By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - The Trump Thread

Once this move was made, there's little need to occupy Canada when it's completely surrounded. The clock starts ticking and it's the beginning of the end for Canada after this, and then only a matter of time. Based on how things have been going in Canada for a decade now, and still are, it wont take all that long either if this comes to pass.

Trumps been warning allies for long enough. Build up your economies and defense or else. The "or else", is eventually become American if you choose to ignore the warning. Then America will boost your economy and defense for you, since you'll be part of it.



PS1   - ! - We must build a console that can alert our enemies.

PS2  - @- We must build a console that offers online living room gaming.

PS3   - #- We must build a console that’s powerful, social, costs and does everything.

PS4   - $- We must build a console that’s affordable, charges for services, and pumps out exclusives.

PRO  -%-We must build a console that's VR ready, checkerboard upscales, and sells but a fraction of the money printer.

PS5   - ^ -We must build a console that’s a generational cross product, with RT lighting, and price hiking.

PRO  -&- We must build a console that Super Res upscales and continues the cost increases.

Around the Network
EricHiggin said:

Once this move was made, there's little need to occupy Canada when it's completely surrounded. The clock starts ticking and it's the beginning of the end for Canada after this, and then only a matter of time. Based on how things have been going in Canada for a decade now, and still are, it wont take all that long either if this comes to pass.

Trumps been warning allies for long enough. Build up your economies and defense or else. The "or else", is eventually become American if you choose to ignore the warning. Then America will boost your economy and defense for you, since you'll be part of it.

Doesn’t really sound like the words of “allies” does it?

Boost their defense against who? America would be the aggressor in that case. Trump should just stay the fuck out of these countries, he cannot even run his own, he can’t even defend americans against americans nor can he figure out how to boost the economy of the US.



Vinther1991 said:
EricHiggin said:

Once this move was made, there's little need to occupy Canada when it's completely surrounded. The clock starts ticking and it's the beginning of the end for Canada after this, and then only a matter of time. Based on how things have been going in Canada for a decade now, and still are, it wont take all that long either if this comes to pass.

Trumps been warning allies for long enough. Build up your economies and defense or else. The "or else", is eventually become American if you choose to ignore the warning. Then America will boost your economy and defense for you, since you'll be part of it.

Doesn’t really sound like the words of “allies” does it?

Boost their defense against who? America would be the aggressor in that case. Trump should just stay the fuck out of these countries, he cannot even run his own, he can’t even defend americans against americans nor can he figure out how to boost the economy of the US.

Do allies take each other for granted? Do they stiff each other when it comes to the bill? Do they dine and dash?

Seems to be doing a pretty good job based on the mess he was handed, and better than a lot of other so called allied Countries.



PS1   - ! - We must build a console that can alert our enemies.

PS2  - @- We must build a console that offers online living room gaming.

PS3   - #- We must build a console that’s powerful, social, costs and does everything.

PS4   - $- We must build a console that’s affordable, charges for services, and pumps out exclusives.

PRO  -%-We must build a console that's VR ready, checkerboard upscales, and sells but a fraction of the money printer.

PS5   - ^ -We must build a console that’s a generational cross product, with RT lighting, and price hiking.

PRO  -&- We must build a console that Super Res upscales and continues the cost increases.

Vinther1991 said:
EricHiggin said:

Once this move was made, there's little need to occupy Canada when it's completely surrounded. The clock starts ticking and it's the beginning of the end for Canada after this, and then only a matter of time. Based on how things have been going in Canada for a decade now, and still are, it wont take all that long either if this comes to pass.

Trumps been warning allies for long enough. Build up your economies and defense or else. The "or else", is eventually become American if you choose to ignore the warning. Then America will boost your economy and defense for you, since you'll be part of it.

Doesn’t really sound like the words of “allies” does it?

Boost their defense against who? America would be the aggressor in that case. Trump should just stay the fuck out of these countries, he cannot even run his own, he can’t even defend americans against americans nor can he figure out how to boost the economy of the US.

If that's the case you can hardly blame these allies from turning to China. If USA invades Greenland NATO is finished, the European countries might recycle it to a new form without US. There will also be a rift between Europe and US and they will be allies no longer. In which case Europe will probably decouple from US and backtrack decoupling from China.

There will be trade between US and EU, because both can't miss it. But that's it, no common agenda, no common goals, no defence cooperation, nothing. Which is partly a problem for US and EU. For US since their bases in Europe were quite valuable in the Middle East wars. They also could be useful for a big invasion of Iran.

For Europe because defending the Baltics without nukes in the Baltics or Nordic countries is impossible. Though there is not a lot to gain in the Baltic for Russia to begin with aside from pride. Finland could quite easily flatten Sint Petersburg as countermeasure. Since it's in striking range, which would be a massive breach of the Geneva convention and would be a defacto genocide. However it's something Russia might not be willing to risc for a symbolic victory.



Please excuse my (probally) poor grammar

Qwark said:
Vinther1991 said:

Doesn’t really sound like the words of “allies” does it?

Boost their defense against who? America would be the aggressor in that case. Trump should just stay the fuck out of these countries, he cannot even run his own, he can’t even defend americans against americans nor can he figure out how to boost the economy of the US.

If that's the case you can hardly blame these allies from turning to China. If USA invades Greenland NATO is finished, the European countries might recycle it to a new form without US. There will also be a rift between Europe and US and they will be allies no longer. In which case Europe will probably decouple from US and backtrack decoupling from China.

There will be trade between US and EU, because both can't miss it. But that's it, no common agenda, no common goals, no defence cooperation, nothing. Which is partly a problem for US and EU. For US since their bases in Europe were quite valuable in the Middle East wars. They also could be useful for a big invasion of Iran.

For Europe because defending the Baltics without nukes in the Baltics or Nordic countries is impossible. Though there is not a lot to gain in the Baltic for Russia to begin with aside from pride. Finland could quite easily flatten Sint Petersburg as countermeasure. Since it's in striking range, which would be a massive breach of the Geneva convention and would be a defacto genocide. However it's something Russia might not be willing to risc for a symbolic victory.

Who says the USA needs to invade? There's more civilized ways to conduct the matter.

Though even if Trump did make an offer too good to refuse, if Greenland wanted it, and Denmark refused, then who's really going to legitimately get upset if the USA were to invade after? Now if Greenland didn't want it, then that's another matter, but still, what's anyone really going to be able to do at this point?



PS1   - ! - We must build a console that can alert our enemies.

PS2  - @- We must build a console that offers online living room gaming.

PS3   - #- We must build a console that’s powerful, social, costs and does everything.

PS4   - $- We must build a console that’s affordable, charges for services, and pumps out exclusives.

PRO  -%-We must build a console that's VR ready, checkerboard upscales, and sells but a fraction of the money printer.

PS5   - ^ -We must build a console that’s a generational cross product, with RT lighting, and price hiking.

PRO  -&- We must build a console that Super Res upscales and continues the cost increases.

Around the Network
EricHiggin said:
Qwark said:

If that's the case you can hardly blame these allies from turning to China. If USA invades Greenland NATO is finished, the European countries might recycle it to a new form without US. There will also be a rift between Europe and US and they will be allies no longer. In which case Europe will probably decouple from US and backtrack decoupling from China.

There will be trade between US and EU, because both can't miss it. But that's it, no common agenda, no common goals, no defence cooperation, nothing. Which is partly a problem for US and EU. For US since their bases in Europe were quite valuable in the Middle East wars. They also could be useful for a big invasion of Iran.

For Europe because defending the Baltics without nukes in the Baltics or Nordic countries is impossible. Though there is not a lot to gain in the Baltic for Russia to begin with aside from pride. Finland could quite easily flatten Sint Petersburg as countermeasure. Since it's in striking range, which would be a massive breach of the Geneva convention and would be a defacto genocide. However it's something Russia might not be willing to risc for a symbolic victory.

Who says the USA needs to invade? There's more civilized ways to conduct the matter.

Though even if Trump did make an offer too good to refuse, if Greenland wanted it, and Denmark refused, then who's really going to legitimately get upset if the USA were to invade after? Now if Greenland didn't want it, then that's another matter, but still, what's anyone really going to be able to do at this point?

If Greenland wanted it (very big if and so far that answer is a hard no), and Denmark refused, then who's really going to legitimately get upset if the USA were to invade after?

The rest of EU would still be very upset and it would still be the end of transatlantic relations, in which US is escorted out of EU permanently. Like it or not there is also a defence pact in EU. Even if Greenland wanted it and yes the area is mostly self governed, (although it depends on Danish financial aid to survive), it's still Danish territory and invading Danish territory is the definitive end of NATO and EU and US calling eachother allies.



Please excuse my (probally) poor grammar

EricHiggin said:
Vinther1991 said:

Doesn’t really sound like the words of “allies” does it?

Boost their defense against who? America would be the aggressor in that case. Trump should just stay the fuck out of these countries, he cannot even run his own, he can’t even defend americans against americans nor can he figure out how to boost the economy of the US.

Do allies take each other for granted? Do they stiff each other when it comes to the bill? Do they dine and dash?

Seems to be doing a pretty good job based on the mess he was handed, and better than a lot of other so called allied Countries.



NATO doesn’t have a membership fee, the only bill to pay is to their own military, 2 % of the GDP, which almost all NATO countries already do, including Denmark.

If Trump is doing so good, why are prices of everything continuing to go up and why does he not want to release job numbers? Why do 7 put of 10 americans say they struggle to pay for food, healthcare and housing?



Qwark said:
EricHiggin said:

Who says the USA needs to invade? There's more civilized ways to conduct the matter.

Though even if Trump did make an offer too good to refuse, if Greenland wanted it, and Denmark refused, then who's really going to legitimately get upset if the USA were to invade after? Now if Greenland didn't want it, then that's another matter, but still, what's anyone really going to be able to do at this point?

If Greenland wanted it (very big if and so far that answer is a hard no), and Denmark refused, then who's really going to legitimately get upset if the USA were to invade after?

The rest of EU would still be very upset and it would still be the end of transatlantic relations, in which US is escorted out of EU permanently. Like it or not there is also a defence pact in EU. Even if Greenland wanted it and yes the area is mostly self governed, (although it depends on Danish financial aid to survive), it's still Danish territory and invading Danish territory is the definitive end of NATO and EU and US calling eachother allies.

I don't disagree, if the USA didn't conduct themselves decently at first, like by making a widely acceptable offer.

But what do you think is going to happen to the EU if it tells the USA to take a hike for taking Greenland? The USA will do exactly that, where it can, especially when it comes to EU defense, and then what? You think Putin and others are going to just sit back and let the EU remain as is, in peace?

I don't think the EU would be foolish enough to react that way at this time, and I think they'd be more than smart enough to realize Canada was next on the chopping block. Not that Canada is part of the EU, but it would be another lost ally, soon enough.



PS1   - ! - We must build a console that can alert our enemies.

PS2  - @- We must build a console that offers online living room gaming.

PS3   - #- We must build a console that’s powerful, social, costs and does everything.

PS4   - $- We must build a console that’s affordable, charges for services, and pumps out exclusives.

PRO  -%-We must build a console that's VR ready, checkerboard upscales, and sells but a fraction of the money printer.

PS5   - ^ -We must build a console that’s a generational cross product, with RT lighting, and price hiking.

PRO  -&- We must build a console that Super Res upscales and continues the cost increases.

Vinther1991 said:
EricHiggin said:

Do allies take each other for granted? Do they stiff each other when it comes to the bill? Do they dine and dash?

Seems to be doing a pretty good job based on the mess he was handed, and better than a lot of other so called allied Countries.

NATO doesn’t have a membership fee, the only bill to pay is to their own military, 2 % of the GDP, which almost all NATO countries already do, including Denmark.

If Trump is doing so good, why are prices of everything continuing to go up and why does he not want to release job numbers? Why do 7 put of 10 americans say they struggle to pay for food, healthcare and housing?

The NATO allies are pretty silent when called out about their lack of payment. Seems odd if Trumps just full of sh*t.

Come to Canada and tell the Canucks that America's economy is sh*t, and it's because of Trump. They'll laugh at that nonsense and then tell you about how their economy is sh*t, because of Trump. They'll be right about the economies but wrong about Trump.



PS1   - ! - We must build a console that can alert our enemies.

PS2  - @- We must build a console that offers online living room gaming.

PS3   - #- We must build a console that’s powerful, social, costs and does everything.

PS4   - $- We must build a console that’s affordable, charges for services, and pumps out exclusives.

PRO  -%-We must build a console that's VR ready, checkerboard upscales, and sells but a fraction of the money printer.

PS5   - ^ -We must build a console that’s a generational cross product, with RT lighting, and price hiking.

PRO  -&- We must build a console that Super Res upscales and continues the cost increases.

EricHiggin said:
Qwark said:

If Greenland wanted it (very big if and so far that answer is a hard no), and Denmark refused, then who's really going to legitimately get upset if the USA were to invade after?

The rest of EU would still be very upset and it would still be the end of transatlantic relations, in which US is escorted out of EU permanently. Like it or not there is also a defence pact in EU. Even if Greenland wanted it and yes the area is mostly self governed, (although it depends on Danish financial aid to survive), it's still Danish territory and invading Danish territory is the definitive end of NATO and EU and US calling eachother allies.

I don't disagree, if the USA didn't conduct themselves decently at first, like by making a widely acceptable offer.

But what do you think is going to happen to the EU if it tells the USA to take a hike for taking Greenland? The USA will do exactly that, where it can, especially when it comes to EU defense, and then what? You think Putin and others are going to just sit back and let the EU remain as is, in peace?

I don't think the EU would be foolish enough to react that way at this time, and I think they'd be more than smart enough to realize Canada was next on the chopping block. Not that Canada is part of the EU, but it would be another lost ally, soon enough.

Europe is not as strong as most would want and can't project power we'll far beyond their borders. But Europe is not as weak as US thinks. Sure European countries are weak compared to US. Besides after US takes Danish soil they are more of a liability than an asset to have in Europe. Maybe they want Netherlands next for ASML.

Military wise Europe still has around 2.000.000 active troops and after the US by far the most advanced military gear. Lately France exports more weapons than Russia, so Industrial weapon capacity is not as bad as some think. Europe lacks in strategic long range weapons, but Sint Petersburg and Moscow are not that far from Finland, so in a defensive war with Russia that's not as much of a downside than other conflicts. When waging war with China that is another story.

After Ukraine Russia couldn't invade Europe if it wanted too, or it could say goodbye to it's second largest city. They struggle a lot in Ukraine at this moment with little support, mostly the military support is outdated equipment. The best Russia could do is maybe take the Baltics, at the direct cost of Kalingrad and Sint Petersburg. Nukes are out of the question because French and British forces can throw them as well.

Putin is already conducting hybrid warfare against EU and US is fine with that. US would lose a lot of strategic power if they lose European bases. They also lose access to the artic via Iceland, Finland and Norway. Also US lacks the ice cutters to dominate that area and Finland is building them.

Canada is defenceless against US, if US wants it nobody could stop them.

Last edited by Qwark - 2 days ago

Please excuse my (probally) poor grammar