We will never sell it - we are first of all pretty well of financially already - a lot more than you guys are (it is you that is drowning in debt ) - and we are not living in the 1600 - where countries are a commodity to sell
If he is going to take it by force or not - there your guess is as good as mine (I personally don’t think he will - because Trump is a chicken he hasn’t even dared putting tariffs on EU) - and since both you and Denmark are part of NATO you can already build military bases there (no problem - a privilege you have had for 80 years) - so I think it will be hard to sell to anyone with a brain - that you need Greenland for security reasons and it would a really bad signal to send internationally if you just took a country by force (esp. From an ally - but who knows really with that idiot in charge) - and I don’t really care really - it will hurt you guys more than us if you did
0
We will never sell it - we are first of all pretty well of financially already - a lot more than you guys are (it is you that is drowning in debt ) - and we are not living in the 1600 - where countries are a commodity to sell
If he is going to take it by force or not - there your guess is as good as mine (I personally don’t think he will - because Trump is a chicken he hasn’t even dared putting tariffs on EU) - and since both you and Denmark are part of NATO you can already build military bases there (no problem - a privilege you have had for 80 years) - so I think it will be hard to sell to anyone with a brain - that you need Greenland for security reasons and it would a really bad signal to send internationally if you just took a country by force (esp. From an ally - but who knows really with that idiot in charge) - and I don’t really care really - it will hurt you guys more than us if you did
Everything is for sale. And the United States maybe in debt but as the Republican party knows that is meaningless when we hold the world reserve currency and defense.
You see we choose to honor our commitments. As for Denmark when do they actually plan to pay 2% of gdp or for that matter anything they have stated they would pay for Paris climate accord rio plus 20 fees Africa and all the rest of the broken commitments that what ever Excellency for your cousins line stated in world accords....
Like I stated before nobody and I mean no country ever stated we going to be alright the danes are with us....lololol
0
Everything is for sale. And the United States maybe in debt but as the Republican party knows that is meaningless when we hold the world reserve currency and defense.
You see we choose to honor our commitments. As for Denmark when do they actually plan to pay 2% of gdp or for that matter anything they have stated they would pay for Paris climate accord rio plus 20 fees Africa and all the rest of the broken commitments that what ever Excellency for your cousins line stated in world accords....
Like I stated before nobody and I mean no country ever stated we going to be alright the danes are with us....lololol
Everything is for sale. And the United States maybe in debt but as the Republican party knows that is meaningless when we hold the world reserve currency and defense. You see we choose to honor our commitments. As for Denmark when do they actually plan to pay 2% of gdp or for that matter anything they have stated they would pay for Paris climate accord rio plus 20 fees Africa and all the rest of the broken commitments that what ever Excellency for your cousins line stated in world accords.... Like I stated before nobody and I mean no country ever stated we going to be alright the danes are with us....lololol
I don't care mate - if it makes you feel better we can pretend you are right (it is exactly like how you handle Trump - pretend the toddler is right - cause it doesn't change the real situation and it makes them happy - win/win)
- I have also never heard "it is going to be alright the nothern part of Manhattan is with us" -- would be about equal
0
Quote Originally Posted by nature1970:
Everything is for sale. And the United States maybe in debt but as the Republican party knows that is meaningless when we hold the world reserve currency and defense. You see we choose to honor our commitments. As for Denmark when do they actually plan to pay 2% of gdp or for that matter anything they have stated they would pay for Paris climate accord rio plus 20 fees Africa and all the rest of the broken commitments that what ever Excellency for your cousins line stated in world accords.... Like I stated before nobody and I mean no country ever stated we going to be alright the danes are with us....lololol
I don't care mate - if it makes you feel better we can pretend you are right (it is exactly like how you handle Trump - pretend the toddler is right - cause it doesn't change the real situation and it makes them happy - win/win)
- I have also never heard "it is going to be alright the nothern part of Manhattan is with us" -- would be about equal
Second, Denmark has supported Greenland's autonomy for decades. We don’t "own" Greenland because we want to - we assist them because they currently can't sustain themselves financially. Now, you might ask, 'So you're saying you'd rather pay to support a country you're helping toward independence than take a check from the U.S.?' The answer is: 'Exactly. One hundred percent, as long as that’s what the Greenlanders want.' ---
and that should show you what sets our two countries apart from each other: both how we view money and people
0
Why should we bet?
First of all, I don't care.
Second, Denmark has supported Greenland's autonomy for decades. We don’t "own" Greenland because we want to - we assist them because they currently can't sustain themselves financially. Now, you might ask, 'So you're saying you'd rather pay to support a country you're helping toward independence than take a check from the U.S.?' The answer is: 'Exactly. One hundred percent, as long as that’s what the Greenlanders want.' ---
and that should show you what sets our two countries apart from each other: both how we view money and people
Pentagon to redraw command map to more closely align Greenland with the US
The Pentagon’s move to shift its oversight of Greenland under U.S. Northern Command aligns with President Trump’s pledge to take control of the autonomous Danish territory. The shift in oversight, which could come as soon as this week, could also help the U.S. broaden its Golden Dome missile shield by providing more radars for coverage. Under the plan, Greenland would shift from European Command’s jurisdiction to Northern Command, which is responsible for overseeing the security of North America, according to a DOD official and two people familiar with the planning. The people were granted anonymity to discuss the move ahead of its announcement. The switch is the most concrete step yet in the Trump administration’s months-long effort to gain ownership over Greenland, an autonomous island aligned with Denmark. “From the perspective of geography, the move makes some sense,” said one of the people familiar. “From a political perspective, however, this clearly is going to worry Europe,” the official added.
The Trump administration has for months talked about the strategic importance of Greenland for U.S. security, pointing out that its location in the North Atlantic makes American control critical for stepped-up missile defense programs and monitoring Russia and Chinese shipping in the Arctic.
The change opens the possibility of adding more Golden Dome radar systems on Greenland and expanding that network of sensors, while more closely aligning the island with Canadian and American regional defense plans.Putting Greenland under Northern Command would, in effect, cleave Greenland from Denmark when it comes to how the island is prioritized in policy discussions at the Pentagon and the White House.
Trump’s comments on the importance of the Arctic have caught the attention of NATO leaders. The alliance’s secretary general, Mark Rutte, said last week that “for NATO, we’re getting more involved” in Arctic security issues. He added that Trump calling attention to Russian and Chinese moves in the region marked a positive development.
In an interview with NBC last month, Trump said he would not rule out taking Greenland by military force. “I don’t say I’m going to do it, but I don’t rule out anything,” he said. “We need Greenland very badly.”
Source : POLITICO
The Pastor of Disaster
0
Pentagon to redraw command map to more closely align Greenland with the US
The Pentagon’s move to shift its oversight of Greenland under U.S. Northern Command aligns with President Trump’s pledge to take control of the autonomous Danish territory. The shift in oversight, which could come as soon as this week, could also help the U.S. broaden its Golden Dome missile shield by providing more radars for coverage. Under the plan, Greenland would shift from European Command’s jurisdiction to Northern Command, which is responsible for overseeing the security of North America, according to a DOD official and two people familiar with the planning. The people were granted anonymity to discuss the move ahead of its announcement. The switch is the most concrete step yet in the Trump administration’s months-long effort to gain ownership over Greenland, an autonomous island aligned with Denmark. “From the perspective of geography, the move makes some sense,” said one of the people familiar. “From a political perspective, however, this clearly is going to worry Europe,” the official added.
The Trump administration has for months talked about the strategic importance of Greenland for U.S. security, pointing out that its location in the North Atlantic makes American control critical for stepped-up missile defense programs and monitoring Russia and Chinese shipping in the Arctic.
The change opens the possibility of adding more Golden Dome radar systems on Greenland and expanding that network of sensors, while more closely aligning the island with Canadian and American regional defense plans.Putting Greenland under Northern Command would, in effect, cleave Greenland from Denmark when it comes to how the island is prioritized in policy discussions at the Pentagon and the White House.
Trump’s comments on the importance of the Arctic have caught the attention of NATO leaders. The alliance’s secretary general, Mark Rutte, said last week that “for NATO, we’re getting more involved” in Arctic security issues. He added that Trump calling attention to Russian and Chinese moves in the region marked a positive development.
In an interview with NBC last month, Trump said he would not rule out taking Greenland by military force. “I don’t say I’m going to do it, but I don’t rule out anything,” he said. “We need Greenland very badly.”
Pentagon to redraw command map to more closely align Greenland with the US The Pentagon’s move to shift its oversight of Greenland under U.S. Northern Command aligns with President Trump’s pledge to take control of the autonomous Danish territory. The shift in oversight, which could come as soon as this week, could also help the U.S. broaden its Golden Dome missile shield by providing more radars for coverage. Under the plan, Greenland would shift from European Command’s jurisdiction to Northern Command, which is responsible for overseeing the security of North America, according to a DOD official and two people familiar with the planning. The people were granted anonymity to discuss the move ahead of its announcement. The switch is the most concrete step yet in the Trump administration’s months-long effort to gain ownership over Greenland, an autonomous island aligned with Denmark. “From the perspective of geography, the move makes some sense,” said one of the people familiar. “From a political perspective, however, this clearly is going to worry Europe,” the official added. The Trump administration has for months talked about the strategic importance of Greenland for U.S. security, pointing out that its location in the North Atlantic makes American control critical for stepped-up missile defense programs and monitoring Russia and Chinese shipping in the Arctic. The change opens the possibility of adding more Golden Dome radar systems on Greenland and expanding that network of sensors, while more closely aligning the island with Canadian and American regional defense plans.Putting Greenland under Northern Command would, in effect, cleave Greenland from Denmark when it comes to how the island is prioritized in policy discussions at the Pentagon and the White House. Trump’s comments on the importance of the Arctic have caught the attention of NATO leaders. The alliance’s secretary general, Mark Rutte, said last week that “for NATO, we’re getting more involved” in Arctic security issues. He added that Trump calling attention to Russian and Chinese moves in the region marked a positive development. In an interview with NBC last month, Trump said he would not rule out taking Greenland by military force. “I don’t say I’m going to do it, but I don’t rule out anything,” he said. “We need Greenland very badly.” Source : POLITICO
You don't need Greenland - you can basically already do everything you want there - you could build 1000's of military bases there if you wanted - didn't bother reading anything else but that - because if a source says you need Greenland for security or military importance (or saying Denmark exclusively hasn't protected it enough) - you know they are bullshitting - you have had 80 years where you could put anything you wanted there
0
Quote Originally Posted by Barbarossa:
Pentagon to redraw command map to more closely align Greenland with the US The Pentagon’s move to shift its oversight of Greenland under U.S. Northern Command aligns with President Trump’s pledge to take control of the autonomous Danish territory. The shift in oversight, which could come as soon as this week, could also help the U.S. broaden its Golden Dome missile shield by providing more radars for coverage. Under the plan, Greenland would shift from European Command’s jurisdiction to Northern Command, which is responsible for overseeing the security of North America, according to a DOD official and two people familiar with the planning. The people were granted anonymity to discuss the move ahead of its announcement. The switch is the most concrete step yet in the Trump administration’s months-long effort to gain ownership over Greenland, an autonomous island aligned with Denmark. “From the perspective of geography, the move makes some sense,” said one of the people familiar. “From a political perspective, however, this clearly is going to worry Europe,” the official added. The Trump administration has for months talked about the strategic importance of Greenland for U.S. security, pointing out that its location in the North Atlantic makes American control critical for stepped-up missile defense programs and monitoring Russia and Chinese shipping in the Arctic. The change opens the possibility of adding more Golden Dome radar systems on Greenland and expanding that network of sensors, while more closely aligning the island with Canadian and American regional defense plans.Putting Greenland under Northern Command would, in effect, cleave Greenland from Denmark when it comes to how the island is prioritized in policy discussions at the Pentagon and the White House. Trump’s comments on the importance of the Arctic have caught the attention of NATO leaders. The alliance’s secretary general, Mark Rutte, said last week that “for NATO, we’re getting more involved” in Arctic security issues. He added that Trump calling attention to Russian and Chinese moves in the region marked a positive development. In an interview with NBC last month, Trump said he would not rule out taking Greenland by military force. “I don’t say I’m going to do it, but I don’t rule out anything,” he said. “We need Greenland very badly.” Source : POLITICO
You don't need Greenland - you can basically already do everything you want there - you could build 1000's of military bases there if you wanted - didn't bother reading anything else but that - because if a source says you need Greenland for security or military importance (or saying Denmark exclusively hasn't protected it enough) - you know they are bullshitting - you have had 80 years where you could put anything you wanted there
That is the only reason and because you want to build AI data centers there - because of the cold climates there - it can literally be no other reason - as long as both of us are in NATO there is nothing security related you can't build there rather you "own" it or not - and if any of us ever leave NATO then you could just take it by force then if the situation called for it - Literally no reason with good intentions in mind - and "no" robbing people for natural minerals isn't a good reason
0
That is the only reason and because you want to build AI data centers there - because of the cold climates there - it can literally be no other reason - as long as both of us are in NATO there is nothing security related you can't build there rather you "own" it or not - and if any of us ever leave NATO then you could just take it by force then if the situation called for it - Literally no reason with good intentions in mind - and "no" robbing people for natural minerals isn't a good reason
That is the only reason and because you want to build AI data centers there - because of the cold climates there - it can literally be no other reason - as long as both of us is in NATO there is nothing security related you can't build there rather you "own" it or not - and if any of us ever leave NATO then you could just take it by force then if the situation called for it - Literally no good reason
in my opinion you should have ownership of what you protect , and Denmark cannot protect Greenland.
my bad , but it is part of a new world order we are witnessing , like it or not .
Without US protection Greenland will be annexed by China in case the US will elect another weak globalist puppet like Biden , another weak and crazy Democrat so to speak ,
like Buttigieg , Ocassio Cortez or Hakeem Jeffries.
The Pastor of Disaster
0
Quote Originally Posted by Calde13:
That is the only reason and because you want to build AI data centers there - because of the cold climates there - it can literally be no other reason - as long as both of us is in NATO there is nothing security related you can't build there rather you "own" it or not - and if any of us ever leave NATO then you could just take it by force then if the situation called for it - Literally no good reason
in my opinion you should have ownership of what you protect , and Denmark cannot protect Greenland.
my bad , but it is part of a new world order we are witnessing , like it or not .
Without US protection Greenland will be annexed by China in case the US will elect another weak globalist puppet like Biden , another weak and crazy Democrat so to speak ,
like Buttigieg , Ocassio Cortez or Hakeem Jeffries.
Quote Originally Posted by Calde13: That is the only reason and because you want to build AI data centers there - because of the cold climates there - it can literally be no other reason - as long as both of us is in NATO there is nothing security related you can't build there rather you "own" it or not - and if any of us ever leave NATO then you could just take it by force then if the situation called for it - Literally no good reason in my opinion you should have ownership of what you protect , and Denmark cannot protect Greenland. my bad , but it is part of a new world order we are witnessing , like it or not . Without US protection Greenland will be annexed by China in case the US will elect another weak globalist puppet like Biden , another weak and crazy Democrat so to speak , like Buttigieg , Occasion Cortez or Hakeem Jeffries.
Are you deliberately not reading what I am saying? - You are already just as much part of the defence of Greenland as we are - and you can't just annex another country for your own security matters - build 1000 military bases there tomorrow - and then I am sure Greenland won't mind if you use their land as the first line of defence versus a Chinese attack on you guys - it is NOT you defending Greenland versus China - it is you using Greenland to defend you versus China
0
Quote Originally Posted by Barbarossa:
Quote Originally Posted by Calde13: That is the only reason and because you want to build AI data centers there - because of the cold climates there - it can literally be no other reason - as long as both of us is in NATO there is nothing security related you can't build there rather you "own" it or not - and if any of us ever leave NATO then you could just take it by force then if the situation called for it - Literally no good reason in my opinion you should have ownership of what you protect , and Denmark cannot protect Greenland. my bad , but it is part of a new world order we are witnessing , like it or not . Without US protection Greenland will be annexed by China in case the US will elect another weak globalist puppet like Biden , another weak and crazy Democrat so to speak , like Buttigieg , Occasion Cortez or Hakeem Jeffries.
Are you deliberately not reading what I am saying? - You are already just as much part of the defence of Greenland as we are - and you can't just annex another country for your own security matters - build 1000 military bases there tomorrow - and then I am sure Greenland won't mind if you use their land as the first line of defence versus a Chinese attack on you guys - it is NOT you defending Greenland versus China - it is you using Greenland to defend you versus China
i am aware of what you are saying , here is the point , China (or Russia) will think more than twice trying to occupy Greenland when it is US territory ,and not Danish territory
i am sure a mutual beneficial deal is possible between the US and Denmark before we discuss uglier scenarios
The Pastor of Disaster
0
@Calde13
i am aware of what you are saying , here is the point , China (or Russia) will think more than twice trying to occupy Greenland when it is US territory ,and not Danish territory
i am sure a mutual beneficial deal is possible between the US and Denmark before we discuss uglier scenarios
There has been no advances that they want to annex it - and they actually wouldn't think more of it - they would think just as hard if you just had a lot of active military bases there - as an attack in that case would mean exactly the same
But if we are discussing if YOU guys have left Greenland undefended for too long (considering your interest in it) - then yeah you have - but it wouldn't change anything rather you own it or we allow you to build there because of the NATO alliance - literally changes nothing
0
There has been no advances that they want to annex it - and they actually wouldn't think more of it - they would think just as hard if you just had a lot of active military bases there - as an attack in that case would mean exactly the same
But if we are discussing if YOU guys have left Greenland undefended for too long (considering your interest in it) - then yeah you have - but it wouldn't change anything rather you own it or we allow you to build there because of the NATO alliance - literally changes nothing
There has been no advances that they want to annex it - and they actually wouldn't - they would think just as hard if you just had a lot of active military bases there - as an attack in that case would mean exactly the same But if we are discussing if YOU guys have left Greenland undefended for too long (considering your interest in it) - then yeah you have - but it wouldn't change anything rather you own it or we allow you to build there because of the NATO alliance - literally changes nothing
we will see what will happen , i hope for a solution that benefits all sides involved
The Pastor of Disaster
0
Quote Originally Posted by Calde13:
There has been no advances that they want to annex it - and they actually wouldn't - they would think just as hard if you just had a lot of active military bases there - as an attack in that case would mean exactly the same But if we are discussing if YOU guys have left Greenland undefended for too long (considering your interest in it) - then yeah you have - but it wouldn't change anything rather you own it or we allow you to build there because of the NATO alliance - literally changes nothing
we will see what will happen , i hope for a solution that benefits all sides involved
We are in a situation where you say either defend it for us or we will take it from you so we can use it to defend us - while we say "You can already use it to defend you"
I will partly give you that it wouldn't be 100% fair if you didn't own Greenland (but had an interest in it) and then it was YOU that had to defend Greenland
But that isn't the situation - it is you that want Greenland for your own defense - it isn't Greenland or Denmark telling you to defend Greenland for us
0
We are in a situation where you say either defend it for us or we will take it from you so we can use it to defend us - while we say "You can already use it to defend you"
I will partly give you that it wouldn't be 100% fair if you didn't own Greenland (but had an interest in it) and then it was YOU that had to defend Greenland
But that isn't the situation - it is you that want Greenland for your own defense - it isn't Greenland or Denmark telling you to defend Greenland for us
Quote Originally Posted by Calde13: There has been no advances that they want to annex it - and they actually wouldn't - they would think just as hard if you just had a lot of active military bases there - as an attack in that case would mean exactly the same But if we are discussing if YOU guys have left Greenland undefended for too long (considering your interest in it) - then yeah you have - but it wouldn't change anything rather you own it or we allow you to build there because of the NATO alliance - literally changes nothing we will see what will happen , i hope for a solution that benefits all sides involved
Thank you - I don't think anything will happen - Trump is a chicken and the next president in line will just build a lot of military bases there as is your right - and you will accomplish everything you have highlighted and all of us live happily ever after
0
Quote Originally Posted by Barbarossa:
Quote Originally Posted by Calde13: There has been no advances that they want to annex it - and they actually wouldn't - they would think just as hard if you just had a lot of active military bases there - as an attack in that case would mean exactly the same But if we are discussing if YOU guys have left Greenland undefended for too long (considering your interest in it) - then yeah you have - but it wouldn't change anything rather you own it or we allow you to build there because of the NATO alliance - literally changes nothing we will see what will happen , i hope for a solution that benefits all sides involved
Thank you - I don't think anything will happen - Trump is a chicken and the next president in line will just build a lot of military bases there as is your right - and you will accomplish everything you have highlighted and all of us live happily ever after
Pentagon to redraw command map to more closely align Greenland with the US The Pentagon’s move to shift its oversight of Greenland under U.S. Northern Command aligns with President Trump’s pledge to take control of the autonomous Danish territory. The shift in oversight, which could come as soon as this week, could also help the U.S. broaden its Golden Dome missile shield by providing more radars for coverage. Under the plan, Greenland would shift from European Command’s jurisdiction to Northern Command, which is responsible for overseeing the security of North America, according to a DOD official and two people familiar with the planning. The people were granted anonymity to discuss the move ahead of its announcement. The switch is the most concrete step yet in the Trump administration’s months-long effort to gain ownership over Greenland, an autonomous island aligned with Denmark. “From the perspective of geography, the move makes some sense,” said one of the people familiar. “From a political perspective, however, this clearly is going to worry Europe,” the official added. The Trump administration has for months talked about the strategic importance of Greenland for U.S. security, pointing out that its location in the North Atlantic makes American control critical for stepped-up missile defense programs and monitoring Russia and Chinese shipping in the Arctic. The change opens the possibility of adding more Golden Dome radar systems on Greenland and expanding that network of sensors, while more closely aligning the island with Canadian and American regional defense plans.Putting Greenland under Northern Command would, in effect, cleave Greenland from Denmark when it comes to how the island is prioritized in policy discussions at the Pentagon and the White House. Trump’s comments on the importance of the Arctic have caught the attention of NATO leaders. The alliance’s secretary general, Mark Rutte, said last week that “for NATO, we’re getting more involved” in Arctic security issues. He added that Trump calling attention to Russian and Chinese moves in the region marked a positive development. In an interview with NBC last month, Trump said he would not rule out taking Greenland by military force. “I don’t say I’m going to do it, but I don’t rule out anything,” he said. “We need Greenland very badly.” Source : POLITICO
Please don't bring up reality it is clear the other poster rather troll than to engage in meaningful dialogue.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Barbarossa:
Pentagon to redraw command map to more closely align Greenland with the US The Pentagon’s move to shift its oversight of Greenland under U.S. Northern Command aligns with President Trump’s pledge to take control of the autonomous Danish territory. The shift in oversight, which could come as soon as this week, could also help the U.S. broaden its Golden Dome missile shield by providing more radars for coverage. Under the plan, Greenland would shift from European Command’s jurisdiction to Northern Command, which is responsible for overseeing the security of North America, according to a DOD official and two people familiar with the planning. The people were granted anonymity to discuss the move ahead of its announcement. The switch is the most concrete step yet in the Trump administration’s months-long effort to gain ownership over Greenland, an autonomous island aligned with Denmark. “From the perspective of geography, the move makes some sense,” said one of the people familiar. “From a political perspective, however, this clearly is going to worry Europe,” the official added. The Trump administration has for months talked about the strategic importance of Greenland for U.S. security, pointing out that its location in the North Atlantic makes American control critical for stepped-up missile defense programs and monitoring Russia and Chinese shipping in the Arctic. The change opens the possibility of adding more Golden Dome radar systems on Greenland and expanding that network of sensors, while more closely aligning the island with Canadian and American regional defense plans.Putting Greenland under Northern Command would, in effect, cleave Greenland from Denmark when it comes to how the island is prioritized in policy discussions at the Pentagon and the White House. Trump’s comments on the importance of the Arctic have caught the attention of NATO leaders. The alliance’s secretary general, Mark Rutte, said last week that “for NATO, we’re getting more involved” in Arctic security issues. He added that Trump calling attention to Russian and Chinese moves in the region marked a positive development. In an interview with NBC last month, Trump said he would not rule out taking Greenland by military force. “I don’t say I’m going to do it, but I don’t rule out anything,” he said. “We need Greenland very badly.” Source : POLITICO
Please don't bring up reality it is clear the other poster rather troll than to engage in meaningful dialogue.
You guys really need to learn what "trolling" means - people are not trolling just because they have a different world view than you and they say it out loud
I do like trolling a lot - but I haven't tried trolling much in this case - I have pretty much just presented you with facts - that you don't like that says more about you than me - The security discussion is for real just - "We need Greenland to defend ourselves" - "Great tell us one thing you can't do at the moment that is important for your safety" -- And the answer to that is "Nothing - there is nothing you can't do already"
0
You guys really need to learn what "trolling" means - people are not trolling just because they have a different world view than you and they say it out loud
I do like trolling a lot - but I haven't tried trolling much in this case - I have pretty much just presented you with facts - that you don't like that says more about you than me - The security discussion is for real just - "We need Greenland to defend ourselves" - "Great tell us one thing you can't do at the moment that is important for your safety" -- And the answer to that is "Nothing - there is nothing you can't do already"
speaking of governor races, the NY race just got a little more interesting. NY Lieutenant Governor Antonio Delgado is running against Kathy Hochul, finally someone grew a pair to push back on the insanely corrupt NY politics. Anyone who primaries this Karen....I mean Kathy is worth voting for. Delgado has a shot, but does he have enough horses in the stable to get him down the stretch? I had to spin that, the Belmont is in Saratoga in a couple days.
Delgado will grab the same voting bloc that DJT won over in the presidential. I would name some of them here but there are too many posters on this site that get offended by words in the english language.
most likely longshot odds if poly markets have any
0
speaking of governor races, the NY race just got a little more interesting. NY Lieutenant Governor Antonio Delgado is running against Kathy Hochul, finally someone grew a pair to push back on the insanely corrupt NY politics. Anyone who primaries this Karen....I mean Kathy is worth voting for. Delgado has a shot, but does he have enough horses in the stable to get him down the stretch? I had to spin that, the Belmont is in Saratoga in a couple days.
Delgado will grab the same voting bloc that DJT won over in the presidential. I would name some of them here but there are too many posters on this site that get offended by words in the english language.
most likely longshot odds if poly markets have any
what's happening in the Netherlands? Dutch government collapses after far-right party leaves ruling coalition over immigration
please(my words not yours) enlighten us why Europe is shifting toward the right, Poland's Nawrocki most recently
maybe I should start this topic, and you can interject?
Last Monday, the PVV announced a 10 point plan that would effectively slash migration, temporarily halt asylum seekers who were granted refugee status from reuniting with families, and place soldiers at borders to turn away asylum seekers. At issue are Syrians who are in the Netherlands as a result of the violence in their home country.
this kinda sounds familiar ^^^^^^^^^^^^ this is happening in your country as well??? Say it aint so
0
@Calde13
what's happening in the Netherlands? Dutch government collapses after far-right party leaves ruling coalition over immigration
please(my words not yours) enlighten us why Europe is shifting toward the right, Poland's Nawrocki most recently
maybe I should start this topic, and you can interject?
Last Monday, the PVV announced a 10 point plan that would effectively slash migration, temporarily halt asylum seekers who were granted refugee status from reuniting with families, and place soldiers at borders to turn away asylum seekers. At issue are Syrians who are in the Netherlands as a result of the violence in their home country.
this kinda sounds familiar ^^^^^^^^^^^^ this is happening in your country as well??? Say it aint so
If you had took the time to read what I have explained a billion times to Uniman - Europe for real has an immigration problem - mate Europe is around the same size as US in land mass but
1) We are 744 million people already you are somewhere around 350 million
2) You mostly fear the immigrant streams from Venezuela and Mexico combined that is a population of 200 million people - we get a lot of immigrants from most of the Middle East (let’s be nice and not calculate them in) - but mostly from Africa which has a population of 1.6 billion people - no joke 70% of those would seek European citizenship before the year was over if we allowed it - so again perspectives would suit you guys
0
If you had took the time to read what I have explained a billion times to Uniman - Europe for real has an immigration problem - mate Europe is around the same size as US in land mass but
1) We are 744 million people already you are somewhere around 350 million
2) You mostly fear the immigrant streams from Venezuela and Mexico combined that is a population of 200 million people - we get a lot of immigrants from most of the Middle East (let’s be nice and not calculate them in) - but mostly from Africa which has a population of 1.6 billion people - no joke 70% of those would seek European citizenship before the year was over if we allowed it - so again perspectives would suit you guys
And now we are also expected to house a lot of the Americans fleeing Trumps rule like it is the most obvious thing in the world - that we can just house you guys too and 30-40% of the Ukrainian population we also host (granted they are also part of Europe - but it is a lot of our land mass that is now a warzone since both west Russia and Ukraine is calculated in the “same landmass as you” statement)
0
And now we are also expected to house a lot of the Americans fleeing Trumps rule like it is the most obvious thing in the world - that we can just house you guys too and 30-40% of the Ukrainian population we also host (granted they are also part of Europe - but it is a lot of our land mass that is now a warzone since both west Russia and Ukraine is calculated in the “same landmass as you” statement)
So double your population - host a war between Florida and Texas (making 15-20% of their landmass unliveable) and then invite every Canadian + every South American to live in the states you have left - then we can talk
0
So double your population - host a war between Florida and Texas (making 15-20% of their landmass unliveable) and then invite every Canadian + every South American to live in the states you have left - then we can talk
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
) - and we are not living in the 1600 - where countries are a commodity to sell 
(it is exactly like how you handle Trump - pretend the toddler is right - cause it doesn't change the real situation and it makes them happy - win/win)
we will see what will happen , i hope for a solution that benefits all sides involved 
Hot Forum Topics
