside the beltway types of folks who are very tuned into international affairs. They tried to give me the most unbiased take they could on what's going on and how they think the current admin views the world.

First, global order has already been upended for years. China already expanded by building artifical islands in the SCS along with their 9 dash line claims. China has a strategy of trying to control all shipping and trade from China, to Europe, to Africa - see the strand of pearls theory. Russia has also upended global order years ago due to obvious reasons. So who is left playing by rules? The west, including the US. What did the world do as China illegally expanded in the SCS with their artificial islands? Nothing. What did the rest of the world do about Ukraine except the US? Pretty much nothing. If Russia and China get to ignore all the rules, then so should the US.

With respect to Greenland/Europe, they pretty much summarized Europe down to 3 things: soccer, socialism, and site seeing. The point they were trying to make was that Europe is basically worthless from both a military strategic and economic standpoint. Europe was described as basically a museum. For decades Europe has refused to fund and maintain an adequate military. Europe has socialist tendencies that are strangling innovation and their economy. AI is going nowhere in Europe while China and the US are accelerating integration into the economy at breakneck speeds. Europe's economy is going to be left in the dust over the next 50 years. They also pointed out that Europe is anemic when it comes to starting companies, which is why they basically don't even have a European version of the S&P 500 - because they're incapble of starting that many companies due to overtaxing socialist policies and regulations smothering them.

To summarize, world order has already been fragmented years ago with expansionist and rising China and the Russia invasion of Ukraine. US has to accept it and live in a multipolar world. Europe is useless due to lack of military and because all economics are moving east. US has to accept the multipolar world and make hard adjustments. China can do whatever they want in their sphere and Russia as well, as long as they both stay the F outta our backyard (i.e., the Americas). That's why you see so much attention about securing Greenland.

It's frightening to see such misinformation from supposed Beltway experts. First, what the hell does Greenland have to do with China's ambitions in the South China Sea? Nobody has provided any evidence that China wants to invade/control territory outside of its immediate geographic neighborhood, especially Greenland. Yes, it has global economic interests and attempts to sway the developing world, just like very other major power. As the Chinese stated this morning, using China as an excuse to invade Greenland is simply covering up Trump's personal amibitions with a fig leaf.

As far as Europe's status, they have the third largest GDP in the world, accounting for 1/6 of the global economy. Quite a statement to say they are "worthless", especially when you look at the dollar compared to the Euro since Trump took office.

If this is the caliber of Stephen Miller's foreign affairs team, we really are screwed.

China and Russia have been militarizing the Arctic for years already. China expansion in SCS and the world does nothing. Then point they were trying to make is that it China is allowed to expand using security excuses, then so should the US. No one is playing by the rules anymore, basically.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was talking to inside the beltway types of folks who are very tuned into international affairs. They tried to give me the most unbiased take they could on what's going on and how they think the current admin views the world.

First, global order has already been upended for years. China already expanded by building artifical islands in the SCS along with their 9 dash line claims. China has a strategy of trying to control all shipping and trade from China, to Europe, to Africa - see the strand of pearls theory. Russia has also upended global order years ago due to obvious reasons. So who is left playing by rules? The west, including the US. What did the world do as China illegally expanded in the SCS with their artificial islands? Nothing. What did the rest of the world do about Ukraine except the US? Pretty much nothing. If Russia and China get to ignore all the rules, then so should the US.

With respect to Greenland/Europe, they pretty much summarized Europe down to 3 things: soccer, socialism, and site seeing. The point they were trying to make was that Europe is basically worthless from both a military strategic and economic standpoint. Europe was described as basically a museum. For decades Europe has refused to fund and maintain an adequate military. Europe has socialist tendencies that are strangling innovation and their economy. AI is going nowhere in Europe while China and the US are accelerating integration into the economy at breakneck speeds. Europe's economy is going to be left in the dust over the next 50 years. They also pointed out that Europe is anemic when it comes to starting companies, which is why they basically don't even have a European version of the S&P 500 - because they're incapble of starting that many companies due to overtaxing socialist policies and regulations smothering them.

To summarize, world order has already been fragmented years ago with expansionist and rising China and the Russia invasion of Ukraine. US has to accept it and live in a multipolar world. Europe is useless due to lack of military and because all economics are moving east. US has to accept the multipolar world and make hard adjustments. China can do whatever they want in their sphere and Russia as well, as long as they both stay the F outta our backyard (i.e., the Americas). That's why you see so much attention about securing Greenland.

It's frightening to see such misinformation from supposed Beltway experts. First, what the hell does Greenland have to do with China's ambitions in the South China Sea? Nobody has provided any evidence that China wants to invade/control territory outside of its immediate geographic neighborhood, especially Greenland. Yes, it has global economic interests and attempts to sway the developing world, just like very other major power. As the Chinese stated this morning, using China as an excuse to invade Greenland is simply covering up Trump's personal amibitions with a fig leaf.

As far as Europe's status, they have the third largest GDP in the world, accounting for 1/6 of the global economy. Quite a statement to say they are "worthless", especially when you look at the dollar compared to the Euro since Trump took office.

If this is the caliber of Stephen Miller's foreign affairs team, we really are screwed.