Here’s the front page of the Guardian:
All of the folks previously focused on helping Hamas and harming Israel (“Queers for Palestine”) have now turned their attention to an issue that hardly anyone prior to 2017 had ever considered, i.e., whether Denmark should continue to rule Greenland, whether Greenland should be independent, or whether Greenland should become a U.S. territory.
Could it be that Donald Trump is actually a genius?
The Greenland issue even prompted UK’s PM Keir Starmer to say “Greenland is for the Greenlanders!”. Yet saying “Britain is for the British!” would be deemed hate speech by Starmer’s regime?
Anon, just because we embrace our Noble Pakistani girl-rape gangs for their valuable multicultural nourishment doesn’t mean the few remaining “British” folks need to leave immediately.
Donald Trump is clearly a genius, kind of social genius that I do not understand but can observe its effects. He is a son of a self-made billionaire, his uncle was MIT’s own John Trump, a student of Robert Van de Graaff and a peer of Vannevar Bush. It runs in the family.
ChatGPT says that Trump’s dad was worth only about $200 million in pre-Biden dollars when he died in 1999 (still pretty good for self-made!). Bidenflation and error bars bring the estimate up to perhaps $600 million in today’s mini-dollars.
Looks like Dr. Greenspun is in competition for who has more zeros! LOL!
Only Greenspun could find a connection between Greenspunland & Jew craft. If US annexed Greenspunland, only 1 country would be left up there. Strange that greenspunlanders don’t want to be annexed, while everyone in the world wants to move into US. Ukraine wants to be annexed. If Greenspunland became independent, it would probably become part of Russia in no time.
Just recently resubscribed to your blog. This post reminds me why I left.
Larry, so well said. I’d leave too, but my voice is so much more important than the hoi polloi as we fight to support our ever Peaceful Brothers in Hamas and Hezbollah and also of course the Great One Mr. Khamenei and his brave citizens in their quest to eradicate the evil Jews. Allahu Akbar!
Yes. I personally like pre-2020 Phil’s postings more… In my opinion, he does have a lot of good posts after that, but you have to search them out. Then again, I like most things and people more pre-2020…
I do admire and enjoy the candor of “A posting every day; an interesting idea every three months”. And the category guide on the blog could make it easy to find the posts I am most likely to enjoy.
For GOD’s sake somebody give him the Nobel Prize.
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-administration-news-01-19-26
regarding Genius, what is the outcome Trump desires that is being achieved?
Is it actually taking over Greenland?
If yes, with what purpose?
If US security, is the US safer w/Greenland (vs with allies)? Or, in the end, will the cost to upsetting allies be minimal.
How about give Puerto Rico to Denmark in exchange for Greenland. All of those Ice People in Denmark would love passport-free travel to sunny, tropical Puerto Rico during the very long, cold, dark Danish winters.
Greenland issue makes EU’s obsession with Ukraine look a bit silly. EU made themselves completely dependent on US gas and military support and they can’t really throw that away over Greenland. From the Russian perspective, if it was a good thing to split Kosovo from Serbia, perhaps Greenland’s status isn’t sacrosanct, either, as EU might discover.
Trump does seem to rival Dali at being “Master of the Surreal”:
https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2017/06/12/salvador-dali-surrrealism-history/
Honestly, what I want to know what this Greenland circus is smoke screen for or in service of.
National security – there are already US bases there, and what exactly is the threat? Resource extraction – how the fuck you are going to do it in these conditions?
So this cover for something, I want to know what for.
Resource extraction? Relatively unexplored, but enormous size and potential. Alaska not a bad analog in terms of operability with large oil & gas operations on north slope at latitude north of Greenland’s southern end.
If the goal is forcing European NATO members to actually wake up and smell the coffee, and then (1) put money in defence, and (2) actually make sure Greenland is *effectively* covered by NATO, but not on the US taxpayers’ dollar, it seems to be working. There is the corollary that the good people of Greenland might have realised that the teenagers’ attitude ‘we can be independent, we can take care of things ourselves’ works only when one had an actual economy and is not dependent of subsidies and defence from elsewhere, so maybe it would pay to tone the attitude down.
Any other goal seem to be poorly served by the move.
Federico, your logic makes more than a bit of sense for us here at Mt. Vernon.
This is noting new and Trump isn’t the first US president interested in Greenland. From Wikipedia [1]:
1867 — Secretary of State William H. Seward pushed for a purchase of Greenland and Iceland from Denmark.
1910 — Diplomatic discussions to bring Greenland under U.S. control in exchange for other territories.
1946 — President Harry S. Truman’s offer of $100 million in gold to Denmark to buy Greenland, but Denmark declined.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposed_United_States_acquisition_of_Greenland#History