- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: NATO could end if US takes over Greenland — Danish PM
Posted on 1/6/26 at 12:51 pm to captainFid
Posted on 1/6/26 at 12:51 pm to captainFid
Greenland will be warm again.
0
Posted on 1/6/26 at 1:00 pm to ChineseBandit58
quote:
Turn the UN bldg into a tenement.
Now THAT'S a solid idea! Let Mamdani provide "rent stabilized" non-racist housing there.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 1:00 pm to Eurocat
It's not so much about the cost for me. It is about not being obligated to defend countries who are acting like war hawks trying to get into battles that are of no interest to the US.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 1:01 pm to LSU7096
quote:
NATO and EU....... frick them trolls and leeches. They do not want reciprocal trade terms or free trade, but want us to continue protecting them while they spend their monies on social programs.
Actually it was the EU that proposed a "zero tarrif" free trade agreement and it was Trump that rejected it.
LINK
Posted on 1/6/26 at 1:04 pm to 10thyrsr
A conflict with one of our enemies is the utmost of interest to us. Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, etc. What we would do in each case would of course depend on the circumstances.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 1:04 pm to Auburn1968
quote:
Yep, ain't gonna happen that way. More likely a promise to the locals of shiny things.
Like high paying offshore drilling job for all able bodied men.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 1:04 pm to captainFid
So even more incentive?
Posted on 1/6/26 at 1:13 pm to captainFid
China is salivating over our self destruction of alliances and global good will.
Imagine thinking EU is a bigger threat than China, which is hollowing the U.S. out.
Imagine thinking EU is a bigger threat than China, which is hollowing the U.S. out.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 1:18 pm to Eurocat
quote:
The actual amount we spend on NATO is n the range of 500 million dollars.
Then if we pull out, they won’t miss us. Right?
Posted on 1/6/26 at 1:21 pm to Godfather1
Of course they would, that is like saying to a family with 10 kids "'well if one dies, you still have the rest so you won't miss them". And no one doubts the USA is a valuable ally.
To this day I don't understand why Trump didn't accept the "no tarrifs on the USA or the EU" offer.
I would hate to think he did it out of spite simply because it wasn't HIS idea. But who knows.
To this day I don't understand why Trump didn't accept the "no tarrifs on the USA or the EU" offer.
I would hate to think he did it out of spite simply because it wasn't HIS idea. But who knows.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 1:21 pm to Don Quixote
quote:
GOOD! let Europe pay for and look after themselves
Yep. If they need our help in some conflict, our MIC is certain to fire up the war machine enthusiastically. No need to keep throwing money at them in the meantime.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 1:26 pm to SpecialK_88
If we fight Russia and China neither of them could ever land a single troop in the US.
We don’t need to invade them. Simply deny them access to raw materials and stop their exports.
Nobody really wins or loses, which is no different than now.
If it goes nuclear, everyone loses. That is true now. Europe adds nothing to the defense of the USA and Canada plays ball or gets absorbed.
We don’t need to invade them. Simply deny them access to raw materials and stop their exports.
Nobody really wins or loses, which is no different than now.
If it goes nuclear, everyone loses. That is true now. Europe adds nothing to the defense of the USA and Canada plays ball or gets absorbed.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 1:37 pm to Lynxrufus2012
quote:
We don’t need to invade them. Simply deny them access to raw materials and stop their exports.
Because China and Russia don’t have raw materials… lol.
They are geographically huge long coasts and land borders with countries that are no longer our allies (Europe) so good lock blocking much of any exports. They have oil in their backyard and China controls most of the world’s rare earths which are also used in military equipment.
That strategy simply has no chance of working.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 1:42 pm to Eurocat
quote:
A conflict with one of our enemies is the utmost of interest to us. Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, etc. What we would do in each case would of course depend on the circumstances.
We would be free to respond as we chose outside of the NATO structure.
Remaining in NATO makes us obligated to respond and I think that takes away our ability to determine our foreign policy.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 1:47 pm to captainFid
I don’t want to forcibly take over Greenland, but if it gets us out of NATO then I will consider it just this once.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 1:48 pm to 10thyrsr
quote:
We would be free to respond as we chose outside of the NATO structure. Remaining in NATO makes us obligated to respond and I think that takes away our ability to determine our foreign policy.
Naive. You assume it would be a one and one fight which history shows it wouldn’t be. Every conflict between major powers includes support (many times direct support like wwi and wwii) from allied nations.
Even now Russia is being supported by NK, Iran, and to a lesser extent China.
Thinking that we could just dismiss our allies and think we’d be going up against a single enemy is pretty foolish.
This post was edited on 1/6/26 at 1:49 pm
Posted on 1/6/26 at 1:51 pm to captainFid
And what’s the cons here?
Posted on 1/6/26 at 1:52 pm to 10thyrsr
quote:
We would be free to respond as we chose outside of the NATO structure. Remaining in NATO makes us obligated to respond and I think that takes away our ability to determine our foreign policy.
Actually it only reduces any threats to us since we would be partner and both sides would certainly want to hear our views. We would say "back off, cook it" and 99.999999 percent of the time countries would come to their senses. It's happened with Greece and Turkey and Indiana and Pakistan and who knows where else. An engaged America is a safer America.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 1:53 pm to Don Quixote
quote:
and for the trifecta: get the US out of the UN and the UN out of the US
That's a fourfecta.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 1:54 pm to captainFid
quote:
NATO could end if US takes over Greenland
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News