mosssideblue
Well-Known Member
Course they will. They will up the anti in the strongly worded letter
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Greenland / Trump nonsense.
- Thread starter ColinBellsjockstrap
- Start date
mosssideblue
Well-Known Member
A very strongly worded letter, with maybe even capital words underlined and bolded usedIssuing a strongly worded statement
Elbow beards
Well-Known Member
Should threaten the cunts with Jedward. They'd never leave their own shores again.Course they will. They will up the anti in the strongly worded letter
carlosthejackal
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 5,033
What would you expect them to do ? I’d hope that neither American or European soldiers would be prepared to fire upon each other .NATO will do fuck all.
BlueMerlin
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 24 Dec 2025
- Messages
- 483
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Yeah. If NATO is worth anything they would have to dismiss USA from NATO and have a tantrum. Or impose sanctions. Or even go to war. But Russia invaded Ukraine and NATO did nothing, mainly because Ukraine is not a member of NATO. So surely NATO must intervene if two of its members go to war.
Yes just like it was Cuba's right to station nukes on the Island. But it's a stupid thing to do knowing the US's historical stance on Greenland.Why? It is completely their right to do so.
cleavers
Moderator
People keep referring to "taken by force", they wouldn't need "force", it has next to no military there (probably already more US than Danish).
It has a coast guard that does sea rescues, with about 3 helicopters.
It has several (very) widely dispersed airfields that could be "taken" but they're 99% civilian airports, with no defence, and mostly a couple or more hours apart.
It does have a lot of ice, coast, and rock, none of the major settlements are connected by road, and connecting roads are virtually impossible to build because of the distances and terrain involved.
Most transport is by sea or air apart from within settlements.
It has several thousand (widely scattered) polar bears.
It has a coast guard that does sea rescues, with about 3 helicopters.
It has several (very) widely dispersed airfields that could be "taken" but they're 99% civilian airports, with no defence, and mostly a couple or more hours apart.
It does have a lot of ice, coast, and rock, none of the major settlements are connected by road, and connecting roads are virtually impossible to build because of the distances and terrain involved.
Most transport is by sea or air apart from within settlements.
It has several thousand (widely scattered) polar bears.
Pingu the Penguin
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 11,513
This whole thing has some echoes of the Falklands to me.
mosssideblue
Well-Known Member
As posted yesterday, if he orders US troops to open fire on NATO troops, then I would guess they would refuse toWhat would you expect them to do ? I’d hope that neither American or European soldiers would be prepared to fire upon each other .
hilts
Well-Known Member
By doing what?Greenland is an ally. They are part of NATO because it is territory of Denmark. If USA invaded Greenland that would be a breach of the NATO treaty and surely NATO would have to intervene.
mosssideblue
Well-Known Member
Force as in Greenland trying to react militarily I agree. But if Greenland flatly refuse to accept the orange turds demands, then simply increasing the US contingent there is a form of force imoPeople keep referring to "taken by force", they wouldn't need "force", it has next to no military there (probably already more US than Danish).
It has a coast guard that does sea rescues, with about 3 helicopters.
It has several (very) widely dispersed airfields that could be "taken" but they're 99% civilian airports, with no defence, and mostly a couple or more hours apart.
It does have a lot of ice, coast, and rock, none of the major settlements are connected by road, and connecting roads are virtually impossible to build because of the distances and terrain involved.
Most transport is by sea or air apart from within settlements.
It has several thousand (widely scattered) polar bears.
Saddleworth2
Well-Known Member
Only as such as a country claims through military means another nations sovereign territory. There the similarity ends as if Trump takes Greenland by shipping in a few thousand troops to their military base, there will be no task force assembled to kick them out.This whole thing has some echoes of the Falklands to me.
Putin and Trump eh? Where will their ambitions take us?
i kne albert davy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 12,928
You mean 250 years ago, i haven’t forgot it the traitorous bastards.Calling out Greenland on a major anniversary of the insurrection he created really worked in making people forget about it.
BlueRockape
Well-Known Member
Yep we should have put troops in well before they actually invadedThis whole thing has some echoes of the Falklands to me.
Not even Trump is my guess.I thought so too... until the fucking **** kidnapped Maduro in a military operation that could easily have gone tits up.
Who the fuck knows what Trump will do next?
FogBlueInSanFran
Well-Known Member
For the record, you absolutely did say what I wrote.Actually I said that he's an idiot and nothing he does matters because it will be immediately reversed when he leaves. Which is still true. But nice of you to chirp in again to me you stupid ****
Second, does the “nothing that he does matters” include the suffering he causes people and institutions and the cruelty he imposes between now and this alleged immediate reversal of his policies?
Because if that’s what you think, then that makes it clear who the **** is here.
Onholiday(somemightsay)
Well-Known Member
He's jostling for position on something (possibly NATO spending or similar).As others have already said, the rationale that the US need it for security reasons falls apart under the most negligible of scrutiny. It's NATO territory, the US is a member of NATO, and they already have bases on the island anyway. This isn't some menacing state that is threatening US sovereignty.
The rhetoric of his lackeys has taken a telling shift; "our hemisphere", "nobody will fight us", "why should Denmark have a claim to Greenland". This rhetoric is illustrative as to why he wants it, because he's an imperialist ****. And he's an imperialist **** whose time is running out. That's the reason. Anyone who can't see that is either a.) a total fucking idiot, or b.) a cultist. At least a.) can be forgiven.
However, I don't think he'll claim Greenland. He's an unhinged maniac, but I think this would be his Rubicon.
He's not taking Greenland in my humble opinion...........
Alan Harper's Tash
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 75,519
Greenland’s best option would be to rename themselves Epstein Island until 2028.
Trump won’t go anywhere near it then.
Trump won’t go anywhere near it then.
blueish swede
Well-Known Member
If he opts to do it in the next few months every European country should boycott the World Cup
Boycott the World Cup
Both UEFA and CONMEBOL should boycott the World Cup. They should also take back control of FIFA and sack off that arse licking morph twat and annul the peace prize. And organise sliding tackle practice on all of Trumps golf greens.
He needs ro be kept in hisd box until the mid-terms. If the Democrats take Congress a lot of his enablers will fade away into the shadows again and he'll be left with JD and Rubio to wank him off.
Last edited:
BigJoe#1
Well-Known Member
Isn't it more a case of which side Greenland/Denmark wish to take?As posted yesterday, if he orders US troops to open fire on NATO troops, then I would guess they would refuse to
Are they content having the pesky Ruskies and Chinese occupying the seas surrounding their country or would they prefer some kind of protection from the US? Quite a simple question really.... you can complicate it all you like by making all kinds of assumptions but the actual reality is West or East?
Going with the US would help reduce the risk of major conflict...