Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trump’s Territorial Ambitions

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Trump’s Territorial Ambitions

    Not even president yet, Trump is apparently angling to enter history books as The Great American Acquisitor when it comes to territories.
    He has his appetite set on a number of dishes.
    Keeping to the culinary metaphors:
    Appetizer: The Panama Canal. Here he is using as an excuse “the outrageous fees” the Canal authority is charging American shipping using the Canal has to pay!
    Main Course: Canada. The oblique “humorous” references to Canada and to PM Trudeau as “Governor” could be seen as a fair indicator!
    (Though
    anyone trying to digest Trudeau would surely suffer sever digestive ailments!)
    Dessert: Greenland. In his previous term of office he did try to acquire this part of Denmark.
    Even going so far as invite him-self to make a State visit to Denmark, though when the Danish PM definitely said no-deal,
    he got his knickers in an uproar,, and cancelled his non-invited visit!
    It should be pointed out that in none of the three cases has any offers to sell, or become part of the United States of America, been made!
    Then again, it just may be that Trump is simply being he living embodiment of the law of the jungle:
    “When the Strong Dictate, the Weak Must Submit!”

    When we blindly adopt a religion, a political system, a literary dogma, we become automatons. We cease to grow. - Anais Nin

  • #2
    Maybe a little less improbable (to me) would be Trump sending US Army troops across the southern border into northern Mexico, occupying a buffer zone, setting up some poorly resourced massive concentration camps there to hold asylum seekers and aliens illegally residing in the US. ...using the excuse that the cross border criminal activity is at a level that presents a clear and present danger to the United States, regardless the veracity of the claimed premise.

    .
    .
    .

    Comment


    • #3
      Trump is just being Trump.

      The big story in the news this last week was that Musk killed the budget deal. Then that Trump couldn't get republicans to go along with his demand that the Budget ceiling be suspended for 2 years.

      People using "President Musk" and Trump not being able to strongarm his party had to get off the news feed. So out comes the "Take Back the canal and Greenland must be ours" BS

      Served its purpose. President Musk is no longer in the news

      Comment


      • #4
        The one that isn't being discussed.. and maybe it should be a what if discussion... but how sure are people that he isn't going to invade Mexico to some extent to tackle the cartels?

        Comment


        • #5
          Donald Trump Jr. is on a “private” sigh-seeing visit to Greenland!
          Yahh, right!
          Arriving on the Trump private jet, with a large entourage! Some private!
          Right after his old man had quite forcibly reinforced his demands for Greenland, going so far, as to threaten Tariff War to strengthen his arguments.
          Using the spurious argument, that it is integral to the safety and security of the U.S.A.!


          Trump Raises the Possibility of Using Military or Economic Force to Take Greenland and the Panama Canal


          https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/07/u...greenland.html

          Paying no mind to the fact that the Greenland population, together with the Home Rule administration,
          and the Danish Central government, have made it clear that the island is not for sale!!!

          When we blindly adopt a religion, a political system, a literary dogma, we become automatons. We cease to grow. - Anais Nin

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Amled View Post
            [FONT=Times New Roman]Donald Trump Jr. is on a “private” sigh-seeing visit to Greenland!
            Yahh, right!
            Arriving on the Trump private jet, with a large entourage! Some private!
            Right after his old man had quite forcibly reinforced his demands for Greenland, going so far, as to threaten Tariff War to strengthen his arguments.
            Using the spurious argument, that it is integral to the safety and security of the U.S.A.!
            This is all bullshit, yet at the same time there have been calls the U.S. should buy Greenland going back to the Grant administration. So "safety and security of the USA" and considering the Arctic has been increasing in importance the past 2 decades, while it is the excuse, I would not call it spurious.

            Comment


            • #7
              If one doesn't care one damn bit about democracy or the rule of law, these gimme, gimme, mine, mine tantrums become somewhat more understandable.
              Trust me?
              I'm an economist!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by rj1 View Post

                This is all bullshit, yet at the same time there have been calls the U.S. should buy Greenland going back to the Grant administration. So "safety and security of the USA" and considering the Arctic has been increasing in importance the past 2 decades, while it is the excuse, I would not call it spurious.
                Offering to 'buy' Greenland isn't the problem. In that happens the Greenlanders have a choice i.e. they can say yes or no to accepting the money. Its Trump's implied willingness to take the island by force if they refuse to accept an offer that's unacceptable. But even then his reasoning is BS. At the moment Greenland is represented on the international stage by a friendly ally of long standing and there are no more restrictions on US companies wanting to do business there that there are for any other nation. In order for Greenland to become a real security issue for the US? Someone would have to change the status quo first and either take over the island by force (which would automatically trigger US intervention or else? Greenlanders would first have to vote to secede from Denmark and then immediately sign some wide ranging 'articles of association' or whatever with a hostile power. Which would also trigger a US intervention. So whats the point?

                Finally. If Trump is serious about 'securing the US's northern frontier' then by rights he should also be just as willing to take over Canada as well!
                Last edited by Monash; 09 Jan 25,, 07:00.
                If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Greenland,Canada,American Bay...Hey, you guys own us a copyright, we came out with that crap first, during the 90'es, when Milosevic went to take "what was historically our lands". Jesus, this is so hilarious that my brain hurts. But, we all know what is coming after statements like this and that part isn't funny.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Monash View Post

                    Offering to 'buy' Greenland isn't the problem. In that happens the Greenlanders have a choice i.e. they can say yes or no to accepting the money. Its Trump's implied willingness to take the island by force if they refuse to accept an offer that's unacceptable. But even then his reasoning is BS. At the moment Greenland is represented on the international stage by a friendly ally of long standing and there are no more restrictions on US companies wanting to do business there that there are for any other nation. In order for Greenland to become a real security issue for the US? Someone would have to change the status quo first and either take over the island by force (which would automatically trigger US intervention or else? Greenlanders would first have to vote to secede from Denmark and then immediately sign some wide ranging 'articles of association' or whatever with a hostile power. Which would also trigger a US intervention. So whats the point?

                    Finally. If Trump is serious about 'securing the US's northern frontier' then by rights he should also be just as willing to take over Canada as well!
                    I feel there should be a broader discussion regarding how "sacrosanct borders" is rapidly disappearing or has disappeared from the rules-based international order. It's a sea change from the last 80 years. We even have American allies in Turkey and Israel that are getting in on it.

                    This is all the last decade:

                    -Crimea bloodlessly taken by Russia, annexed
                    -the war between Ukraine and Russia has led to approximately 18% of all pre-2014 Ukrainian territory is now held by the Russians, a small portion of Russia is now held by Ukraine, situation still fluid but there's nothing that has occurred the past 2 years that makes it look like Ukraine will ever get most of that land back
                    -Libya is by fact 2 countries split into an eastern half and a western half
                    -disintegration of Syria, Turkey has taken control of areas in the north next to its border, Israel has expanded the Golan Heights, situation still fluid
                    -Israel has invaded Gaza and Lebanon and while they have no interest in administrating civilians there, it appears they're going to control portions of them (a de facto annexation)
                    -American recognition of Western Sahara is part of Morocco
                    -American recognition of Jerusalem is the capital of Israel
                    -Hong Kong has disappeared as an autonomous polity
                    -Azerbaijan have eliminated Artsakh/Nagorno-Karabakh and taken over full control of the area
                    -international recognition of Somaliland looks like it's about to happen, as part of that an Ethiopian port there which could create a regional war with Somalia and Egypt, meanwhile the Horn of Africa has been a constant state of war somewhere in the region for years
                    -the French are en masse getting evicted from Western Africa as the region is splitting into 2 blocs
                    -Iranian designs on the Middle East have taken a colossal turn worse, but it looks like they're getting replaced by the Israelis and Turks
                    -a coup attempt in our major non-NATO ally South Korea of all places

                    For things out there that look like they might change: hell, the Turks have taken bits of Syria, Turkish Cyprus is sitting out there now more than 50 years old; Republika Srpska merging with Serbia which Sprska would probably be for if they were allowed a vote, Transnistria is looking a little more shaky, the U.S. saber-rattling the Danes, Canadians, and Panamanians of all people and discussing an expeditionary force moving into Mexico, India are becoming a more aggressive country such as carrying out extraterritorial assassinations in Canada, the Chinese are going to do SOMETHING in the Pacific and have already been playing low-level skirmish games on their borders

                    Again, I just think we're all preparing for a broader war. What the war is and who it's between, I don't know, but the 1910s vibes are out there and the international system is really struggling to contain it. Part of this is due to the international system was designed 80 years ago for a post-World War II world that heavily does not exist anymore as Asia, Africa, and Latin America have all gotten independence and become significantly more important globally, and part of it is the very long term trend of the decline of European power geopolitically relative to the geopolitical power of the rest of the world and yet are still overrepresented. All the conflicts above were not created by Trump, and although I don't care for the man I think he's actually more fit for where the world is going than Biden is. I have a heavy interest in geopolitics and more has been going on the past few years than went on in the 30 years prior, which is odd for Biden considering his foreign policy was as much a rejection of Obama's as it was Trump's and was framed as "get back to normal". We've clearly not gotten back to normal as Biden defined it pre-2016 as Russia and Israel in tandem have completely destroyed Biden's version of the U.S. rules-based international order, Russia via demonstrating the West won't come in with troops to help Ukraine back to its 2014 borders and Israel via their actions in the Middle East showing that the rules-based international order doesn't apply to you if you're an American friend.

                    (If you asked me to state the war I think is most plausible that kicks things off, China do something to Taiwan/Philippines/other East Asian country, they're a U.S. ally and Trump similar to Netanyahu in Gaza wants to use that as the excuse to wreck Chinese coastal industry, difference being the Chinese are way more capable than the Palestinians and there's a grand theory of surface naval ships are just giant targets.)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by rj1 View Post

                      This is all bullshit, yet at the same time there have been calls the U.S. should buy Greenland going back to the Grant administration. So "safety and security of the USA" and considering the Arctic has been increasing in importance the past 2 decades, while it is the excuse, I would not call it spurious.
                      You’re right of course!
                      Greenland is without doubt of vital importance to the integral strategic security of North America.
                      No, my use of the word “spurious” arose from the person uttering them!
                      Trump!
                      Who, on more than one occasion has made his feelings and thoughts on such things as: patriotism and national security, quite clear!
                      He might know the words, but not the commitment.

                      https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...uckers/615997/

                      Trump: Americans Who Died in War Are ‘Losers’ and ‘Suckers’
                      No, Trump is a deal-maker, a businessman!
                      What he sees in Greenland is a vast untapped source of natural resources!
                      As such; in his worldview, he sees it only natural that the USA have it under their ownership and control!

                      https://www.cnbc.com/2025/01/14/gree...-fixation.html

                      Trump is fixated on Greenland — a vast Arctic island with massive resource potential
                      Puts the Greenland Home Rule and Danish governments in a bit of a pickle!!!
                      As for the approx. fifty-seven thousand Greenlanders? Well, there aint’t that much that they could do, if the US decides to put action, behind their words.
                      Now, the Danes are; if possible, worse off!
                      Here you have the largest most powerful member of a military alliance, to which you both have belonged since its inauguration back in the ‘40’s.
                      Not only that, but they also your largest international trading partner!
                      This “good friend” and “ally” suddenly put’s a gun to your head, and demand a slice of your country!!!
                      That the Danes are taking it serious indeed can be seen by the actions of their politicians.
                      Such as all non-essential political activity has been put on hold, until this current crisis has been resolved.
                      The PM had a 45 minute phone conversation with Trump!
                      After which she held a meeting with all the leaders of the political parties, together with the leaders of the business community.
                      In the following press-conference, she reiterated Trump’s refusal to abstain from the “…use of military or economical force”!
                      So like most others, it’s just a matter of waiting until January 21st. or 22nd.
                      To find out if it was all blow/hard rhetoric, or the inauguration of a dystopian future.



                      When we blindly adopt a religion, a political system, a literary dogma, we become automatons. We cease to grow. - Anais Nin

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by rj1 View Post

                        I feel there should be a broader discussion regarding how "sacrosanct borders" is rapidly disappearing or has disappeared from the rules-based international order. It's a sea change from the last 80 years. We even have American allies in Turkey and Israel that are getting in on it.

                        This is all the last decade:

                        -Crimea bloodlessly taken by Russia, annexed
                        -the war between Ukraine and Russia has led to approximately 18% of all pre-2014 Ukrainian territory is now held by the Russians, a small portion of Russia is now held by Ukraine, situation still fluid but there's nothing that has occurred the past 2 years that makes it look like Ukraine will ever get most of that land back
                        -Libya is by fact 2 countries split into an eastern half and a western half
                        -disintegration of Syria, Turkey has taken control of areas in the north next to its border, Israel has expanded the Golan Heights, situation still fluid
                        -Israel has invaded Gaza and Lebanon and while they have no interest in administrating civilians there, it appears they're going to control portions of them (a de facto annexation)
                        -American recognition of Western Sahara is part of Morocco
                        -American recognition of Jerusalem is the capital of Israel
                        -Hong Kong has disappeared as an autonomous polity
                        -Azerbaijan have eliminated Artsakh/Nagorno-Karabakh and taken over full control of the area
                        -international recognition of Somaliland looks like it's about to happen, as part of that an Ethiopian port there which could create a regional war with Somalia and Egypt, meanwhile the Horn of Africa has been a constant state of war somewhere in the region for years
                        -the French are en masse getting evicted from Western Africa as the region is splitting into 2 blocs
                        -Iranian designs on the Middle East have taken a colossal turn worse, but it looks like they're getting replaced by the Israelis and Turks
                        -a coup attempt in our major non-NATO ally South Korea of all places

                        For things out there that look like they might change: hell, the Turks have taken bits of Syria, Turkish Cyprus is sitting out there now more than 50 years old; Republika Srpska merging with Serbia which Sprska would probably be for if they were allowed a vote, Transnistria is looking a little more shaky, the U.S. saber-rattling the Danes, Canadians, and Panamanians of all people and discussing an expeditionary force moving into Mexico, India are becoming a more aggressive country such as carrying out extraterritorial assassinations in Canada, the Chinese are going to do SOMETHING in the Pacific and have already been playing low-level skirmish games on their borders

                        Again, I just think we're all preparing for a broader war. What the war is and who it's between, I don't know, but the 1910s vibes are out there and the international system is really struggling to contain it. Part of this is due to the international system was designed 80 years ago for a post-World War II world that heavily does not exist anymore as Asia, Africa, and Latin America have all gotten independence and become significantly more important globally, and part of it is the very long term trend of the decline of European power geopolitically relative to the geopolitical power of the rest of the world and yet are still overrepresented. All the conflicts above were not created by Trump, and although I don't care for the man I think he's actually more fit for where the world is going than Biden is. I have a heavy interest in geopolitics and more has been going on the past few years than went on in the 30 years prior, which is odd for Biden considering his foreign policy was as much a rejection of Obama's as it was Trump's and was framed as "get back to normal". We've clearly not gotten back to normal as Biden defined it pre-2016 as Russia and Israel in tandem have completely destroyed Biden's version of the U.S. rules-based international order, Russia via demonstrating the West won't come in with troops to help Ukraine back to its 2014 borders and Israel via their actions in the Middle East showing that the rules-based international order doesn't apply to you if you're an American friend.

                        (If you asked me to state the war I think is most plausible that kicks things off, China do something to Taiwan/Philippines/other East Asian country, they're a U.S. ally and Trump similar to Netanyahu in Gaza wants to use that as the excuse to wreck Chinese coastal industry, difference being the Chinese are way more capable than the Palestinians and there's a grand theory of surface naval ships are just giant targets.)
                        The thing about your list of land grabbing exercises is that all the countries on the list are run by dictators (e.g Putin an XI) or autocrats/would be autocrats not democracies. And yes I include Israel in the list of autocratic countries because for the moment at least its government is effectively dysfunctional with a leader who is facing serious fraud charges and jail time if he loses office dependent on the support of hard right Zionist parties who do want to expand Israel's borders in order to stay in office. Basically, for now? They can get away with what they are doing because there's no domestic opposition.

                        Also for now? America is a democracy and so is Denmark so 'checks and balances'. So lets assume Trump seriously wants to kick the tires on Greenland and then makes an offer which the Greenlanders and of course Denmark then refuses. He then decides to occupy Greenland by force. Ignoring for a mo the little issue of invading a fellow NATO member and the long term ramifications of that little faux pas? Constitutionally Trump as President cannot declare war without congressional approval. Now he might get that (eventually) albeit even in the MAGA dominated republican congress of 2025 there will definitely be strong opposition. But the issue will almost certainly also end up in the Supreme Court where again despite it's current right leaning bias there is certain to be some serious concerns.

                        If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          President Trump was asked: while he was busy signing Presidential decrees, regarding his repeated stated intentions regarding Greenland.
                          He (Trump) reiterated his intention to acquire Greenland, and that “…Denmark would eventually come around…”!
                          Now, the latter part of that statement was eerily so reminiscent to Don Corleone’s:
                          “…make them an offer they can’t refuse…”that I kept looking for Luca Brassie standing in the background.!
                          When we blindly adopt a religion, a political system, a literary dogma, we become automatons. We cease to grow. - Anais Nin

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Last time the US declared war was WW2. Hasn't stopped us from invading foreign countries.

                            The President can commit troops without congressional approval but must notify Congress within 48 hours of "Boots on the ground/Bombs on target". He can keep them there for 60 days without Congressional approval. After 60 days Congress can have the President withdraw those troops ( by cutting funding), extend the deployment or declare war

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
                              Last time the US declared war was WW2. Hasn't stopped us from invading foreign countries.

                              The President can commit troops without congressional approval but must notify Congress within 48 hours of "Boots on the ground/Bombs on target". He can keep them there for 60 days without Congressional approval. After 60 days Congress can have the President withdraw those troops ( by cutting funding), extend the deployment or declare war
                              We can only hope even the current a Republican Congress would balk at invading a long term friend and ally. Especially given their apparent whole scale rejection of any more 'foreign' interventions like Iraq and Afghanistan etc. Besides that given his stated agenda for this term I'm counting on the fact that Trump will have so many distractions at home for the next four years that Greenland will keep getting shunted to the bottom of his in tray.
                              Last edited by Monash; 23 Jan 25,, 22:25.
                              If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X