Trump to impose tariffs on European nations over Greenland
dw.com
dw.com
The Parties will contribute toward the further development of peaceful and friendly international relations by strengthening their free institutions, by bringing about a better understanding of the principles upon which these institutions are founded, and by promoting conditions of stability and well-being. They will seek to eliminate conflict in their international economic policies and will encourage economic collaboration between any or all of them.
US spelling bee kids will be great at spelling P-A-R-I-A-H though.
You can and you should, in order to make your case known, it's simple politics. Huffing and puffing while drowning in moral indignation isn't much different from the other side's approach. And don't jump the gun just because of some silly post somewhere on silly soc media.
I have never seen an official EU statement about US-EU-NATO relations that actually makes sense. What I see is kicking the ball back and forth moving in the same general direction.
Gave him a golden samurai helmet. Very rare, very important. I heard that it was like a New Yorker gifting a Ruth home run bat. Trade deal got signed, everyone was happy.
Then 'liberation' day happened. The Japanese got smacked with absurd tariffs. Big trade deal might as well have been chewing gum. They didn't get the samurai helmet back. They're still sore about it.
That peace prize he got on Friday? Couldn't even remember her name that afternoon.
There is not a single thing he says that any nation can trust. If the first rule of politics is that once you're bought, you have to stay bought, then Donny is playing Calvinball.
why is the congress allowing this to continue?
in any parliamentary democracy this cretin would have been gone by now
Right. The West's not seen anything like this since the Reich's march into the Sudetenland.
One can only hope Europe has enough gumption to confront the bully long enough for US citizens to awake and correct the situation.
The last thing we need now is gutless Appeasement from European states à la Chamberlain.
The real danger might still be within the US itself - what happens if he loses and doesn't want to accept it. Civil war?
Maybe missions in Venezuela, Iran etc. was accomplished so easily, that it blurred the judgment of what could be done. But those countries are different than a conglomerate of 450 M people / 27 countries. And now military and economic thinking/domains/threats were also mixed. "Weak EU leaders" can and are now forced to unite as one strong resistance.
His supporters still say “It’s not great but I’d vote for him again.” Well, the unfortunate news is he’s near end of life and they footgunned their own economic opportunity light cone. The global economy is going to route around the US accordingly, because it cannot be trusted to trade as an adult vs a bully. They will continue to have their vote and mental model regardless of rationality and logical reasoning. All you can do as a nation state counterparty is defend against military action and disconnect economically.
Same vibes as "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." —- LBJ
(derived from first principles)
The bigger question is why would anyone believe anything he says, especially if it was going to benefit regular people.
Trump's doing the literal opposite. This is why Trump wants to trashtalk Biden so much
i do feel like this is a pipeline
Disagree with some aspects of democrats? boom you are a republican
Disagree with some aspects of Republicans? boom you are a democrat
It's just picking the less worst candidate and media influence as such values a lot in the perception of "loss"
Obviously trump has been the more worst candidate in comparison and there were already tell tale signs of it
It's a shame that bernie sanders hasn't been an American president or the bias you see at democrats because of it regarding bernie or not pushing bernie at times.
That being said, what trump is doing so abhorent that Its literally killing the nation so I feel like some blame should be placed in its voters.
I genuinely just hope that you guys re-evaluate your two party system. You need a grass roots movement of independent to take on the system from within with the promise of changing the voting system to some better more independent or similar.
But looks like America's not gonna have mid term elections (Trump joked about it just as how he joked about greeland)
How does one fuck up a country that I used to admire a few years back into something that even I am comparing it to Iran & in many cases worse.
I do feel like Histories being written in front of our own eyes tho, Historians are also gonna analyze the average opinion on what's happening and we are gonna witness something in decades to come, "but why didn't they take action when all of this was happening, surely everyone could agree it was wrong" (this was my first thought reading about slavery/ pre-french revolution)
Now I understand how it feels like.
So right now's the perfect time to call bullshit on trump and impeach him or support the idea in the time being even you may've voted republican.
I do feel like America's gone to the point of no return but the only thing America can do right now is risk mitigation because chances are, war does feel more real now.
I am not american but first and foremost, whether or not if you are a democrat or republican, you all are american so why are some of you still defending a country which is breaching or trying to breach the sovereignity of another country and a guy who looks like hes all hell bent on breaking the ideas America was established on.
Cut the losses of the survivorship bias and do what's right. The world's watching.
The 'pissed off the left wing' thing is a bit of an issue. The Dems really need to return to representing the average american, not the extra woke. Democracy means rule of the people, not rule of the far left.
Why is it so hard to admit? Nobody really liked her except for the fact that she ran against Trump...
The policy isn't decided by one person or one party or the two parties for that matter. Trump is just an actor going thorough the script, as much as he can make it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_hybrid_warfare_agains...
Funny, we are are beginning to think the same, why do we need you? (The truth, of course is that everyone wins when trade is open/free.)
These are most of the countries that sent military forces to Greenland during the past two days for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Arctic_Endurance. The US was also invited.
Time to tell the bully to do quaint anatomical actions with mobile baked goods.
I would like our countries to integrate more, maybe with a common army. In the Nordics we already have begun to integrate our Air Forces to a common Nordic Air Force. Why not extend that to UK, France, Netherlands and Germany? These countries together could form a quite powerful army, air force etc. that could safeguard Europe against external threats.
I hope his antics do nothing except push us closer together.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Arctic_Endurance
The Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto found the operation superfluous and ridiculous, calling it a joke, and urged that it be carried out under NATO coordination.
It's just that I also want that split (north vs south, sort of). The EU of today is dysfunctional, largely because of this immense cultural split.
Now I want to delay this split though. At the moment we need EU unity.
But in principle, I think the EU, some voting forms, and a federal army is necessary if we desire any degree of self-determination.
Generally true with one small but very important correction - the US actions are clearly meant to bait the EU into breaking itself apart.
> It's just that I also want that split (north vs south, sort of).
You've been had. Trump is smarter than you, you've bitten his bait and you're hanging on his hook... and you were doing so well initially.
> The EU of today is dysfunctional, largely because of this immense cultural split.
There's no cultural split, there are only politicians on varying levels of corruption and the leading EU countries are in the center of it all. That's the problem that needs addressing.
That's the major goal of all the theatrics you see in political space - to have very similar peoples get at each other's throats. It was wildly "successful" in provoking the idiotic war between Russia and Ukraine.
It's telling that I don't see any politician in the EU addressing that threat. You'd think EU politicians would know better given the long and bloody history of idiotic intra-European wars.
A lot of the nationalist theatrics you see in political space lead to inflaming the small differences between similar peoples and getting them at each other's throats. That was clearly seen in the run-up to the tragic war between Russia and Ukraine.
It's telling that I don't see any politician in the EU addressing that threat. You'd think EU politicians would know better given the long history of bloody intra-European wars.
P.S. I reformulated my previously downvoted comment in order to make it more precise and less stingy. That will also help me understand the reason for the explanation-less downvoting - is it the truth in the content or the blemishes in form that caused it.
The only way to ensure one political party doesn't seize full and complete control over the entire thing and bend its will to exclusively their goals.
As an Indian, I don't like it
I hope that Europe realizes that the problem isn't america (although it kinda is as well), its the fault where if one party relies on another party and they go rogue. (I do feel as if America might have gone rogue)
China's Authoritarian too about tiannmen shows that it can go rogue as well.
My point is a new geopolitical order of net neutrality should be taken place all over the world.
I am saying this because I have read both Indian and American history and geopolitics and Something like this happened with India during its time to create a nuke (which now feels like being the biggest factor for security)
The point of the nukes aren't to do agression but rather to protect one in cases where its sovereignity is being undermined by oppression.
I can go on about this for hours but we have this saying from the people who remember the past grievances (its usually the older people more geopolitically well versed but some of those are being passed down to newer generations)
"to be an enemy of US can be dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal."
We are probably gonna shift to a new world order now that America's trust is eroded effectively impacting its finance sector the most imo. Companies are simply gonna pull all the money and bonds out of America
that being said, once again I wish to point out that the solution isn't to rely on any other country just as Europe or the world did on America. its simply to be in a multi polar world where relationships and treaties are between countries and the reliance on a single country is tried to be minimal
We will probably see EU cozy up more to India (recently got a trade deal which does hurt India more than not) but India's willing to sacrifice some parts of this because India also wants to not be reliant on America.
I have been both pro America and skeptical of it but never in a million years I expected something like this.
I just feel sympathy for American businesses because some people voted because some of these people and businesses are genuinely good and they are gonna have a hard time in the future. My sympathy to both American families (if they get impacted by what might come in the future because of things like this) & the European nations effectively being bullied by America.
I feel like a lot of Europeans might feel the same way right now where we aren't American businesses or families but what America as a country is doing itself & its becoming a matter not of nationalism but of national sovereignity.
American geopolitics have been super depressing recently that I had to avoid most talks about geopolitics after tariffs but there are so many points where one is almost forced to speak because of the insanity behind thngs and thats been so frequently basically being every news nowadays.
Is there seriously any more further escalation which can take place except from a full scale war? Perhaps raising more tarrifs I suppose from 10% and I am pretty sure if things dont go out that way we might see this too & this violates NATO's article 2 as well so I don't know what's left aside from a full scale escalation of war.
Can someone who is unhappy about this fill me in on why Denmark should have it?
You can read up on it yourself.
It’s kind of weird, like sure Wikipedia articles exist but it’s not as if people who have some position are basing their position entirely on the Wikipedia article and I can infer the structure of their position from the Wikipedia article. So I’m asking about what people think, and all I hear back is “reeeeeee”.
"Woman raped" - Tell me again why did she like mini skirts?
"American citizen kille by ICE' - Tell me again why did he look like he came from Nicaragua?
By themselves the may have been somewhat ok, but in this context, asking these questions give them a whole different meaning.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_and_the_European_Uni...
I think your framing may not model how territory ownership actually works…
Greenland is clearly not sovereign! What does that even mean? They are a colonial territory of Denmark.
“Greenland joined the then European Community in 1973 with Denmark, but after gaining autonomy in 1979 with the introduction of home rule within the Kingdom of Denmark, Greenland voted to leave in 1982 and left in 1985, to become an OCT.”
It is very easy to read about Greenland gaining autonomy also in more detail. I don’t know what is happening on your end that you have trouble with it?
Even more on it but Greenland right now is unsustainable and funded by Danish govt. who is willing to fund it because it sees potential in the Area
But its still Greenland's which is sovereigen/autonomous. Trump/America right now are the opposite of it.
Also all the points trump makes is bullshit and danish govt and everyone is always willing to help since they dont want russia either in the area but yeah I do feel as if this is just a smokescreen.
This is a very transactional point of view that you put on them. I would rather guess that Denmark funds Greenland because the citizens are part of the kingdom. Not because the "see potential".
Not everything is about money. Money is just means.
So if the sovereign people of Greenland chose denmark and think its right for their country (and they are given autonomy as well by Denmark)
I just don't see how America gets any right in Greeland and wanted to debuke the claim that Denmark can get the claim as well.
Y'know the thing is America effectively tried to bribe the average Greelander to get away from Denmark but they still don't think its worth it to get into the mess, that's how happy Greenland is with Denmark and prides themselves to be part of Dane culture and neither is Denmark interested in selling Greeland (quite the contrary)
In all of these cases, as such America got literally zero argument ever and that was what I was trying to say. It's got the same argument as that of "mine" or just bullying
Denmark has sold virgin islands to America once and also for greenland, they could've gotten complete support of Danish govt/Greenland govt to make bases/mineral deals even in diplomatic ways and they literally tried to say that
Up until now. I don't see why America would want to do such a blunder not unless they just want to have the flag show Greenland as part of America just for the sake of it which is such a crazy thing when you think about it.
Also Greenland's as close to Denmark (around 2000 miles) as it is to America, so saying its in America's backyard because the map makes one think so is a crazy statement too.
Are we 100% sure that these guys didn't just look at mercator map and decided all this stupidness in it with 0 reason? This seems so silly even a teenager can tell this so much.
When did they do that? Since I believe approaching individual citizens to pay them for opposing the country they belong to would be seen as an act of war.
To illustrate, if Greenland wanted to leave Denmark but Denmark didn’t want it to, could it? No, therefore it isn’t sovereign.
And, yes, currently, on legal basis (sovereignty), Greenland could decide to leave Denmark.
China (PRC) wants to be one with China (RoC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_the_Danish_West_Indi...
What next? Sicily?
They signed an agreement with the US in 1951, that the US military could freely use and move between defence areas, but was not to infringe upon Danish sovereignty.