(01-07-2026 02:21 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 02:08 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 01:59 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 01:55 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Greenland sits in the middle of a direct route between us and western Russia, and also provides another access point by China.

Both Russian and Chinese ships are reportedly all over Greenland at the moment. Greenland also has REM that both countries are attempting to mine.

No one is seriously talking about invading them. We have talks scheduled Friday about purchasing Greenland.

do you know we already have a base on Greenland and an agreement to keep it there in perpetuity. Also that base is the only deepwater port on this side of the Arctic and only has ~3% of the personnel that were there during the cold war, with ZERO restrictions on us resupplying to cold war levels.

Also, before Trump started breaking down our alliances for "reasons", is there any evidence we couldn't completely control RE out of greenland since there are already dozens of US affiliated miners operating around there.

Again, what is the need?

The need is secrecy. We need to deploy weapon systems that are not subject to inspection by other NATO countries. These systems must remain uncompromised or they simply won't work. It's a matter of being able to securely deploy what is needed without compromising what they are and how they work.

This makes more sense but I don’t really see any impediment to implementing trumps golden shower project or whatever you’re referring to.

Trump doesn't trust the other NATO countries to have knowledge of our new weapon systems. Denmark apparently is one he doesn't trust.

Balls doesn't care, Claw.

(01-07-2026 02:57 PM)Claw Wrote:  Trump doesn't trust the other NATO countries to have knowledge of our new weapon systems. Denmark apparently is one he doesn't trust.

Where did you see this?

(01-07-2026 02:44 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 02:39 PM)b2b Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 01:59 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 01:55 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Greenland sits in the middle of a direct route between us and western Russia, and also provides another access point by China.

Both Russian and Chinese ships are reportedly all over Greenland at the moment. Greenland also has REM that both countries are attempting to mine.

No one is seriously talking about invading them. We have talks scheduled Friday about purchasing Greenland.

do you know we already have a base on Greenland and an agreement to keep it there in perpetuity. Also that base is the only deepwater port on this side of the Arctic and only has ~3% of the personnel that were there during the cold war, with ZERO restrictions on us resupplying to cold war levels.

Also, before Trump started breaking down our alliances for "reasons", is there any evidence we couldn't completely control RE out of greenland since there are already dozens of US affiliated miners operating around there.

Again, what is the need?

Rent vs Own. What do you prefer?

Would you buy a house you had an agreement in perpetuity to rent for zero dollars and also got to share in capital gains from the valuation of the house?

Yes. I want possession of the house.

(01-07-2026 02:57 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 02:21 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 02:08 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 01:59 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 01:55 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Greenland sits in the middle of a direct route between us and western Russia, and also provides another access point by China.

Both Russian and Chinese ships are reportedly all over Greenland at the moment. Greenland also has REM that both countries are attempting to mine.

No one is seriously talking about invading them. We have talks scheduled Friday about purchasing Greenland.

do you know we already have a base on Greenland and an agreement to keep it there in perpetuity. Also that base is the only deepwater port on this side of the Arctic and only has ~3% of the personnel that were there during the cold war, with ZERO restrictions on us resupplying to cold war levels.

Also, before Trump started breaking down our alliances for "reasons", is there any evidence we couldn't completely control RE out of greenland since there are already dozens of US affiliated miners operating around there.

Again, what is the need?

The need is secrecy. We need to deploy weapon systems that are not subject to inspection by other NATO countries. These systems must remain uncompromised or they simply won't work. It's a matter of being able to securely deploy what is needed without compromising what they are and how they work.

This makes more sense but I don’t really see any impediment to implementing trumps golden shower project or whatever you’re referring to.

Trump doesn't trust the other NATO countries to have knowledge of our new weapon systems. Denmark apparently is one he doesn't trust.

We should leave NATO. Frick em

(01-07-2026 03:03 PM)b2b Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 02:44 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 02:39 PM)b2b Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 01:59 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 01:55 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Greenland sits in the middle of a direct route between us and western Russia, and also provides another access point by China.

Both Russian and Chinese ships are reportedly all over Greenland at the moment. Greenland also has REM that both countries are attempting to mine.

No one is seriously talking about invading them. We have talks scheduled Friday about purchasing Greenland.

do you know we already have a base on Greenland and an agreement to keep it there in perpetuity. Also that base is the only deepwater port on this side of the Arctic and only has ~3% of the personnel that were there during the cold war, with ZERO restrictions on us resupplying to cold war levels.

Also, before Trump started breaking down our alliances for "reasons", is there any evidence we couldn't completely control RE out of greenland since there are already dozens of US affiliated miners operating around there.

Again, what is the need?

Rent vs Own. What do you prefer?

Would you buy a house you had an agreement in perpetuity to rent for zero dollars and also got to share in capital gains from the valuation of the house?

Yes. I want possession of the house.

We have possession of several bases/facilites in Greenland. We dont need to own them. We have permission to place pretty much any military presence there we wish to based on prior existing agreements.

Id point out we have relied on NORAD and its Canadian installations since the start of the Cold War for strategic nuclear early warning defense. Yet, not only do we own none of the NORAD bases in Canada----we dont even have a single "US base" in all of Canada---though we do have some military personnel serving in those NORAD facilities along side Canadian military members. That said, it sounds like we are going to offer Greenland a deal that is similar to what we have with several Pacific Island nations that would give us more explicit defense rights to Greenland (though, Im not sure thats really all that necessary given the current arrangement). My guess is we will come to a direct arrangement with the government of Greenland---which Denmark has said is fine with them (they just want the final deal to represent self determination by the population of Greenland and not a forced occupation). I dont really like the way this is being handled. Should have been done quietly behind the scenes. Id prefer our enemies not see mom and dad fighting.

(01-07-2026 07:57 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

You should put that in your sig.

Danish Defense Ministry: We’ll “Shoot First and Ask Questions Later” If US Invades Greenland

^^ I'm sure that would work out well for them. dumb***.

We are not going to invade Greenland. We're going to make them an offer they can't refuse. Even the head of Denmark said if the Greenlanders were happy with the deal, then that's it.

(01-07-2026 09:12 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  Danish Defense Ministry: We’ll “Shoot First and Ask Questions Later” If US Invades Greenland

Brave words only spoken because invasion is out of the question.

(01-06-2026 09:29 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(01-06-2026 09:24 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  

(01-06-2026 09:14 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  I hope it works out but Trump should not have suggested we would attack a territory of a NATO nation. Even if it was just posturing.

NATO is a toothless organization run by globalhomo.

Who gives a flying f*** what NATO thinks?

I'd rather we reinforce the Western Hemisphere to keep China and Russia away than keep wiping Europe's a** which we've been doing for over 80 years now.

F*** NATO, F*** the UN and F*** the EU.

Get the US out of NATO and the UN, and kick the UN out of the US.

Let the UN setup their globalhomo headquarters in Belgium.

Yes

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

The answer to all of youz beetchin’ is to get out of NATO. And I’m all in on telling the UN to F off. But as long as we are members of NATO we should uphold what we agreed to.

(01-07-2026 09:45 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(01-06-2026 09:29 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(01-06-2026 09:24 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  

(01-06-2026 09:14 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  I hope it works out but Trump should not have suggested we would attack a territory of a NATO nation. Even if it was just posturing.

NATO is a toothless organization run by globalhomo.

Who gives a flying f*** what NATO thinks?

I'd rather we reinforce the Western Hemisphere to keep China and Russia away than keep wiping Europe's a** which we've been doing for over 80 years now.

F*** NATO, F*** the UN and F*** the EU.

Get the US out of NATO and the UN, and kick the UN out of the US.

Let the UN setup their globalhomo headquarters in Belgium.

Yes

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

The answer to all of youz beetchin’ is to get out of NATO. And I’m all in on telling the UN to F off. But as long as we are members of NATO we should uphold what we agreed to.

they've been trying to subvert/take advantage of the USD for too long .... THEY (THE G'DAMMED GLOBOHOMOS) chose that path ... fk the status quo right of the past ... the bushes, the cheneys, the old right supposed conservatives ... the whole lot of 'em were all in cahoots...

Ike AND Reagan warned us...

(01-07-2026 10:37 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 09:45 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(01-06-2026 09:29 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(01-06-2026 09:24 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  

(01-06-2026 09:14 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  I hope it works out but Trump should not have suggested we would attack a territory of a NATO nation. Even if it was just posturing.

NATO is a toothless organization run by globalhomo.

Who gives a flying f*** what NATO thinks?

I'd rather we reinforce the Western Hemisphere to keep China and Russia away than keep wiping Europe's a** which we've been doing for over 80 years now.

F*** NATO, F*** the UN and F*** the EU.

Get the US out of NATO and the UN, and kick the UN out of the US.

Let the UN setup their globalhomo headquarters in Belgium.

Yes

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

The answer to all of youz beetchin’ is to get out of NATO. And I’m all in on telling the UN to F off. But as long as we are members of NATO we should uphold what we agreed to.

they've been trying to subvert/take advantage of the USD for too long .... THEY (THE G'DAMMED GLOBOHOMOS) chose that path ... fk the status quo right of the past ... the bushes, the cheneys, the old right supposed conservatives ... the whole lot of 'em were all in cahoots...

Ike AND Reagan warned us...

I just wish Ronaldus Magnus hasn't selected GHWB to be his VP. But then again, who should he have picked? Goldwater would've been bad news, even sixteen years after losing to LBJ. I guess he was in a tough spot.

(01-07-2026 10:37 PM)Vintage Dr. Gonz Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 09:45 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(01-06-2026 09:29 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(01-06-2026 09:24 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  

(01-06-2026 09:14 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  I hope it works out but Trump should not have suggested we would attack a territory of a NATO nation. Even if it was just posturing.

NATO is a toothless organization run by globalhomo.

Who gives a flying f*** what NATO thinks?

I'd rather we reinforce the Western Hemisphere to keep China and Russia away than keep wiping Europe's a** which we've been doing for over 80 years now.

F*** NATO, F*** the UN and F*** the EU.

Get the US out of NATO and the UN, and kick the UN out of the US.

Let the UN setup their globalhomo headquarters in Belgium.

Yes

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

The answer to all of youz beetchin’ is to get out of NATO. And I’m all in on telling the UN to F off. But as long as we are members of NATO we should uphold what we agreed to.

they've been trying to subvert/take advantage of the USD for too long .... THEY (THE G'DAMMED GLOBOHOMOS) chose that path ... fk the status quo right of the past ... the bushes, the cheneys, the old right supposed conservatives ... the whole lot of 'em were all in cahoots...

Ike AND Reagan warned us...

People never learn.

(01-07-2026 10:44 PM)Dr Gonz padwan Andy B. Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 10:37 PM)Vintage Dr Gonz Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 09:45 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(01-06-2026 09:29 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(01-06-2026 09:24 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  NATO is a toothless organization run by globalhomo.

Who gives a flying f*** what NATO thinks?

I'd rather we reinforce the Western Hemisphere to keep China and Russia away than keep wiping Europe's a** which we've been doing for over 80 years now.

F*** NATO, F*** the UN and F*** the EU.

Get the US out of NATO and the UN, and kick the UN out of the US.

Let the UN setup their globalhomo headquarters in Belgium.

Yes

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

The answer to all of youz beetchin’ is to get out of NATO. And I’m all in on telling the UN to F off. But as long as we are members of NATO we should uphold what we agreed to.

they've been trying to subvert/take advantage of the USD for too long .... THEY (THE G'DAMMED GLOBOHOMOS) chose that path ... fk the status quo right of the past ... the bushes, the cheneys, the old right supposed conservatives ... the whole lot of 'em were all in cahoots...

Ike AND Reagan warned us...

People never learn.

I hate to say it, but sadly, no, we don't. (I say that as a member of the human race, much less an American.) (And I wanted to get in on the act of colorful nicknames. Sue me. Just don't hire tanq. lol)

(01-07-2026 06:32 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 03:03 PM)b2b Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 02:44 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 02:39 PM)b2b Wrote:  

(01-07-2026 01:59 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  do you know we already have a base on Greenland and an agreement to keep it there in perpetuity. Also that base is the only deepwater port on this side of the Arctic and only has ~3% of the personnel that were there during the cold war, with ZERO restrictions on us resupplying to cold war levels.

Also, before Trump started breaking down our alliances for "reasons", is there any evidence we couldn't completely control RE out of greenland since there are already dozens of US affiliated miners operating around there.

Again, what is the need?

Rent vs Own. What do you prefer?

Would you buy a house you had an agreement in perpetuity to rent for zero dollars and also got to share in capital gains from the valuation of the house?

Yes. I want possession of the house.

We have possession of several bases/facilites in Greenland. We dont need to own them. We have permission to place pretty much any military presence there we wish to based on prior existing agreements.

Id point out we have relied on NORAD and its Canadian installations since the start of the Cold War for strategic nuclear early warning defense. Yet, not only do we own none of the NORAD bases in Canada----we dont even have a single "US base" in all of Canada---though we do have some military personnel serving in those NORAD facilities along side Canadian military members. That said, it sounds like we are going to offer Greenland a deal that is similar to what we have with several Pacific Island nations that would give us more explicit defense rights to Greenland (though, Im not sure thats really all that necessary given the current arrangement). My guess is we will come to a direct arrangement with the government of Greenland---which Denmark has said is fine with them (they just want the final deal to represent self determination by the population of Greenland and not a forced occupation). I dont really like the way this is being handled. Should have been done quietly behind the scenes. Id prefer our enemies not see mom and dad fighting.

This comports with what I have read and makes sense which is why I’ve posed the question.

I also think it’s important to ask who benefits from weakening the NATO alliance?

And ballgargling goofball still can't let sleeping dogs lie. Oh, well. Globohomos gonna globohomo.

(01-07-2026 10:51 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  And ballgargling goofball still can't let sleeping dogs lie. Oh, well. Globohomos gonna globohomo.

This choir boy from the Sunbelt board sure is trippin balls tonight.