Trump Eyes a New Real-Estate Purchase: Greenland

The US already tried to buy it after WW2. The Danish said no.

I did have the same thought as trump today though. With climate change, Greenland will be a more livable place than it has been.

We would need to clear off most of the ice, but it would be good purchase, especially for migrating Americans to a cooler zone if the parts of the country become too hot. There may be a lot of natural resources to make use of, which probably isn't happening much today.

Greenland has the highest suicide rate in the world. I hope he moves there.

r2 Except the Danes aren't selling, so... It doesn't hurt to ask and degrade yourself even further, though.

But R4 I have to think they could name their price if we offered. They’d be stupid not to sell it as only 60,000 people live there and America could afford to pay them a lot of money for it.

Like think about if some country wanted to pay like 5 trillion dollars for Wyoming. You wouldn’t sell that shit in a heartbeat?

R5 is correct. Everyone has a price, R4. Doesn't hurt to ask.

r5 It's 2019, not the turn of the 19th century. It's gross to even suggest to a developed prosperous European country that you want to buy a huge chunk of their territory. But leave it to a classless turd like Trump to mention it to the Danish queen when he meets her later this year.

Also, with what money, exactly? How about you take care of your debt first?

The Danish no longer have the authority to sell it. It’s self governing. In the last few years, it’s taking considerable steps towards independence. We’d need an overwhelming groundswell of support from residents of Greenland and of the US.

During WWIII, the Danes sold their Virgin Islands to the US. Hence the US activity there.

Thanks for that info, r8. I wasn’t aware of that.

I say lets buy it and welcome two new democratic senators

Can we trade Florida and Texas for it?

Correct R8, Greenlanders are pursuing independence. They would reject a U. S. bid. They want to build those resources on their own.

Greenland’s flag, adopted in 1985, is the first Nordic flag without a Nordic cross.

If we can't buy it, we should conquer it with force. I want those two senators

In WWII, the UK attacked and occupied Iceland, a neutral country that was ostensively an ally, but for the purpose of keeping it out of German hands.

Greenland was allied with Denmark and therefore already allied with the UK.

[quote] They would reject a U. S. bid.

Don't be so sure.

They would reject an appeal from Trump, he is despised in Europe. Even by European right wingers!

R14, We just need to grant statehood to Puerto Rico for those two senators. Kind of ridiculous that it hasn't happened--PR has 5 million people.

Given that Greenland's tiny population is 88 percent Inuit, not sure why they'd want to join up with the U.S.--it's not like we have a history of treating native populations well. If anything, the natural alliance would be with Canada.

Meanwhile, Alaska comprises 20 percent of U.S. territory, if things warm up, there's plenty of room up north without acquiring Greenland.

No amoount of global warming though is going to get rid of the endless night of an arctic winter.

[quote] not sure why they'd want to join up with the U.S.

$$$$

Why would Greenland want to be a dumping ground for the US? You all know what shit will be dumped there. And not to mention hundreds of thousands of 350-lb - 600-lb gun-crazy louts, hicks, incels who will flock there and wreak havoc. Such horror!!!

Greenland has a lot of oil reserves. That is the only reason he wants it. Putin wants to drill in the artic. Trump wants to make a deal with Putin.

The perfect Ice Palace for the perfect Ice Queen.

Trump only knows what he knows - real estate, money laundering, and cheating. That's all he can fantasize about since he's not spending any time on his job.

I like this idea. I think we should buy Cuba as well.

R21 has summed it up brilliantly. Buy Greenland, make a huge profit selling it to Putin and Russia.

Keep dreaming lard-ass. You ain't buying shit!

Let it go!

If the US sees the value in it, the Danes and Greenlanders probably do as well. Why wouldn't they just keep it for themselves?

Hmm what's a Greenlander to do, allow the U.S to come in and take all their natural resources, or sell those resources themselves and become billionaires?

Greenlanders know that joining the US has no nothing to offer them. They can get exactly what they need through free trade deals and a military alliance. The US will pay them for a military base, if we don’t already.

Joining the US will mean subverting whatever European values they have, and also subverting whatever Inuit values they have. I’d bet their lifestyles and political policies have little in common with US values, beyond a love of Hollywood and some American sports.

[quote] The US will pay them for a military base, if we don’t already.

Already covered, R30.

R18 Puerto Ricans do not want statehood.

Harry S Truman tried it. So did Dwight Eisenhower. And now Donald Trump is reportedly the latest US president looking into the possibility of somehow acquiring Greenland ahead of his trip to Denmark next month.

Not for sale: Danish MPs ridicule idea of Trump buying Greenland

Danish politicians on Friday poured scorn on the notion of selling Greenland to the United States following reports that President Donald Trump had privately discussed the idea of buying the world’s biggest island with his advisers.

Greenland, a self-ruling part of Denmark located between the North Atlantic and Arctic oceans, is dependant on Danish economic support.

“I am sure a majority in Greenland believes it is better to have a relation to Denmark than the United States, in the long term,” Aaja Chemnitz Larsen, Danish MP from Greenland’s second-largest party Inuit Ataqatigiit (IA), told Reuters.

This thread makes me want to watch Smilla's Sense of Snow again.

This idea is nothing more than the ramblings of a lunatic mind.

This idea is nothing more than the ramblings of a lunatic mind.

/Sums up the last 3 years

Another day, another shiny object. Trump wins again, ensuring Greenland gets covered more than Epstein/The Economy/Dead Kids.

I really thought there would be a ton of Trump jokes in here but I can't believe that some of you are even serious about this.

You can not buy territory or people anymore. You would have to ask the people of Greenland if they want to join the United States first. I doubt they would even consider this for 5 sec. Buying Alaska for only 100 million was such a bargain in retrospect.

Offensive that the Danes are mocking this. He should force them to sell it. Say we won't defend them.

I wish he'd force them to sell. We can make it a blue state.

The backstory is it was a joke a guest mentioned to him at Mar-a-Lago and Trump took it seriously. The guest was too embarrassed to correct Trump as he considered the possibilities.

Trump is probably still fooled by the whole Greenland-Iceland naming trick.

R39 Defend them from what?

Trump has no leverage over Denmark. That much is obvious

NATO, R43. He could threaten to withdraw from NATO unless they sell.

Denmark would be responsible for failing to give the US what it wants to stay in NATO. All the other allies would look at Denmark differently.

R37: Please link to reputable sources, not the unctuous right wing Clownhall. Thank You.

You know who also advocated for “living space”?

Bloomberg:

Trump Shows Interest in Buying Greenland. Denmark Isn’t Selling

This is just getting more surreal. Someone save us from this idiot please!!!!

R32 yes, Puerto Rican DO want statehood. They just voted for it. The Republicans won't let them.

It might be easier and more achievable by colonizing it first, like Mexico is doing with the U.S.

R50 and what was turnout like?

The people opposed to statehood boycotted the last vote. Google it.

[quote] It might be easier and more achievable by colonizing it first, like Mexico is doing with the U.S.

Even three years into Trumps presidency, the utter delusion of the right is stunning. It's like flat earthers. All of us know those people are out there but it's still surreal when you encounter one in real life.

Delusion of an ignoramus vulgarian.

From Marlene Dietrich's ABC:

Greenland ("Should be called Iceland. See ICELAND.")

Iceland ("Should be called Greenland. See GREENLAND.")

Today Greenland is a priceless hedge against global warming. We can’t afford it.

Denmark isn't selling, but suppose they were interested or even could sell Greenland. They aren't just going to let the US have it at some price, they would sell it to the highest bidder, imagine China wanting it, or Russia. Canada might bit on it, Trump is suppose to be this Real Estate genius but he is too fucking stupid to realize it would be a bidding war.

Trump probably thinks he can sell all the ice in Greenland to the Saudi's.

Does it come furnished?

Greenland's strategically important, the Danes wouldn't sell it to Russia or China. Not the U.S. either, but that's more because they have no interest in selling.

What would Putin do?

I hope someone doesn't suggest to Trump that he sell off California in exchange for paying off the national debt. Trump would love to sell off all the liberals and Mexicans in California to China. Trump could get rid of California and take credit for paying off the national debt.

Half of his base is constantly posting that they hope California falls into the ocean, they would be all for it.

Who cares if some people boycotted a vote? This is Democracy in action. Puerto Rico voted for statehood for the first time ever.

Your argument is about as valid as me being angry that less than half of eligible voters elected Trump to be President.

[quote] The referendum was boycotted by all the major parties against statehood for several reasons. One reason is that the title of the ballot asserted that Puerto Rico is a colony.[a] The Popular Democratic Party (PPD) has historically rejected that notion. Similarly, under the option for maintaining the status quo, the ballot also asserted that Puerto Rico is subject to the plenary powers of the United States Congress, a notion also historically rejected by the PPD.[b] Likewise, under the 'independence/free association' option, the ballot asserted that Puerto Rico must be a sovereign nation in order to enter into a compact of free association with the United States.[c] Supporters of the free association movement reject this notion. Had these parties participated in the referendum, they claim it would mean they had accepted those assertions implicitly, regardless of whether the assertions were correct.

To Trump: Gå fuck dig selv!

Go fuck yourself in Danish.

Yeah, take a look at your own link, r65. Opinion pills of all parties showed 52% support. The reason the opposing parties "boycotted" the vote was because they knew they were going to lose, so they nitpicked on some wording to pretend that's why they weren't going to vote, in order to cast doubt on the election so that rubes like you will use it as a way to say it wasn't "fair".

The majority of Puerto Ricans support statehood. That's a fact.

I hope PR votes for independence. I don't want another state. 50 is perfect.

To Trump: Gå hjem og knep din mor

"Go home and fuck your mother" in Danish.

Can we sell Mar-a-Lago, Trump Tower and Bedminster along with the entire fucking Trump clan to Greenland?

Let's turn them into a home for migrants and refugees! They will just have to deal with the gaudy, which might cause some of them to flee back to their home countries.

Current polling (7/19) has 2/3rds support for statehood. I’m surprised: i’d have expected independence after Maria.

[quote] R45: Denmark would be responsible for failing to give the US what it wants to stay in NATO. All the other allies would look at Denmark differently.

Yes, they would all take Denmark’s side and consider sanctions against the US. At a minimum, they would consider breaking with the US. They all know that appeasement fails against Fascism.

A young US once pledged [italic] “millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute”. [/italic] Independent countries, like Denmark, have [italic] pride. [/Italic] Even the smallest countries. Such US action would be unacceptable to all of Europe, excepting Russia, perhaps.

Europe, collectively, has only to defend itself against Russia*. Not that they’d invite a war, but they could repel a Russian invasion without US help. They’d tell the US to take a hike.

*Of course, if Trump actually pursued such a course, then Europe would also have to be prepared to defend itself against the US, too. A very divided US.

Buyink? No, just takink it you pussy!

I think they’ve had two successive statehood votes in a row, now.

The Inuit do make use of color with their house paint selections.

Now that Trump has cheapened the White House, maybe Denmark can also buy it. If it hasn't already been sold to Russia in another money laundering scheme, that is.

We already bough Greenland. And your country too, wherever you live.

bough = bought

OP Trump's being cute.

[quote]OP Trump's being cute.

It’s Trump being stupid.

R3, Why does Greenland have such a high rate of suicide?

Greenland has responded.

In essence, thanks but we're not interested.

My guess the weather. Same as Ireland.

[quote] R76: The Inuit do make use of color with their house paint selections.

Dark colors to attract sunlight for heat.

Why don't they have any fucking trees? Are they afraid of trees, like the Irish?

It would be a referendum, similar to how Limbe province voted to change from being a part of Nigeria to joining Cameroon.

Look at your atlas, R86. Trees don't grow well in ten months of chill.

R86 Irish are afraid of trees? That's a new one to me. Haha

More information on the Cameroon/Nigeria referendum of 1961.

The U.S., China, and India, getting their hands on pristine lands won't stay pristine long.

Keep Exxon, BP, etc., out of Greenland.

r88 I blame Trump for that.

R91 Keep them all out of everywhere else!

Lousiana, Alaska, and Gadsden purchases were all 19th century deals of less populated areas; though populated already with many Americans; sold by autocrats; who really needed the money; and figured the US would just take them, anyway.

The US Virgin Islands was not too much different. Sold by Denmark in 1917 (not during WWIII as I wrote in R8). It had a lot of Americans, certainly. Denmark was pressured by war and the US did threaten to occupy the islands. Denmark did have a plebiscite, though the islanders did not vote.

It would be inconceivable transferring such land in the 21st century without a local plebiscite. And I don’t think even the US could afford to buy all that land with the territorial rights to fishing, oil, and minerals. It would have to be a simple trade of nationalities, I think.

With the new Arctic shipping route opening up, Greenland will soon be paid huge chunks of USD without selling a chunk of ice.

It's depressing that Trump has fucked up foreign policy and relationships with allies so much that a scenario like that in R73 even seems plausible. The GOP has a lot to answer for.

The U.S. should work with the UN to end Denmark's colonial authority over Greenland.

R97 The US would be a bit late to that fight seeing as Greenland has almost total political autonomy now. They are close as they can be to independence without formally breaking off ties. And they prefer being part of the Denmark economy. Really they are in the ideal situation

Agreed R94 - a local election would be necessary before anything else could move forward. It would be a huge change for the people of Greenland and they need to be a part of it.

All Greenlanders would agree if they were guaranteed a cool $1M to each and every person. Which is very possible: only 60,000 population = $60B price tag. The U.S. cam afford that easily.

Posters here who are seriously considering this are why Trump won and might possibly win again. And I can't fucking believe he has managed to - yet again - successfully divert the conversation from a possible impending recession, which is of his doing. Throw a shiny toy at the electorate and everything is forgotten in an instant, I guess. With a lot of help from the Russians, who just love watching NATO allies squabbling amongst each other.

[quote]Wouldn’t it be cool to have a 51st state?

What's wrong with D.C. and Puerto Rico? Too many brown people for your liking? But please, keep dreaming about Greenland. It's nice to have aspirations in life, however unrealistic.

Brilliant satire from those of you pretending that this is viable, a good idea and something that the Greenlanders and Danes would want!

It is satire, right? Nobody could be that stupid.

[quote] R97: The U.S. should work with the UN to end Denmark's colonial authority over Greenland.

Denmark subsidizes Greenland, and has pledged to grant it independence when its income from resources makes it self sufficient. Besides, it has no say in its internal affairs. It handles foreign relations and defense.

If the UN replaced Denmark’s funding, they might be find with this.

R101, Greenland also has a bunch of brown people--though 54,000 people is way too small for a state.

R63, The U.S. can't afford to sell off California--it's the economic engine of the country and underwrites a large chunk of the federal government. It's why Drumpf whines about the Golden State, but doesn't do anything to it. Too much economic power.

That's aside from it being unconstitutional and all.

R100, encapsulates the mindset of rich, powerful countries. Everything must be for sale. The US is no different from Russia and China, in some respects.

R101 Thank you so much for your racism, it’s added so much to this conversation. Your ignorance and viciousness are charming. Ninety percent of the population of Greenland are ‘brown people’ but apparently facts are too difficult for you.

[quote] Europe, collectively, has only to defend itself against Russia*. Not that they’d invite a war, but they could repel a Russian invasion without US help. They’d tell the US to take a hike.

Europe has had 74 years to "tell the US to take a hike" and take on full responsibility for its own defense. It has not, as yet, done so.

And if you think Europe could repel even a conventional Russian invasion with their exiting forces, you're dreaming - but it wouldn't be a conventional invasion for long. Russia has many times more nuclear weapons deployed or stockpiled than France and the UK. Do you trust Putin not to press this advantage?

The Greenland thing is fun to talk about but obviously silly. Trump is an idiot. Those facts don't make Europe less dependent on the US for defense.

Trump's camp leaked this story to distract from something else.

[quote] Greenland also has a bunch of brown people

Uh what??

Russia’s reconquest of Eastern Europe would probably not be with tanks. They know the US would respond with nukes, whether the US was in NATO or had already withdrawn. The US would simply not accept Russian occupation of Germany. And a grab of Poland would probably be unacceptable, too. The Baltics, not so much. Sorry Latvia!

What Russia is more likely to do is use it’s position as a major supplier of natural gas to Europe to cut off supplies in mid-winter. They’ve used this tactic on Ukraine before, and I think that squeezed all of Europe at the time. It’s a high-stakes game, though, since it’s “economic warfare” and could literally spark a hot war. It was effective in changing some countries’ hard-line anti-Russia policies.

The Japanese would argue that the reason they attacked the US in WWII was because the US had blockaded all shipments of oil into their country, and they had no alternative. They needed to seize the oil fields in Dutch East Asia, and could not do so with the US Navy in the way. They won’t mention that the US initiated the embargo as a result of their China invasion, but still, its complicated.

I don’t thing the US grade schools taught about the oil. They taught it was an unprovoked attach, and due to territorial ambition, and the US was a completely innocent victim. And, the Japs attacked in a [italic] Sunday, [/italic] when everyone was in [italic] Church! [/italic] That’s literally what I was taught in the 1960s, by the gals on the home front.

[quote] It was effective in changing some countries’ hard-line anti-Russia policies

Though, it also sparked interest in a pipeline from the Mideast to Western Europe that avoids routing through Russia. Russia has tried to kill the project. I don’t know where this stands today.

This is another example of how mentally incompetent and filled with lunacy Trump is. If you watch YouTube videos of Benito Mussolini with his pompous facial expressions and spastic hand gestures you will see a carbon copy of Trump. Trump is a modern American Il Duce.

Trump constantly poses with that stern look on his face. He’s almost never shown laughing or even smiling. I believe it’s because of a mental disorder whereby he is afraid that such expressions make him look weak. He’s expressed his obsession with “strength”. This, of course, constrains his choices, and makes him easy to manipulate.

I find it pathetic because a strong man acknowledges when he is wrong and accepts responsibility for it, and acts to make things right. Trump could never admit being wrong and accept responsibility for his actions. Trump is the weakest man I’ve seen in public life in my 60 years. It’s ironic.

Watch the last 12 seconds (from the 1:00 mark) of that Mussolini video and you can see Mussolini is written all over Trump.

The Orange Cunt strikes out again.

Puerto Ricans are idiots who twice rejected statehood.

They most recently, pre Maria, twice chose statehood. Do keep up. And I never write that. But do, please.

r118 it's also mentioned in this thread several times, which r117 either missed or willfully ignored. There's even an argument about it. There's some sort of right wing mythology around PR that shows up whenever it's mentioned.

Do keep up, both elections had high levels of boycott with about 35% eligible voter participation.

Yes, r120, we've already covered that same talking point above 🙄

Not again, R113, we used to hear the same thing during the Obama presidency. Everyone gets compared to Mussolini.

[Quote] He’s almost never shown laughing or even smiling. I believe it’s because of a mental disorder whereby he is afraid that such expressions make him look weak.

He just doesn't laugh. That's it, a smirk usually otherwise. It's a psychopathic thing.

R122, Trump is a Fascist. Here’s Webster’s definition:

[quote] a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.

The only thing as yet to be perfected are “severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.” None of this applies to Obama.

[quote]They would reject an appeal from Trump, he is despised in Europe. Even by European right wingers!

No he isn’t. They even say they want Trump as PM when polled.

Real estate is his comfort zone. Not that he's any good at it without some shady deal. But he's no Robert Moses with a grand civic vision, for all the latter's evils.

R122, the only people who compared Obama to Mussolini were right wing nut cases and racist scumbags.

To be honest, to add Greenland to the US would sort of delight me, but only if that's what they chose for themselves. And that doesn't seem very likely. I still would like DC, Puerto Rico, Guam, the US Virgin Islands, American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands to become states. I remember, at one point years ago, The Azores expressed an interest in becoming part of the US.

If I were a Greenlander I'd look more to Europe than to the US. Ties of course, not a ludicrous sale.

If I were Greenland, I'd look at Canada--it's close, there's a cultural connection between native peoples of both areas. But they already chose Denmark and it sounds like they have no desire for a divorce.

They kill whales there.

I wish we could conquer it, but the next administration would just give it back.

Here’s a map of the true size of Greenland. Maps distort it’s real size. It’s still huge. Looks to be a little smaller than the Louisiana Purchase. But it’s not as large as usually depicted.

Actually, just a tad bit bigger than the Louisiana Purchase.

It's rather insulting for them to laugh at the idea.

[quote] R15: In WWII, the UK attacked and occupied Iceland, a neutral country that was ostensively an ally, but for the purpose of keeping it out of German hands.

The British also attacked their allies, the French fleet, in Marseilles. The French refused to sail for a British port nor scuttle their ships, and the Brits were afraid the NAZIs would take and repurpose the ships, so the Brits sunk the French ships in port.

War is complicated!

R135, they laughed because they didn't take it seriously. See R100. If the people of Greenland were offered a huge some of money directly they'll seriously consider it. And Denmark doesn't even have to be involved.

Trump's idea buying Greenland is still showing up on the Google news stream. There's no credibility to this idea. I'm starting to feel like I'm watching live version of it's a "Mad Mad Mad Mad World." The only thing we're missing comic timing and Jimmy Durante kicking the bucket.

Hmmm, looks like the Greenlanders also think Canada's their natural buddy.

Greenland is, geologically, considered part of North America.

Trump should have purchased Greenland piece by piece on the sly, using shell companies like Disney did in Florida. Now that it’s out in the open, the price will be sky high. Greenland and Denmark are already holding out to get the price up.

Once Trump is indicted they need to offer him a deal. You and your family leave the US lock stock and barrel and go to Greenland for the rest of your lives and we'll kill the indictment.

Sounds like a fitting punishment.

The Queen of Denmark has to pretend she’s happy to see this half wit when he has his State Visit in september too. I hope she spits in his drink.

Insulting.

It's hard to take serious a country having a queen in the 21st century. The French and the Russians had the best solution to their parasites, unlike England, Sweden, Denmark, The Netherlands, Spain, etc. But orange circus peanuts's every remark seems to have as its goal alienating our European allies. It is going to take years, if not decades to repair the damage Trump and the GOP assholes (who went as far as to spend the 4th of July 2018 in Russia) have done to NATO cohesion. Before even thinking of adding Puerto Rico as a state, which is an economic black hole, we should revert the red states that are on the Washington teat to territories. They can send representatives to DC, but their votes don't count.

R144 It’s impossible to take seriously a poster with the inability to string together a couple of cohesive sentences.

There's actually a historically-plausible reason to think Denmark would be willing to sell its sovereignty over Greenland to the US -- it's already lost 99.8% of it, and is probably less than a decade away from losing it completely anyway. Russia sold Alaska to the US because it knew SOMEONE would take it away from them if they didn't. Ditto, for France selling Louisiana, and Spain selling Florida. It's no different than finally agreeing to sell the family farm 3 days before you'd lose it to foreclosure anyway... a last-ditch attempt to cash out before getting nothing at all.

We could even sweeten the deal... allow Denmark to retain fee-simple ownership of 10% of the land in Greenland it already owns, and give the other 90% to Greenland's new state government with clause that the new state government picks 25% to deed to the federal government within 10 years, or the feds can divide that land into 1 square mile chunks & randomly seize 30% of it. If Denmark were smart, it would keep a square mile at the northernmost tip of Greenland to preserve its polar interests, and pick the remainder from tracts of land around Nuuk likely to explode in value.

To get the support (and votes) of Greenlanders, we offer:

*$1 million cash to every Greenlander who remains in Greenland... payable at $50k/year for 20 years. Greenlanders who choose to reject US citizenship & leave Greenland get a one-time bonus of $100k to reimburse them for the inconvenience and moving expenses. Greenlanders who take their new US citizenship & move to Florida have their remaining payments reduced to $25k/year.

* Dual citizenship... they get to keep their Danish citizenship in addition to gaining US citizsnship. Ditto, for any kids they have within 20 years of joining the US.

* $100 billion payable to Denmark for all the money it has sunken into Greenland, at $5 billion/year for 20 years. Denmark can use its windfall to build expensive new bridges & tunnels everywhere there's currently just a ferry. Since it's "windfall money", the bridges/tunnels wouldn't even have to make strict economic sense... just build 'em everywhere because it can, for pure Danish time-saving convenience.

* minimum of $2 billion/year guaranteed to Greenland (vs 700 million Euros it gets now)

* Queen remains as titular constitutional monarch of the new state. Going forward, each time there's a new monarch, Greenland has a referendum to decide whether to continue recognizing the monarch or abolish it. Legally, the monarch is chieftain of an indian tribe.

Would some people in Greenland and Denmark still bitch? Of course.... but I guarantee the referendum in Greenland would pass by an OVERWHELMING landslide, because effectively winning a million dollars in a de-facto lottery is one HELL of a good inducement.

Before dismissing this due to national pride, ask yourself... if Britain or Canada offered a similar deal to the US to buy the Florida Keys & the US were willing to allow it, what percentage of Keys residents do you GENUINELY think would vote 'no' if a 'yes' vote meant $50k/year for 20 years & dual citizenship if they decided their new British/Canadian status was simply intolerable? Patriotism is nice & all... but a million dollars is a LOT of fucking free money & an insanely great golden parachute.

R146 with all due respect, your arguments represent everything that is, for want of a better word, unappealing, about the attitude of many of your countrymen towards the rest of the world.

r114 Unless he's posing with an orphan whose parents were killed by a man radicalised by Trump's fasism and hate. Then he smiles broadly.

Would it be true that Denmark just offered to buy the USA? Presumably that want more than CA. It was reported in a major NY media outlet. Of course it could have been a joke by payback.

Per OP --

[quote]In meetings, at dinners and in passing conversations, Trump has asked advisers whether the U.S. can acquire Greenland, listened with interest when they discuss its abundant resources and geopolitical importance and, according to two of the people, has asked his White House counsel to look into the idea.

Does anyone really believe Trump would listen with interest to discussions of Greenland's geopolitical importance? 🤣

R41 -- I don't remember where I heard that same thing (Nicolle Wallace? Rachel Maddow?), but the real laugh is that the joke the person made, and Trump was too stupid to get, had something to do with buying Greenland and turning it into his next golf resort.

R80, R81 -- Not sure which is funnier, though, the original joke or posters here and elsewhere who have bought into this as anything more than Trump being an idiot.

R138 -- 😄

r147, exactly how would anyone in Greenland be meaningfully worse-off if they were paid as per r146 in return for joining the US?

Now, I'll freely admit I totally don't 'get' the idea of being emotionally bound to a chunk of land. I grew up in Florida, but like 90% of Floridians, was born elsewhere. In my entire high school with ~2,500 students, I think *maybe* 50 were actually *born* in Florida. Yeah, I might get nostalgic enough to rent a car & take a 2-3 day road trip across my "ancestral homeland" if I have a business trip to Cleveland or Pittsburgh someday, but that's about the extent of it.

I like being American, but the thought of becoming Canadian or British really wouldn't bother me, especially if I got to have my cake & eat it too by enjoying the benefits of dual citizenship for the rest of my life regardless of where I ultimately decided to live. I've been to Canada & the UK, and both would be perfectly acceptable alternatives to the US... better in some ways, worse in others, overall pretty equivalent.

If Greenland became a state, very little would really change for them besides possibly having tourism explode, Nuuk's population quadrupling within a few years, and a general sense of free money getting indiscriminately thrown at them by the fistful.

[quote] [R146] with all due respect, your arguments represent everything that is, for want of a better word, unappealing, about the attitude of many of your countrymen towards the rest of the world

R147, Thank you for so eloquently stating what many may sense.

On behalf of The States, I apologize for the perceived wealth and self-absorption that has impoverished the minds and hearts of many of my countrymen/women. It is, unfortunately, no surprise to see who leads the country currently. I am afraid that many in this land are not yet perceptive or wise-enough to hold a visionary world perspective.

While I truly hope this is not the case, perhaps the current unraveling of the U.S. may be necessary to discover what much of the world already knows. (It is ironic that we are discussing the acquisition of one country by another that is, itself, currently being dismantled at this moment.) I sadly write while being inside its borders.

R146, thanks for expanding on MY original idea and adding more details. I don't think the additional payments to Denmark are necessary, however. With its citizens becoming instant millionaires, Greenland can itself vote to be independent and join the U.S. on its own.

If you don’t put your name on it, it’s up for grabs.

Maybe the U.S. could foment unrest in Greenland and do a Panama independence type thing. Denmark should just make a deal and then no one has to get hurt.

Or Trump could fly over there and piss all over Greenland and say "It's mine now, I marked it!!" and we can all forget about this stupidity.

I wonder if the purchase will named after the territory, like the Louisiana Purchase, or will it be named after the man, like the Gadsden Purchase. Trump will probably go for the latter and make it the Trump Purchase and maybe even rename the territory.

I laugh at all the posts suggesting $$$$ will immediately captivate a land - or nation - and they can be purchased as easily as anything on a wild shopping spree.

Reducing humans and all their facets - preferences, loyalties, emotions, mentations - to inanimate objects.

It's as if all the World is for sale, and weeeeee can purchase it!

How about buying the sky? Americans are so funny....

You wouldn't take a million dollars if someone handed it to you, R158?

Is there any question that the U.S. would sell Puerto Rico to whomever made the best offer? Maybe we should trade PR for Greenland. If you ignore the chaos and corruption on the island. it's at least warm there.

R158, it’s just Trump , not “Americans”.

R159 believe it or not, there are some things $$$$ cannot buy.

Health and healthy, natural lands are just a small sample of those things.

While it may come as a surprise to those self-insulated in the U.S., for a Western "democracy", we are not amongst the most healthy.

So, in answer to your question, if I were living in Greenland and had a hygge lifestyle: no.

R161

Are you sure?

The responses of R100, R146 and R151 might suggest otherwise.

Trump plus 2 or 3 people do not constitute “America”, so, yeah, I’m sure.

The Greenlanders are mostly Protestants, so ‘murican Flyovers wouldn’t feel threatened by the new neighbors. They’d probably be Trump voters anyway, if they had brains they would have left Greenland and moved to Denmark to go to university.

R164 I respectfully disagree.

I'm currently reading the NYT, WP, The Atlantic, The New Yorker and Twitter (obviously as well as DL!). I read often many Americans propose $$$$ is the solution to most if not many ills.

I'm also working in a hospital near the border here in The States, and I see often that many, unfortunately, think $$$$ and more treatments (or pills) are the solutions to a myriad of problems.

Several years ago while living in D.C. , I took a tour of the U.S. Treasury. The guide there stated, " For Americans, money is the One Religion Here that unites them all."

While I agree that this is a generalisation, in my experience there are more than the 3 posters and Trump who truly live as if $$$$ is their primary motivating force. There are many......many in The States who I observe that make it their top priority.

You and I may see it differently....

[quote]You wouldn't take a million dollars if someone handed it to you, R158?

For something worth a hundred times, even a thousand times, more than that? Of course not. Why on earth would I?

R164

America, Inc.

Don’t be so literal, r166.

[quote]Don’t be so literal, [R166].

R169 Akin to Trump and many Americans, you believe you have the ultimate authority to tell others how they should - or should not - be.

Unsurprising.

You’re a carbuncle, R170.

r167, you'd take it because precisely NONE of that alleged extra value will ever make it into YOUR bank account, but 100% of that million would be guaranteed... and statistically, at least 25-30% as much as you'd otherwise have to work 40 hours at a shit job to earn.

Con: moral outrage over "selling out to 'murrakah"

Pro: can subsist for the rest of your life without ever *having* to work again.

Or... from the likely perspective of a Greenlander Inuit: a life of hard work, long hours, and subsistence poverty... or financial security & spending the rest of my life in a state of Maslowian self-actualization.

I *guarantee*, unless it were restricted to people who lived in Greenland prior to 8/16/19, Greenland's population would probably double within weeks before it even voted as people from Denmark *itself* scrambled to get in on the party and metaphorically 'win the lottery'.

This has nothing to do with 'American materialism', and everything to do with "having to work at a shit, demanding non-creative job with limited potential for self-actualization sucks'.

I'm not R167, but reading through your blather, R172, is uncomfortable.

It typifies all the ugly American stereotypes: telling others what they should do - or in this case, would do - presumptions and ignorance on full display, and again assumptions of all bowing down to the almighty benjamins.

Did it ever occur to you that money is not the end-all-be-all? And that some may find satisfaction and contentment in their efforts and livelihoods? Not ALL individuals are screaming to get away from their lives as many Americans.

America is not a happy place at this time; as you clearly demonstrate with your mental machinations.

Oh, R172 - who says that the Ugly American is dead?

Damn, look who’s talking, R173. You’re an awfully hateful and bigoted carbuncle.

Those of you who are trying to blanket all Americans in this money loving embrace while defending non financial values should try less "American" attacks and instead focus on "culture" or "attitudes" rather than turning this into a country-bashing exercise. It would be easier to read your counter arguments when you aren't showering obvious bias and vitriol on a specific target. Many people will just get mad because it seems more like intellectual snobbery than a reasoned, non-inflammatory opinion.

Washington Post:

The U.S. is already transforming Greenland, and it’s imperiling Americans here at home

Uh, it's not just the U.S producing all those greenhouse gasses, that is a misleading headline.

R178, you’re right. It’s Trump. I kid, but more seriously, he is the fool who pulled us out of the Paris accord. The US disproportionately offends, and with its wealth, should lead.

China, India, Nigeria and elsewhere are bad, and will get worse, but the sad fact is, there will be no fixing them at all, if they can point at the US and say that the US is not leading.

r179 the US pulling out of the Paris accord was moronic, but it wouldn't have changed India and China's emissions one iota, because they are specifically mentioned in the accord as "developing nations" which means they get a free pass on emissions. That is why a lot of people thought the Paris accord was more of a face-saving measure for governments than anything realistic or useful. It would have been good to stay in it and set an example, but it was just a very small step in actually combating climate change, which no country is doing on any sort of scale.

R180, except you start a long journey with a single step.

And, there are some countries that are doing incredibly well. There are a few in Europe that are moving to emissions-free energy production, and all electric cars by 2040, or some such thing. It’s actually quite remarkable that they have such ambitious goals. I’m sorry that I can’t be specific.

Europe is struggling with what to do about nuclear power. Germany is phasing out all their nuclear power plants. France, I understand, is building more.

The ones that are sticking with petroleum products are moving to natural gas, the cleanest of fossil fuels. Coal is being phased out.

I’m 60, but think I may live to see all new car sales in most of Continental Europe as being electric, with power sources being mostly renewable, and the balance natural gas.

r181 yes, I agree it would have been symbolically good and it's not feasible to expect everyone to go from 0 to 90 in one go. I just don't like the fact that China and India got huge exceptions. The two countries with billions of people between them, who as they get more industrialized, are only going to produce much more carbon. The Paris accord would have given everyone a dozen years of cover for that so that giant corporations can get cheap products and manpower.

I welcome Puerto Rico becoming a state just to witness the end of the non-stop bitching about "disenfranchisement" (lol puerto ricans get a sweet deal as it is) just to hear the non-stop about-face bitching about colonial oppression of their native culture.

[quote]I'm not R167, but reading through your blather, R172, is uncomfortable. It typifies all the ugly American stereotypes: telling others what they should do - or in this case, would do - presumptions and ignorance on full display, and again assumptions of all bowing down to the almighty benjamins.

I am R167 and I completely agree with you. Thank you for writing that. R172 truly does not know just how ignorant he is.

The Drunk in Chief just canceled his visit because nobody in Denmark takes him seriously. Hey, nobody in the US takes him seriously either - but he won't leave here. Only the Israelis and Russians like him. Gottinyu, take him already.

It was a state visit, too, at the invitation of the Queen.

The man is truly deranged.

OMG, R185 speaks truth!

R187, saying "speaks truth" and linking to CNN is not a good match.

Good lord he's an asshole.

R188, it would help if the example you cite proved your point.

If this is true, I am so embarrassed for America right now!

Wow he cancelled the trip specifically because the PM said they wouldn't sell Greenland?

"Denmark is a very special country with incredible people, but based on Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen's comments, that she would have no interest in discussing the purchase of Greenland, I will be postponing our meeting scheduled in two weeks for another time," he wrote Tuesday night.

He continued, "The Prime Minister was able to save a great deal of expense and effort for both the United States and Denmark by being so direct. I thank her for that and look forward to rescheduling sometime in the future!"

A White House official confirmed to CNN that the entire trip to Denmark is being scrapped.

There is no way he canceled because of Greenland. He obviously is being a lazy ass who doesn’t feel like traveling to do his job.

He just canceled his trip to Denmark because he was told he could not buy Greenland.

It sounds like he was pissed because the PM was so, um, direct that the idea was ridiculous. Also this gem:

His cancellation came just three hours after the US ambassador to Denmark tweeted: 'Denmark is ready for the POTUS @realDonaldTrump visit! Partner, ally, friend' sharing a picture of a billboard emblazoned with Trump's name.

R193 he was visiting Denmark on a European trip with multiple stops. He would already have been there.

He clearly announced this because he was mad and this is his way of getting revenge. He's such a man baby.

Trump was invited by Denmark's Queen Margrethe II for a state visit on September 2 and 3 during which he'd meet with Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenland's Prime Minister Kim Kielsen

August 15: Reports surface that Trump is considering buying Greeland

August 16: Greenland's government tweets 'We are open for business, but we're not for sale'

August 18: Frederiksen says 'Greenland is not for sale' and calls the purchase talks 'absurd'

August 20: Trump cancels Denmark visit and talks with Frederiksen because she refused to talk about potential Greenland purchase

I can't believe he can still leave me speechless, three years in. What an unrepentant fucking turd.

Big Surprise! Trump continues to make the US a laughing stock in Europe! It's infuriating to this American, who likes traveling to Europe, that Europeans think Trump represents what all Americans are thinking. I'm staying home so they can enjoy their Chinese tourists!

Savage takedown by Greenland's Prime Minister.

[quote]“It was Leif Erikson who discovered America and his father, Erik the Red, discovered Greenland and settled here. Therefore it is only natural that we get the US back. He has not decided on the price, but feels that it should be relatively low considering the enormous deficit.

[quote]If Donald Trump is included naturally the price goes even lower.”

[quote] “I’m with Greenland!”

That’s a bumper sticker I could live with!

Here's his tantrum on Twiter:

[quote]Denmark is a very special country with incredible people, but based on Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen’s comments, that she would have no interest in discussing the purchase of Greenland, I will be postponing our meeting scheduled in two weeks for another time....

Negotiations on the purchase are getting tense, apparently.

[quote] DJT: When I said that we should nuke Denmark, I later reviewed the transcript, and I realized that I was misheard when I said that we should [bold] not [/bold] nuke Denmark. That’s in the past now, and I’m looking forward, not backward! Denmark will be just fine, with time. It’s obviously there own fault, anyway, but no matter. It’s an honor to be here. We’ll see what happens.

r184, I firmly maintain that regardless of how aghast some claim to be about my assertion, just about anyone who's rational & sane would pounce on the opportunity to get a million dollars in return for selling their loyalty to a country that's generally pretty comparable overall. It's not a matter of 'greed' and 'worshiping money', it's a matter of securing your own economic well-being for life & being able to preemptively insulate yourself from 95% of your likely future problems by eliminating hand-to-mouth financial problems as a concern.

Denmark might have vastly more generous social welfare than the US... but not even *Denmark* is going to indiscriminately fork over ~$4,400/month with no strings attached to someone just for being a Greenlander. That's what a million dollars over 20 years really means.

That said... Trump is a jackass for 'postponing' his visit. Acquiring Greenland was a total longshot with close to zero chances of happening, and throwing a tantrum over it & risking our friendship with both Greenland & Denmark is insane.

The U.S. doesn’t have a friendship with Denmark. There’s just been a few mutual interests.

R205 You either don’t get it or do get it but can’t let it go - Greenland isn’t Denmark’s to sell.

And if you can’t understand how fucking offensive it was for the idea to be even floated...well, you’re beyond help. Go hypothesise over Puerto Rico.

Your buffoon of a head of state has once again made both himself and your country an international laughing stock. You must be very proud.

I guess Trump still thinks he is starring on 'The Apprentice' and that he can put on all this bravado and pretend that he can just buy & sell whatever he wants in the world.

[quote] [R205] You either don’t get it or do get it but can’t let it go - Greenland isn’t Denmark’s to sell. And if you can’t understand how fucking offensive it was for the idea to be even floated...well, you’re beyond help. Go hypothesise over Puerto Rico. Your buffoon of a head of state has once again made both himself and your country an international laughing stock. You must be very proud.

Thank you for this post! The lack of awareness demonstrated by insistently posting bizarre hypotheticals about purchasing a country (who seems - like many - shocked by the whole idea) is astounding. And to continue blathering on about the particulars of the outlandish and absurd notion...is surreal.

[quote] I am [R167] and I completely agree with you. Thank you for writing that. [R172] truly does not know just how ignorant he is.

You are welcome. I've come to the sad realisation that many Americans "know not what they do." They are like the World's toddler playing with nuclear arms; or 10-year-olds playing with rifles (which was actually recommended by an official in the U.S. This week.)

[quote]Those of you who are trying to blanket all Americans in this money loving embrace while defending non financial values should try less "American" attacks and instead focus on "culture" or "attitudes" rather than turning this into a country-bashing exercise. It would be easier to read your counter arguments when you aren't showering obvious bias and vitriol on a specific target. Many people will just get mad because it seems more like intellectual snobbery than a reasoned, non-inflammatory opinion.

Sure R176. What attitudes and culture would you like to discuss? Attitudes of corporate dominance superseding deaths via mass shootings? Attitudes of profit over environmental preservation? Attitudes of "cost - cutting" to redirect waste into the Flint water system?

And culture? There exists great wealth in The States; it's been reported the Walton family of Walmart makes 4 million dollars every hour. But there also exists much homelessness and poverty. And increasingly less between the two extremes. We are innovators here, but it appears our place on the World stage is lessening. Our government appears gridlocked and corrupt in some aspects.

And our 45th president is not healthy; quite literally, he is pathological. The fact that he remains in office is a testament to many things in our culture, currently.

We are not in a place to dominate - or laughably, purchase - any country. We fail to look after even our own citizens.

[quote]I firmly maintain

I firmly maintain that you're an idiot who has no idea what you're talking about. Only one of us has the actual data to back up his beliefs.

R209 you're correct there are a lot of major issues here, however, my point still stands. If you want your posts actually read, maybe focus on the issue at hand rather than a diatribe of everything you hate.

r207, "sell" is a gross oversimplification of what would be a complex transaction.

Denmark has a legitimate colonial interest in Greenland, compounded by the fact that it has objectively been beneficial to Greenland itself. Denmark has told Greenland that it's free to pursue full independence if that's what it wants... but the free money stops if it does.

Denmark also has substantial state-held real estate holdings in Greenland that exist independently of the sovereignty issue. Denmark could let Greenland become fully independent without invalidating its ownership of its real estate holdings there. This isn't a controversial viewpoint, and the UN, US, EU, and NATO would ALL back it up 100%.

So, yes... if Greenland were to become fully independent of Denmark & voluntarily join the US, Denmark would have legitimate expectations that the US would reimburse it enough to make up for all the money it has spent in the past supporting Greenland... and the US would fully agree.

Greenland is also part of Denmark, so any transfer of sovereignty would also need democratic approval by Greenlanders to be acceptable and legitimate... with plenty of mitigations to protect the rights of Greenlanders who'd view its union with the US as abhorrent. A national referendum, being allowed to accept US citizenship while retaining Danish citizenship, along with the freedom to remain in Greenland as an expat Danish citizen & abundant financial compensation to enable Greenlanders to choose any option without being limited by personal financial constraints would be another essential part of it.

Incidentally, it would ALSO be an enormously better deal than residents of Hong Kong were offered.

The point being, nobody would be getting bought or sold. National sovereignty might change, but only as the outcome of a democratic process. The US has no interest in participating in a "hostile takeover".

In any society, you'll always have some people who'll oppose almost anything, and that's their right. But it's ALSO understood that a minority shouldn't be allowed to exercise unlimited veto power over a majority, as long as the aggrieved minority is compensated & made whole.

If one or more of Greenland's smaller municipalities were united in opposition, I'm sure the US would allow them to remain independent (or part of Denmark)... though I suspect, as autonomous city-states under partial Danish rule (but without most of their present subsidies), they'd lose their best & brightest to emigration to Denmark, the US, and/or the new US State of Greenland... because small indigenous settlements tend to end up being rather poor & unappealing to kids who grow up there & know what's available elsewhere.

It's not because countries like the US hate indigenous people, it's because traditional subsistence societies simply aren't economically viable in a globalized economy. You can invent a product (like casino gambiing), embrace globalization & aggressively develop resources like oil, minerals, commercial agriculture, etc,... or you can do nothing, then bitch & moan when your kids flee & never look back.

Complete waste of brain power hypothesising this because it'll never happen. You're not going to sweep in and save the indigenous people from themselves. Sort out Puerto Rico first.

Of course it won't but it's remarkable just how persistent R212 is, with these long posts and hypotheses, none of which bear any resemblance to reality. All he has demonstrated thus far is that he knows absolutely nothing about Greenland, which would seem to be a prerequisite for this exercise in mental masturbation.

R213, not to mention the US Virgin Islands (Denmark’s last US sale, pop 104,000); Guam (170,000), and Samoa (193,000). Greenland, pop 56,000.

Oh, yeah, and Washington DC, pop 6.5 million.

New speculation is that Trump canceled the trip because Obama will be visiting there in September and Trump didn't want the media to be able to contrast the reception there between himself and Obama.

What a fucking LOSER!!!

In either case, it is further evidence that Trump ‘s mental illness or deficiencies are driving US policy. Unthinkable, to this extent. This isn’t “personality”, it’s pathology.

R215 Those ahem "acquisitions" were rather at the point of a spear, weren't they? - Virgin Islands were somewhat of a shake down following World War I and the US was in a position to enforce its demands whereas the Dutch weren't. - Marshall Islands, Marianas, Samoa were "liberated"" as the big kids with mighty fat boy weapons like to say.

Could donald be any more rude than to refuse the Queen's invitation? Queen Margrethe should acquire the Baby Donald Balloon and, in place of donald, treat it as her guest for the royal visit. What a photo op!

Watch the reception President Obama will receive when he visits Denmark in late September.

There goes the Misogynist In Chief again: during his press conference he just referred to the Danish Prime Minister as "nasty."

the state visit is cancelled, The Queen won’t be meeting the orange rotter.

He would never diss Queen Elizabeth this way, yet he’s doing it to her cousin which is very rude.

He had to deliver the kompromat to Prince Andrew, r223.

Jesus Christ, this fucker is deranged!

Here's what he just said, leaving no doubt he cancelled because he got his feelings hurt:

“Denmark, I looked forward to going, but I thought that the prime minister’s statement that it was ‘absurd,’ that it was an ‘absurd idea,’ was nasty. I thought it was an inappropriate statement,” he said. “All she had to do is say, ‘no, we wouldn’t be interested.’ We can’t treat the United States of America the way they treated us under President Obama. I thought it was a very not nice way of saying something. They could have told me no.”

DataLounge, should I buy and fly a Denmark 🇩🇰 flag, or a Greenland 🇬🇱 flag?

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R220, it was the Danes that sold the American Virgin Islands to the US (Danish West Indies), not the Dutch.

“It was a very not nice way or saying something.”, says our moron in chief.

Denmark “can’t treat the United States of America the way they treated us under President Obama.”, because we all know, they walked all over us, with their fancy pastries and their igloo condominiums.

Can someone please put this shit on a bumper sticker?

Bloomberg:

Trump Cites ‘Nasty’ Remark by Danish Leader After Canceling Trip

Another “nasty woman”.

Lunatic, misogynist, narcissist or psychopath - take your pick.

[quote] [R209] you're correct there are a lot of major issues here,

You think?

[quote] however, my point still stands. If you want your posts actually read, maybe focus on the issue at hand rather than a diatribe of everything you hate.

YOU are placing words in my mouth. I have never used the word "hate". And I have been focused on the topic at hand only then answering the post of your request for "attitudes" and "culture" to be addressed.

Perhaps it is not a pretty sight to be confronted with our American "attitudes and culture" and how they are perceived by those outside the U.S: when we insist on deluded and deranged policies....like purchasing another sovereign country. Just because......It Makes Good Real Estate Sense.

It's insane. And to have fellow (American....or who otherwise knows...) posters justify this craziness is beyond the pale.

I understand, you like many Americans, may be defensive about our country. Like all places, it has its benefits and challenges. But this is beyond jingoism.....it's actually quite scary in its level of seriousness.

And someone needs to sound the alarm. Because He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named continues on. How far will he go?

Perhaps posters from Germany could weigh in on their thoughts and experiences of history?

R212 You’re obviously very defensive about how the rest of the world views the USA as a result of this latest Trump lunacy. The problem (well, it’s your problem) is that you are cloaking your very detailed arguments in the very American parochialism and xenophobia with which many people view Trump and the country which elected him.

He’s a fool. His idea was beyond ridiculous. His response in cancelling the state visit because he was upset by a “nasty woman” would be laughable if it wasn’t so dangerous as it sets the precedent for foreign policy dictated by ego.

If you find all that unpalatable - and I hope that you do - work hard with your compatriots to ensure that he’s not re-elected.

Because it’s only going to get worse from here.

Whaling. Because indigenous people do it, it's ok. Please.

I remember the final years of the Reagan presidency where it was becoming obvious that he was suffering from some form of mental impairment - most likely dementia. This manifested itself publicly in transient confusion about things like the names of people and places. It was pretty frightening that the person with the nuclear codes could have been losing his marbles at the height of the Cold War.

But Trump is something else again. The assumption was always that Reagan was supported (possibly controlled) by his team toward the end of his presidency. With diplomacy being conducted by tweet, we’re in a much crazier time. Cancelling a state visit through a tweet is incredibly offensive - luckily Denmark is a civilised country, so their response hasn’t been inflammatory. Imagine if Trump pissed off a less restrained and more militarily powerful country - China comes to mind - through one of his tweets. Wars have started over relatively minor things before.

I’m also wondering if Trump isn’t exhibiting signs of dementia, but that’s the subject for a whole other thread.

[quote]“You don’t talk to the U.S. that way,” Trump said.

r231 The guy who lost the popular vote thinks he's the embodiment of the country.

Trump is a malignant narcissist, r236, whom doesn't give a damn. He thinks he's the smartest person in the room and he's not -- and he's not able to fake it.

Make no mistake, what he did in that tweet has more to do with the baby man's feelings being hurt and insecurity over Obama being received better when he travels there in Sept. vs any form of dementia.

Yes, I know typos in r238.

[quote] DJT: They could have told me no...

I think they did tell him “no”, but he still pursued it further, anyway.

They literally said it's not for sale. How is that not a "no"? He's now picking on Denmark on Twitter:

[quote]For the record, Denmark is only at 1.35% of GDP for NATO spending. They are a wealthy country and should be at 2%. We protect Europe and yet, only 8 of the 28 NATO countries are at the 2% mark. The United States is at a much, much higher level than that....

[quote]....Because of me, these countries have agreed to pay ONE HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS more - but still way short of what they should pay for the incredible military protection provided. Sorry!

[quote] Denmark, I looked forward to going, but I thought that the prime minister’s statement that it was ‘absurd,’ that it was an ‘absurd idea,’ was nasty. I thought it was an inappropriate statement,” ...

As if he understood the meaning of the word “inappropriate”.

Incidentally, this is why diplomatic ideas such as this are usually discussed by staff before the President and his counterparts ever get involved. It keeps stupid ideas like this from embarrassing the leaders.

r233 No. You are going off on a diatribe about how horrible the US is as a way of justifying your dislike for what a poster or two in this thread has said. It's not relevant, it's just you venting, and it takes away from whatever argument you are trying to make - which at this point I've forgotten amidst all the America bashing you've been doing.

I'm not justifying what Trump has said. Your argument is careening all over the place and it seems more like you're just using this Greenland topic as an excuse to vent all your complaints about the country. None of what you're saying is "sounding the alarm" - it's already been sounding for a good while.

[quote] R236: I remember the final years of the Reagan presidency where it was becoming obvious that he was suffering from some form of mental impairment - most likely dementia.

You’ll remember how Reagan’s stumbling performance in the first debate in 1983 worried people that he was confused and showing signs of dementia? He “deflected” these concerns in the second debate, when he recited a prewritten joke about Mondale’s “relative youth and inexperience”. I think he was showing dementia symptoms even that early.

Howard Baker was told to look for signs of dementia when he took the Chief of Staff position in 1987. Be likewise heard Reagan tell a joke or have a non-demented moment, and that settled the matter for him. But, even demented people can tell jokes and have lucid moments.

We can't afford healthcare but we can afford to buy a country? Does Trump think the citizens of Greenland will bail us out of our problems? Hawaii would be better off without us, more than likely. The USA is just a burden, because of Trump.

[quote] R243 is right: “It's not relevant, it's just you venting, and it takes away from whatever argument you are trying to make - which at this point I've forgotten amidst all the America bashing you've been doing.”

I think the main point this carbuncle is trying to make is indeed, the “American bashing” itself.

it won’t be long before he starts wrecking the Danish royal family via Twitter. Queen Margrethe’s yellow smokers teeth are an easy target.

Despite Trump's empty promises, he would turn Greenland into the HUUUUGEST Trump Tower-Green Acres Private Island Resort.

By using "Green" in the name, Trump will declare it an Eco-Friendly Resort.

Despite Trump's empty promises, he would turn Greenland into the HUUUUGEST Trump Tower-Green Acres Private Island Resort.

By using "Green" in the name, Trump will declare it an Eco-Friendly Resort.

[quote] R237: The guy who lost the popular vote thinks he's the embodiment of the country

l'état, c'est moi

I hear a chant from the MAGA horde coming:

"Conquer Greenland!"

"Conquer Greenland!"

"Conquer Greenland!"

r251 The subreddit dedicated to Trump is all "when", not "if". Greenland becoming the next state is basically a done deal in their eyes. Scary shit.

Let them try to take Greenland. While they are doing so, we could take Texas.

[quote] No. You are going off on a diatribe about how horrible the US is as a way of justifying your dislike for what a poster or two in this thread has said.

Respectfully disagree R243.

No diatribes. Just shock. Really. That this country has an ELECTED representative that is displaying such pathological words and behaviours. It is astounding.

Then when a "poster or two" on this thread begins justifying 45's behaviour, I honestly become VERY disheartened. Perhaps you fail to recognize that America (as exemplied by its leader and many of its citizens) think it to be the greatest place on earth. It is clearly not.

[quote] It's not relevant

Again disagree. It's very revalent. Denial is strong in our culture currently. As is the lack of self- introspection and our relations with "others". Relations with others are very much involved in the dynamics of purchasing another sovereign country; especially when said country has demonstrated the absurdity of the whole affair.

[quote] it takes away from whatever argument you are trying to make - which at this point I've forgotten amidst all the America bashing you've been doing.

Okay. One more time: The Idea of Trump's Insistence on Purchasing Greenland is Pathological. The fact that we are observing this points to a larger illness than merely, Trump, the man himself. Many aspects of the U.S. are quite seriously sick. And (more than) "a poster or two" like yourself, who defends the issues, is PART of said issues.

America is not bad. It is not perfect, either. Many outside the country do not believe it lives up to its Western Democracy potentialities. They may very well have a point.

We as Americans could benefit from turning our tendency towards immediate Defense - in all aspects - instead towards looking inwards: to self-introspection and to honestly acknowledge what's occurring WITHIN the country.

Jared is going to be the Broker and collect a 6% Commission.

[quote]We can't afford healthcare but we can afford to buy a country?

Healthcare is an expense. Land is an investment.

Remember when Trump said he would get rid of the EPA, as if it were not the best thing that ever happened to our water and air.

I hope everyone remembers that Republicans stopped all infrastructure programs, now our country is falling apart.

Republicans only work for the super rich...why are people so ignorant of this fact?

Remember when Trump said he would get rid of the EPA, as if it were not the best thing that ever happened to our water and air.

I hope everyone remembers that Republicans stopped all infrastructure programs, now our country is falling apart.

Republicans only work for the super rich...why are people so ignorant of this fact?

When are we invading Antarctica?

R254: That's it I'm out Fellow American. Carry on Defending America R243!

Oh, thank God. R243 was right.

Denmark has lost 43 soldiers in the US led, Mideast wars.

I stand with r254. But no one is a prophet in their own land, as the saying goes around my parts.

R254 is a bigot. You’re standing with that?

R229 Thank you for the correction. Thank you as well for being factual, civil and non-histrionic: feats which our president cannot hope to achieve.

Given Trump’s inability to master facts, will he call for boycott of breakfast danish?

Sorry, no go. I loves me my danishes!

We should boycott danishes and instead eat those unpronounceable Norwegian things that Rose consumed.

Eat me, I'm a Danish.

The Danish Prime Minister should say “We’ll only discuss if President Obama is the sole US representative.”

[quote]You are going off on a diatribe about how horrible the US is as a way of justifying your dislike for what a poster or two in this thread has said.

R243, can you, perhaps, provide the quotes that you find so offensive about "how horrible the US is?" Because that's not the way I read those posts at all. He was talking about very specific behaviors by Trump and by those few people on this thread who are taking this nonsense seriously and pretending that Greenland really is, or ought to be, for sale. That's not "how horrible the US is;" that's "how horrible some individuals can be."

If I'm wrong and there really were such rants posted, then by all means show me.

[quote]R254 is a bigot. You’re standing with that?

I'm neither R254 nor R262 but until you actually come up with some "bigoted" comments from R254, then yes, I'll stand with those posts.

r270, r209 and earlier posts where he's saying the US is a hellhole, to paraphrase. The r209 post was in response to me politely asking if the handful of the posters who seem more offended that anyone would want to be a part of the US than you are the Greenland discussion, could please try to focus on Trump and his offer, not spend their time bashing the US as a shithole nation to support their shock that such an offer would even be considered by anyone sane.

[quote] R39: NATO, [R43]. He could threaten to withdraw from NATO unless they sell.

I understand that we are a signatory on the NATO treaty, which was approved by the (then) Senate and signed by the (then) President. Treaties are mentioned in the Constitution and take precedence over laws passed by Congress or by the States.

R272 Nobody has said that the USA is a hellhole (paraphrased or otherwise). You seem very thin skinned regarding criticism of the lunatic actions of your head of state.

You do realise, don’t you, that not everybody (either within or outside of the USA) is as enamoured of the USA as you seem to be, don’t you? That while your elected representatives proclaim it as “the greatest country on Earth”, many of the rest of us suppress an eye roll? I see much to admire in the USA, as I do of many countries. And some stuff to criticise, as I do of many countries, including my own.

I suspect that you are one of the majority of your countrymen who has never left your country. Get a passport, jump on a plane, take a risk and explore the rest of the world. It will open your eyes, if you dare.

R274 you keep projecting opinions on me and assuming that because I am pointing out your litany of complaints about the US seems something a bit more than the topic of hand, that I am the US's number one fan. You are doing FAR more than "criticizing the actions of the US's head of state".

All I have said is that if you guys want someone to read your posts, you may want to dial down the US bashing since it is definitely over the top for the subject at hand (Greenland) and is making it hard to read them.

Your suspicions are also completely wrong. I moved back to the US last year after spending a few years living overseas and I'm under no illusions when it comes to the US or how it's seen under this President.

When you have to resort to ad hominem attacks, you've lost the argument.

^^^^R275 I am poster R209/R254.

I am not, however, R274. Someone else entirely. Sounds like they are outside the U.S.

It is even more befuddling to learn that you have experience abroad.....

President Truman proposed purchasing Greenland in 1946.

R275 I am poster R274 and definitely not R276 (hi R276!).

I am getting rather tired of reading that I (we?) are “bashing” the USA. I’m not. I see no “litany of complaints”. There is none. Just some observations on Trump wanting to buy another country and not understanding what that is offensive/stupid/crazy - take your pick.

But we only see what we want to see, I guess. As you seem to be doing.

Good luck with your president!

R276 and R278 I tire of this. You guys can get fucked. Carry on with your America bashing and willfull misrepesentation of what you have said.

You really need to work on the hyper-sensitivity, R279! If you think that what I’ve said is “America bashing” then you need to get out more. Which I suspect, you don’t.

Didn’t learn much from your “few years living overseas”, did you?

R280 shouldn't you be in the Royal Watcher thread, bashing Meghan Markle with 500 word posts on how she used the wrong nail color during a meeting with the Queen, and therefore is literally Satan?

Not sure what you mean, R281 - I’m much more interested in geopolitics than Meghan’s Markle’s nail varnish! Perhaps you’d be better off avoiding this thread, eh? You seem a little unhinged.

R282 🙄

R254 bump

R254 is filled with passive aggression, condescension, and generalization. He attacks Americans, and then complains that Americans are overly sensitive and defensive.

“Perhaps you fail to recognize that ..”

“Many aspects of the U.S. are quite seriously sick...”

“(You) who defends the issues, is PART of said issues.” I have no idea what this even means, but it sounds accusatory.

Americans being “not yet perceptive or wise-enough to hold a visionary world perspective.”

Then, you move on to accusations of American denial, lack of self- introspection, defensiveness, thin skin, having blinders on, self-absorption, lack of honesty, ignorance, condescending assumptions about international travel, and more.

Check out R173 for more anti-American bigotry.

R285 I thought that you were tired of this thread - yet you can’t just walk away.

You are assuming that multiple posters on this thread are the one person. They’re / we’re not! I’m one of them but I’m not the only one pointing out how your defensiveness of your country only reinforces what I’ve pointing out all along about parochialism, defensiveness and an inability to read an outsider’s view without taking it as a personal criticism.

By the way I am an outsider in this discussion - I’m not an American and I don’t live there. I’m pretty sure that at least one of the other posters is one of your compatriots.

Your inability to read and comprehend what others are saying reflects on your weird nationalist insecurities rather than my ability to get my point across - my opinion, anyway.

Time for another 🙄 emoji from you, eh mate? When all else fails, as they say...

[quote]There goes the Misogynist In Chief again: during his press conference he just referred to the Danish Prime Minister as "nasty."

Yes, and there was another example recently when Trump referred to Justin Trudeau's Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland as a nasty woman, too.

The words "some" and "most" go a long way when discussing a group of people in a country that is clearly divided rather than lumping everyone all together. I know it's "easy" to do that but that's just not the case.

It's a country where the majority of people (3 million more) can vote for one candidate but it doesn't even matter unless those votes are in the right "areas."

Should people have to do that? No. However, I also think people can be generally lazy and lean towards hyperbole when discussing things to drive their point home. So you get "all Americans" instead of "most Americans" or "some Americans." We're on a gay board and I know this board has its problems and "trolls" but the majority of the people here did not want that man in the White House & I get why people get very defensive if there's an implication that they/we did.

So while I'm a person that's completely open to criticism (and this country has tons of problems), I think it's great when people talk using the words some and most unless they really do mean "all." It gives people the chance to agree with you and take your side without feeling like they're part of the problem or be able to look at that "side" that did put the man in the White House (within the same country) and talk with you.

R286 it's kinda funny that you just assumed r285 is the same person as r279, before launching into your pompous diatribe of how others make assumptions about how many people are posting on a subject.

Oh, and 🙄

Thanks, R289.

R286, since you’re kinda dense, the point of R289 is that R285 isn’t the same guy who said he was tired of this thread, R279. You’re accusing him of conflating posters, when YOU are actually doing so, in the same post! We really need better trolls.

Amy Klobuchar: “You know the difference between Donald Trump and Greenland? Greenland is not for sale.”

I want nasty overt bullying from Klobuchar, not these cutesy zingers.

[quote]Amy Klobuchar: “You know the difference between Donald Trump and Greenland? Greenland is not for sale.”

How witty.

“You know the difference between Donald Trump and Greenland? One is a nasty little white supremacist turd who can only get elected through voter suppression and foreign interference, and who is currently fucking up the country for the next thirty years. The other is an island."

What I wish Klobuchar would have said. But of course her clit only gets hard when those she bullies are her employees who aren't allowed to clap back.

Was there backlash when President Truman proposed purchasing Greenland in 1946?

r296 Yes, NPR did an article about it this week.

[quote]The United States opened negotiations with Denmark about using Greenland, and at one point, the American side proposed buying the island outright for $100 million in gold and the rights to a patch of Alaskan oil.

[quote]All this took place in confidence but even then — as now — the idea shocked the Danes.

More at the link.

I thought it was funny when Tom Cotton tried to claim credit for giving Trump the idea. You KNOW if Trump heard about that, he'd be pissed.

It was also funny how Trump said HE had the idea, then when people were shitting on him about it, he brought out the Truman excuse. Which I'm sure he didn't know about until he saw it on Fox News.

Truman may have been interested in Greenland, but he wasn't a total lunatic ranting & raving every day and posting crazy stuff from morning till night.

Or using terms like "we hereby order".

Truman would also never dismissively call it a "real estate deal", which was the first gross thing about this whole ordeal.

Bones Spurs wants Greenland as a gift to Putin. Everything he does is to please Putin.

Sorry the Greenland thing didn't work out, Donny. How about an alternative purchase?

Bonus: they're just as racist and xenophobic as you are, and they already speak English (sort of)!