171–180 of 660 posts
Of course they were. The United States has never before damaged its own reputation in Europe as much as they did in the last 12 months. And the same goes for Canada, possibly worse. You don't go around threatening your allies unless you really have plans and that's why you don't elect senile old guys to positions of power.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Militarily, absolutely. Absolutely no one misunderstands this. It would destroy the US on the worldwide stage, and even internally. Not to mention it absolutely annihilates the American delusion that you're the "good guys". Right now the US is a staggering idiocracy, and is absolutely the most dangerous rogue nation on the planet. And how utterly pathetic. When the "join us, please, we're so great" fell absolutely fl…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are pretty happy with having superiority on high tech manufacturing and robotics. You basically cannot manufacture something without using China - even if you try. I don't think they consider the TSMC EUV monopoly a long term threat. Doing good on AI as well, you bet the OSS chinese models causing stock panic in the US makes them laugh. On the topic of manufacturing outside China, the YouTuber "Smarter Every day…
I have some friends who are doing things 'China free' and it is possible but it comes at a very substantial premium.
There's a difference between "posturing" for show and actually "preparing for war". They're wise to the fact that "the Stable Genius" isn't going to try anything violent with Denmark/Greenland, but they still want to prevent him thinking about just stealing territory "peacefully."
Ukraine thought Russia was just posturing and look where it got them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trust me, Denmark wasn't posturing. The assumption was - and still is - that the USA wasn't posturing either. We (and I realize I obviously don't speak for all of Europe but I have my finger on the pulse in many places here) are also not assuming that when Trump is gone the USA will go back to normal.
And even if they did go back to normal for the next presidency - why trust it? Their entire political system is set up so that the winds can change entirely every 4 years. If the people voted Trump in to office twice, it’ll happen again. It’s a divided country where propaganda has a strong hold.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, what is absurd is the number of people that can't wait to go back to a world with endless wars of conquest. We already know what that looks like. If you have never seen war up close then I am happy to forgive you, but trust me, in 'actual war' there is no possibility of success for anybody, there are only degrees of damage and degrees of grief and illusions to the contrary are focused on the few people that manag…
I'm sorry but you are not interacting with the rational suppositions of posters in various threads here. No one is arguing for a war except you. People are explaining to you the strategic reality and you are espousing rhetoric that I honestly can't decipher. 1. Denmark cannot win militarily 2. You are suggesting Denmark would not capitulate and indeed enter into a state of war What do you think happens in this situat…
The one thing that is common about 'rationalists' is that they share a lot of the viewpoints with other ra*ists and that's not the world many of us want to live in.
Sure, you can take it. But can you afford to take it?
The answer is most likely you can't. And so far every attempt to show John Mearheimers superiority has been the equivalent of 'just relax and enjoy it'.
Guess what? We won't. Alliances are made voluntarily, not through conquest.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That doesn't matter. It is not so much about whether the USA could do this and expect to win, of course they can. Nobody has any doubt about that. It is about gross miscalculation of consequences. Attack Greenland ->attack Denmark, attack Denmark -> Attack the EU. So you don't attack Greenland. Because that would be wrong. Unless all that stuff about shining cities on hills was nonsense. Instead of making America gre…
>It is not so much about whether the USA could do this and expect to win, of course they can. Nobody has any doubt about that. Um, lots of us have doubts about that. The USA couldn't win against Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq; why do you think it could win against Greenland? Greenlanders actually have a lot of guns; and likely most of Europe and Canada would also go to war against the USA.
If it was because of resources, then American companies are frankly free to extract them as long as they reach deals with Greenland about it. If the USA had waited a few years for Greenland to gain more independence then it would have been even easier.