Donald Trump Appreciation Thread

[egg]

8 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

So Trump "cashing in his chips" in a childish tantrum allows him to seize another country, an ally of the US, at the point of a gun ?

Do the people of Greenland not have a say ?

We know they won't. 

Now onto the Chagos Islands. I think it likely that once our sovereignty ends, Trump will annexe all the islands. Being a sub tenant of just one of the islands won't be enough for him. 

[badgerx16]

4 minutes ago, egg said:

 

Now onto the Chagos Islands. 

In May last year the US, and Trump personally, praised that deal as a "monumental achievement", now it is apparently "an act of GREAT STUPIDITY".

[egg]

6 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

In May last year the US, and Trump personally, praised that deal as a "monumental achievement", now it is apparently "an act of GREAT STUPIDITY".

Indeed. His latest view is probably the better one though to be fair. Where it is daft is that it removes part of our leverage with the US. 

The Tories started that particular ball rolling, and I'm not sure what was ever on it for us. Feels like "doing the right thing" rather than anything beneficial to us. 

[hypochondriac]

19 minutes ago, egg said:

We know they won't. 

Now onto the Chagos Islands. I think it likely that once our sovereignty ends, Trump will annexe all the islands. Being a sub tenant of just one of the islands won't be enough for him. 

He's 100% right about Chagos but completely wrong and frankly nuts about Greenland. I'm hoping it's part of some negotiation and some of the European nations can convince him that they have enough to defend the island without him invading.

[hypochondriac]

3 minutes ago, egg said:

Indeed. His latest view is probably the better one though to be fair. Where it is daft is that it removes part of our leverage with the US. 

The Tories started that particular ball rolling, and I'm not sure what was ever on it for us. Feels like "doing the right thing" rather than anything beneficial to us. 

Even that is questionable given that as far as I am aware Mauritius never owned the thing.

[hypochondriac]

I wonder if they offered Greenlanders something like $500k each whether they would agree. I'd certainly think about it.

[badgerx16]

5 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I wonder if they offered Greenlanders something like $500k each whether they would agree. I'd certainly think about it.

It seems that for Greenlanders the most important aspect of Denmark's control, the main thing holding back calls for complete independence, is the welfare state that Denmark extends to the Island; healthcare, pensions, and education. There is no way that would be sustained under US occupation.

[badgerx16]

Trump makes great play out of his ability as a deal maker. One thing clearly and publicly goes against this - whatever he paid for his hair, he was robbed.

[sadoldgit]

22 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

In May last year the US, and Trump personally, praised that deal as a "monumental achievement", now it is apparently "an act of GREAT STUPIDITY".

This is what happens when you cross a narcissist. There is no “special relationship” unless you treat them as special 24/7.

As soon as Starmer stood up and told him that the tariffs were wrong yesterday that was it. He won’t be a happy bunny again until he gets his own way and we back down.

This is what happens when you give too much power to an unhinged megalomaniac.

Putin and Xi will be loving this.

I don’t agree with Batman. I don’t think we will back down over Greenland although I expect some deal will be struck to make it look like the spoilt brat has “won.”

Watch him threaten to pull the plug on Ukraine next.

 

[sadoldgit]

15 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I wonder if they offered Greenlanders something like $500k each whether they would agree. I'd certainly think about it.

Why doesn’t that surprise me?

[hypochondriac]

12 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Why doesn’t that surprise me?

I preferred it when you pretended to have me on ignore soggy. No surprise you know a lot about how a narcissist operates.

Edited 55 minutes ago by hypochondriac

[hypochondriac]

14 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

It seems that for Greenlanders the most important aspect of Denmark's control, the main thing holding back calls for complete independence, is the welfare state that Denmark extends to the Island; healthcare, pensions, and education. There is no way that would be sustained under US occupation.

Good point. I still reckon this could be sorted with a larger American presence on Greenland and some collective agreement on security. Who knows with Donald but I can't see him actually invading.

[AlexLaw76]

57 minutes ago, egg said:

We know they won't. 

Now onto the Chagos Islands. I think it likely that once our sovereignty ends, Trump will annexe all the islands. Being a sub tenant of just one of the islands won't be enough for him. 

Do the people of the Chagos not get a say?

[hypochondriac]

15 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Do the people of the Chagos not get a say?

If the U.K. could be so stupid as to give Chagos away, at the behest of International law decided by Russian and Chinese judges, to an ally of China and Russia, pay them billions on an ongoing basis AND then agree IN LAW to tell that ally of Russia and China if the base is ever to be used militarily against anyone including Russia and China - what idiocy could Denmark be persuaded to do under the guise of complying with international law? 

I don't understand how someone can seriously make the case for the people of Greenland whilst simultaneously doing a deal on Chagos that ignores the wishes of the people who come from there.

Edited 33 minutes ago by hypochondriac

[egg]

54 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Even that is questionable given that as far as I am aware Mauritius never owned the thing.

We bought it from someone in 1965 so there was definitely ownership. 

[AlexLaw76]

2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

If the U.K. could be so stupid as to give Chagos away, at the behest of International law decided by Russian and Chinese judges, to an ally of China and Russia, pay them billions on an ongoing basis AND then agree IN LAW to tell that ally of Russia and China if the base is ever to be used militarily against anyone including Russia and China - what idiocy could Denmark be persuaded to do under the guise of complying with international law? 

I don't understand how someone can seriously make the case for the people of Greenland whilst simultaneously doing a deal on Chagos that ignores the wishes of the people who come from there.

  Because UK, and Western Europe, are oh so pious and virtuous on the world stage. 

[badgerx16]

16 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Do the people of the Chagos not get a say?

The only people on the Chagos Islands are US and UK military personnel and civilian contractors. The native population were dispersed many years ago. 

The annexation of the archipelago was the last dying spasm of British colonialism.

[AlexLaw76]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

We bought it from someone in 1965 so there was definitely ownership. 

The UK gained the islands from France over 200 years ago.

the BIOT administration was formed in 1965

[badgerx16]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

We bought it from someone in 1965 so there was definitely ownership. 

We got it off the French in 1814, and administered it as part of Mauritius until it was formally made into an overseas territory of the United Kingdom in 1965.

[egg]

32 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Do the people of the Chagos not get a say?

What people? We booted them off the island. 

[hypochondriac]

12 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

The only people on the Chagos Islands are US and UK military personnel and civilian contractors. The native population were dispersed many years ago. 

The annexation of the archipelago was the last dying spasm of British colonialism.

Right so it was the British that moved them off. So really the island belongs to those people so they should be the ones that have a say on this.