TexAgs91 said:
I heard that Denmark/Greenland sidelined for now: Multiple reports, including from Rutte himself in interviews (e.g., with Fox News), confirm that sovereignty transfer or Denmark ceding control of Greenland "did not come up" in their talks.
Is that true? Did Trump cancel the Tarrifs without even discussing transfer of any part of Greenland to the US?
Fdsa said:
Think about this…the most indebted major country in NATO is also the one that carries the heaviest burden. This was never supposed to be the case and is not sustainable. Other countries have to spend more on their defense (sorry, cut your social program)…and the US needs to find a way to perhaps make some $$ from all the propping up we have done over the years.
nortex97 said:
But Euro's are so serious now. This guy is about right:WILKIE: “the Canadian army was the 4th largest in NATO. Today, it is the size of the Alabama national guard.”
— Rothmus 🏴 (@Rothmus) January 21, 2026
“Lithuania could put more troops in the field within 24 hours than Britain, France, and Germany can. THAT is the warning sign for all of us.” pic.twitter.com/qYgeVXMHvc
Lathspell said:
This whole thing has been a giant nothingburger.
Trump believes these bases and our assets in Greenland is a high priority for homeland security. He was always going to use economic might to push these countries into giving him what he wanted. I'm sure he would take the entire island if they were to give it to us, but all he wants are the bases for security against Russian missiles and ships.
Sending a couple dozen NATO troops to Greenland literally did nothing. If Trump really was going to "invade" Greenland (outlandishly crazy) a couple dozen NATO troops aren't stopping him.
This whole situation is classic Trump negotiations that the rest of the world simply can't understand. He wants something. So he says he wants the "something"x3. Europe or the left whine and cry and throw a temper tantrum, calling him a Nazi and all other manner of BS. Then, they eventually cave and give him the "something", which is all he ever really wanted.
ETA: Basically, this means massive US investment into Greenland (great for Greenlanders). It cuts China and Russia out of the land, with around $5T in minerals. And it gives us better defense against ICBM's and Russian navy in the north atlantic.
ALL OF THAT IS GOOD. Why can't the leftists in this country simply agree a good thing is a good thing, lol
HoustonAggie11 said:TexAgs91 said:
I heard that Denmark/Greenland sidelined for now: Multiple reports, including from Rutte himself in interviews (e.g., with Fox News), confirm that sovereignty transfer or Denmark ceding control of Greenland "did not come up" in their talks.
Is that true? Did Trump cancel the Tarrifs without even discussing transfer of any part of Greenland to the US?
you heard so it must be true. lol
Fdsa said:
You could argue our rising national debt is a matter of national security…
fullback44 said:nortex97 said:
But Euro's are so serious now. This guy is about right:WILKIE: “the Canadian army was the 4th largest in NATO. Today, it is the size of the Alabama national guard.”
— Rothmus 🏴 (@Rothmus) January 21, 2026
“Lithuania could put more troops in the field within 24 hours than Britain, France, and Germany can. THAT is the warning sign for all of us.” pic.twitter.com/qYgeVXMHvc
This is crazy if true, the Euros are not doing their part… Trump needs to keep pressure on the Euro to grow and strengthen their armies .. and yes Canada too
Old Gorm said:
Some folks truly believe the best negotiating tactic in diplomatic matters is a play on Theodore Roosevelt's famous quote:
Speak softly and act like you've cut off your ****.
President Trump took an extreme and aggressive position to get what he really wants. I think POTUS actually wants more control over Greenland's economic affairs in the same respect we possess tremendous say over its defense. He is going to get that for our country.
A tough stance with the British in the 1840s got us a good portion of the Pacific Northwest without a shot being fired.
If the Biden or Obama Administrations been in power back then, then those clowns would have paid Queen Victoria to take the whole region from us.
A Kamala Harris win in 2024 would have led to the Chinese gaining a foothold over Greenland. American weakness is always an opportunity for our enemies to do us harm.
Acting like sissies at the negotiating table and in foreign affairs on the world stage rarely gets you anything but grief.
Glad we have a President who gets it. Haven't had one of those since the 1980s.
🚨 Byron York nails Trump’s Greenland play: Classic Art of the Deal!
— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) January 22, 2026
“He asks for ten times what he wants, the other side freaks out, huge news cycle, back & forth, then they settle for what they could’ve had day one.”
Trump always wins! pic.twitter.com/mC4aMf0Pms
How is Bovino so good at this pic.twitter.com/0tZA9ppvdh
— Jack Posobiec (@JackPosobiec) January 22, 2026
So the new deal is ...
— Wall Street Mav (@WallStreetMav) January 22, 2026
1) Denmark has to keep paying the population of Greenland $600 million per year.
2) USA gets sovereignty over whichever parts we want for US military bases
3) USA gets mineral rights
4) China and Russia aren't allowed in Greenland
5) Cost $0.00 pic.twitter.com/gxDWj5MW7e
GAC06 said:
Mine and drill? This isn't about national security? I'm shocked!
Logos Stick said:GAC06 said:
Mine and drill? This isn't about national security? I'm shocked!
There is no national security without economic security.
GAC06 said:
Mine and drill? This isn't about national security? I'm shocked!
wall street mav is a paid government influencer account, that's likely how they knowMaxPower said:
Where did he see that is the deal?
Lathspell said:
This whole situation is classic Trump negotiations that the rest of the world simply can't understand. He wants something. So he says he wants the "something"x3.
Reginald Cousins said:KentK93 said:dvldog said:
Pretty decent Trump impression as well
Agree! He almost nailed but forgot to add hand jesters.
Jesters?
Old McDonald said:Lathspell said:
This whole situation is classic Trump negotiations that the rest of the world simply can't understand. He wants something. So he says he wants the "something"x3.
how normal people negotiate: hey neighbor i need to park my car in your driveway
neighbor: ok sure
how trump negotiates: hey neighbor i need to park my car in your driveway, sell me your house for $10 million or i might just take it from you
neighbor: uhh how about i just let you park there?
trump: DEAL! that's what I wanted all along, art of the deal
Old McDonald said:jrdaustin said:
Calling him crazy for focusing on Greenland flies in the face of so many things the dems claim to care about.
no one is calling him crazy for focusing on greenland, they're calling him crazy for threatening a hostile takeover of greenland when we already have free reign to do whatever we want there.
Old McDonald said:Lathspell said:
This whole situation is classic Trump negotiations that the rest of the world simply can't understand. He wants something. So he says he wants the "something"x3.
how normal people negotiate: hey neighbor i need to park my car in your driveway
neighbor: ok sure
how trump negotiates: hey neighbor i need to park my car in your driveway, sell me your house for $10 million or i might just take it from you
neighbor: uhh how about i just let you park there?
trump: DEAL! that's what I wanted all along, art of the deal
Old McDonald said:Lathspell said:
This whole situation is classic Trump negotiations that the rest of the world simply can't understand. He wants something. So he says he wants the "something"x3.
how normal people negotiate: hey neighbor i need to park my car in your driveway
neighbor: ok sure
how trump negotiates: hey neighbor i need to park my car in your driveway, sell me your house for $10 million or i might just take it from you
neighbor: uhh how about i just let you park there?
trump: DEAL! that's what I wanted all along, art of the deal
Ag87H2O said:Old McDonald said:Lathspell said:
This whole situation is classic Trump negotiations that the rest of the world simply can't understand. He wants something. So he says he wants the "something"x3.
how normal people negotiate: hey neighbor i need to park my car in your driveway
neighbor: ok sure
how trump negotiates: hey neighbor i need to park my car in your driveway, sell me your house for $10 million or i might just take it from you
neighbor: uhh how about i just let you park there?
trump: DEAL! that's what I wanted all along, art of the deal
How leftists react to Trump's negotiating style - REEEEEEEEEEEE!!!
End result - Trump still wins and gets exactly what he wanted.
It is amusing to watch how much he irritates you guys.
Fdsa said:
Think about this…the most indebted major country in NATO is also the one that carries the heaviest burden. This was never supposed to be the case and is not sustainable. Other countries have to spend more on their defense (sorry, cut your social program)…and the US needs to find a way to perhaps make some $$ from all the propping up we have done over the years.
B-1 83 said:Old McDonald said:Lathspell said:
This whole situation is classic Trump negotiations that the rest of the world simply can't understand. He wants something. So he says he wants the "something"x3.
how normal people negotiate: hey neighbor i need to park my car in your driveway
neighbor: ok sure
how trump negotiates: hey neighbor i need to park my car in your driveway, sell me your house for $10 million or i might just take it from you
neighbor: uhh how about i just let you park there?
trump: DEAL! that's what I wanted all along, art of the deal
Exhibit C
HoustonAggie11 said:Fdsa said:
Think about this…the most indebted major country in NATO is also the one that carries the heaviest burden. This was never supposed to be the case and is not sustainable. Other countries have to spend more on their defense (sorry, cut your social program)…and the US needs to find a way to perhaps make some $$ from all the propping up we have done over the years.
really no reason to defend Europe anymore should completely cut the cord.
74OA said:Fdsa said:
Think about this…the most indebted major country in NATO is also the one that carries the heaviest burden. This was never supposed to be the case and is not sustainable. Other countries have to spend more on their defense (sorry, cut your social program)…and the US needs to find a way to perhaps make some $$ from all the propping up we have done over the years.
The US pays 16% (~$3.5B) of NATO's annual operating budget as each country's contribution is based on its GDP.
So, only a miniscule fraction of total US yearly military budget ($800B+) is for NATO alone. The vast preponderance of US military funding is for general-purpose forces used to protect all of our varied interests around the globe.
If NATO disappeared tomorrow, the US defense budget would remain essentially unchanged because the global threats to our national interests would also remain unchanged.
Squadron7 said:HoustonAggie11 said:Fdsa said:
Think about this…the most indebted major country in NATO is also the one that carries the heaviest burden. This was never supposed to be the case and is not sustainable. Other countries have to spend more on their defense (sorry, cut your social program)…and the US needs to find a way to perhaps make some $$ from all the propping up we have done over the years.
really no reason to defend Europe anymore should completely cut the cord.
Demographics have doomed Europe insofar as NATO.
They are almost useless now in terms of the projection of any power. In time they will become...well, they will align with the Middle Eastern countries.
