- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: If this is real, does it concern you?
Posted on 1/19/26 at 7:54 am to PepeSilvia
Posted on 1/19/26 at 7:54 am to PepeSilvia
quote:
The US already has a strategic military installation in Greenland. There’s no need for the US to “own” it unless Trump has plans to operate in a way that isn’t beneficial to the US’s NATO allies.
Oh, Trump gave you the secret plans?
0
Posted on 1/19/26 at 7:55 am to PepeSilvia
quote:
The US already has a strategic military installation in Greenland.
I am so sick of this talking point
There is like 20 people at Thule at any time. We intend to turn it into the worlds most ever advanced missile defense system which will in theory be able to deny even nukes on rockets.
Yes we need to own it no one else would ever have the drive, money, or capability to do this
Posted on 1/19/26 at 8:15 am to boosiebadazz
quote:
But if it is real, is it a problem?
No.
Other than feeling slighted for a Nobel which isn’t important, the rest is accurate and spot on
Posted on 1/19/26 at 8:20 am to boosiebadazz
Sure if true.
Less concerning than the one political party which openly ratified open borders and welfare fraud within the last few months.
Less concerning than the one political party which openly ratified open borders and welfare fraud within the last few months.
Posted on 1/19/26 at 8:34 am to PepeSilvia
quote:you mean how NATO has operated for the last couple decades not beneficial to the US? It’s all been on our dime. Think of GEOTUS as our repo man. They outta be gracious some kneecaps don’t get busted when we collect.
a way that isn’t beneficial to the US’s NATO allies.
Posted on 1/19/26 at 8:56 am to SuperSaint
quote:
you mean how NATO has operated for the last couple decades not beneficial to the US? It’s all been on our dime. Think of GEOTUS as our repo man. They outta be gracious some kneecaps don’t get busted when we collect
Are you suggesting that our NATO allies have not assisted the US in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, collaborated in peace keeping operations in multiple locations over the years, provided military support like missile defense resources, and joint training opportunities? Because that would be a dumb suggestion.
I think it’s reasonable to point out that the US is the most significant contributor to NATO, but pretending like other nations aren’t critical US interests and missions is just stupid.
Posted on 1/19/26 at 8:59 am to boosiebadazz
quote:Good grief man.
boosiebadazz
Posted on 1/19/26 at 9:01 am to boosiebadazz
quote:So, you now refer to yourself as "This Greenland shite"?
This Greenland shite is pretty bizarre
Congrats on the self awareness.
Posted on 1/19/26 at 9:02 am to Wolfhound45
quote:
Good grief man.
quote:
Wolfhound45
If that letter is real, does it concern you?
Posted on 1/19/26 at 9:03 am to boosiebadazz
Why does a a president telling the truth concern you?
Posted on 1/19/26 at 9:06 am to boosiebadazz
quote:
This Greenland shite is pretty bizarre.
I know you will dismiss this video because she is an old lady but she explains it pretty well:
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.Posted on 1/19/26 at 9:09 am to boosiebadazz
Addressing the OP as asked, assuming the message is real, I don't have a problem with American hegemony and I don't have a problem with the POTUS prioritizing what's in the best interest of the American people. That's what he's supposed to do IMO. That's his job.
I also believe that, in this case, maneuvering strategically and proactively for military reasons is a good thing not only for the US but for the rest of the world. The stronger US hegemony is, the less likely conflicts are to break out internationally.
As always, (again, assuming it is real, which I'm sure it's not) I wish Trump's communication style was more mature, less narcissistic, and classier overall, but I don't have a problem with the substance of the message.
I also believe that, in this case, maneuvering strategically and proactively for military reasons is a good thing not only for the US but for the rest of the world. The stronger US hegemony is, the less likely conflicts are to break out internationally.
As always, (again, assuming it is real, which I'm sure it's not) I wish Trump's communication style was more mature, less narcissistic, and classier overall, but I don't have a problem with the substance of the message.
Posted on 1/19/26 at 9:10 am to boosiebadazz
It doesn't concern me nearly as much as the democrats' agenda in Virginia, which is the same as it is everywhere else, but the leftists who post here constantly won't appear in that thread.
Posted on 1/19/26 at 9:11 am to boosiebadazz
Posted on 1/19/26 at 9:11 am to PepeSilvia
quote:
I think it’s reasonable to point out that the US is the most significant contributor to NATO
Now you’re getting it.
Posted on 1/19/26 at 9:13 am to lurking
quote:
Now you’re getting it.
Most significant isn’t only significant, and it’s not a free pass for belligerence to people with normal, functioning brains.
Posted on 1/19/26 at 9:15 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:
These quick click accounts get the boomers going.
On both sides of the aisle.
Absolutely.
Way too many people, who vote, fall for some of the dumbest shite sometimes. They'll repost fake Russia/China bot account shite without giving it a second thought if it's something that aligns with what they believe/want to believe.
Posted on 1/19/26 at 9:18 am to PepeSilvia
quote:
The US already has a strategic military installation in Greenland. There’s no need for the US to “own” it unless Trump has plans to operate in a way that isn’t beneficial to the US’s NATO allies.
If the US already has de facto military control and is pretty much solely responsible for its defense of Greenland, why shouldn’t we own it?
Posted on 1/19/26 at 9:24 am to PepeSilvia
You (and those like you) continue to operate under archaic assumptions of shared interests.
Had NATO operated as intended Greenland wouldn’t be a point of contention because the member states would have never allowed for Chinese/Russian expansion into the western hemisphere.
Take your Prevagen so you can properly long for the old days, boomer.
Had NATO operated as intended Greenland wouldn’t be a point of contention because the member states would have never allowed for Chinese/Russian expansion into the western hemisphere.
quote:
people with normal, functioning brains.
Take your Prevagen so you can properly long for the old days, boomer.
Posted on 1/19/26 at 9:29 am to lurking
It’s so odd how changeable you guys are. Last year MAGA was isolationist, anti war, America first, blah, blah, blah. This year is invade for oil interests, expansionist, war is good, blah, blah, blah. It’s almost like MAGA has no principles, except those that Trump tells them to have. Enjoy that yummy boot flavor boys.
Page 2 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News