Trump, Greenland, and the Dangerous Return to Imperial Thinking

[Staples]

6 hours ago, LordFall said:

Why do you think the EU is in a position to play hardball negotiator with the US?

Because they must. As the rest of the world must. The time to prevent America from turning into a Neo-Fascist state is now.

Try this again in a year, and the stakes won't be just Greenland.

To be clear, the GOP is trying to enslave as much of the world as they can before resistance is put up.

They are cashing out a century of political capital.

[ArcticGong]

5 hours ago, Jodistrict said:

Greenland has a population of approximately 57,000 people and they are sitting on a land with valuable resources and a strategic location.   In a capitalistic worldview where corporations have an absolute right to plunder resources, it is hard to see how they are going to escape.    Is Trump an anomaly or has he been hired by the OCGFC to implement policies that expand their power and control?  

he is playing the game of politics in a mask off mode . Previous leaders had more finess. If they wanted to change a foreign leader or some territory, they would at least give some plausible excuse.  Not anymore.

What purpose did the rule based order serve? That purpose is expiring, I guess. 

[Jannes]

What if Trump just wants to leave NATO anyway so by taking Greenland either a clash over Greenland happens which would give him an excuse to leave NATO or it doesnt and that sets the stage for him to continue robbing countries .. ?

[Basman]

10 minutes ago, ArcticGong said:

he is playing the game of politics in a mask off mode . Previous leaders had more finess. If they wanted to change a foreign leader or some territory, they would at least give some plausible excuse.  Not anymore.

What purpose did the rule based order serve? That purpose is expiring, I guess. 

Don't sane-wash insanity. This is about the size of Greenland and the spectacle.

[Breathe]

2 hours ago, Staples said:

GOP is trying to enslave as much of the world as they can before resistance is put up

Who do you think they're targeting?

[LordFall]

5 hours ago, Staples said:

Because they must. As the rest of the world must. The time to prevent America from turning into a Neo-Fascist state is now.

Try this again in a year, and the stakes won't be just Greenland.

To be clear, the GOP is trying to enslave as much of the world as they can before resistance is put up.

They are cashing out a century of political capital.

No I didn't ask anything about your feelings about it. I asked "Why do you think the EU is in a position to play hardball negotiator with the US?"

As in logistically and militarily how would that work? It's just not feasible and gonna happen. The world order will be rearrangered around AI superpowers and for the foreseeable future the EU is not a contender and will have to play rank and file to the united states. 

Tell me precisely how you think that would not happen otherwise you're just coping. This will work out well in the end I believe but we cannot be delusional about matters as serious as geopolitics. 

[Staples]

4 hours ago, Breathe said:

Who do you think they're targeting?

The weakest and most profitable first. See Venezuela.

[Staples]

2 hours ago, LordFall said:

No I didn't ask anything about your feelings about it. I asked "Why do you think the EU is in a position to play hardball negotiator with the US?"

As in logistically and militarily how would that work? It's just not feasible and gonna happen. The world order will be rearrangered around AI superpowers and for the foreseeable future the EU is not a contender and will have to play rank and file to the united states. 

Tell me precisely how you think that would not happen otherwise you're just coping. This will work out well in the end I believe but we cannot be delusional about matters as serious as geopolitics. 

The goal is to mitigate damage. I'm afraid you're the one coping if you think this can end well.

I don't know how it would work. I'm not privy to any military secrets. The specifics are not something a common person could ever evaluate.

Try this thought experiment; imagine the current geopolitical situation as represented by children on the playground. The biggest and strongest kid, little Sam, is the playground bully. He steals the other kids lunch money, he beats up the weaker children, and threatens anyone who might stand up to him. All the kids are whimpering with tails between their legs. Because don't upset little Sam, or he'll pick on you next. This situation will never be solved by allowing Sam to continue his bad behavior. The weaker kids have to stand up for each other, with each other all at once as a cohort, and tell Sam NO in the strongest possible terms. Until little Sam is met with authority equal to or greater than his own, he will keep this misbehavior up for as long as he can get away with it. And every time Sam gets away with stealing lunch money without resistance, he gets bolder and greedier.

[BlueOak]

8 hours ago, ArcticGong said:

he is playing the game of politics in a mask off mode . Previous leaders had more finess. If they wanted to change a foreign leader or some territory, they would at least give some plausible excuse.  Not anymore.

What purpose did the rule based order serve? That purpose is expiring, I guess. 

It stopped the planet turning into a wasteland.

More countries have nukes. More will get them if America backstab Europe.

[ArcticGong]

5 hours ago, BlueOak said:

It stopped the planet turning into a wasteland.

More countries have nukes. More will get them if America backstab Europe.

Rules-based for thee, not for me.

Perhaps an overly cynical view of global institutions and norms, but invoking democracy and freedom is mostly a joke, considering the circumstances under which that pretext is made. 
 

“It stopped the planet turning into a wasteland.“

Fair point, but what does this have to do with the rule-based order? You’re making a survival based argument here. 

[BlueOak]

1 hour ago, ArcticGong said:

“It stopped the planet turning into a wasteland.“

Fair point, but what does this have to do with the rule-based order? You’re making a survival based argument here. 

Yes. Which is paramount to anything else.

Order and structure stops the planet becoming a wasteland; without it people do whatever they can get away with. At present countries don't have nukes because America stops them. BRICS have just given up stopping people and are now arming them, Belarus and North Korea for example. If this trend continues, we will have nuclear proliferation all over the world, and a considerably higher likelihood of ending the planet in the current multipolar no-order dynamic.

Edited 6 hours ago by BlueOak

[LordFall]

@Staples Have you watched the conscious politics series? Reading your comments it just seems like you don't understand the world and your political understanding comes from basic social media.

Monopoly on violence is a good thing and the only reason why our countries exist and have come out from city states and tribal warfare. 

[ArcticGong]

@BlueOak more poles= no order is sloppy analysis. Just because hard power is being distributed around the world does that not mean no-order.  

The limitation of power based-order makes more sense then. Rules implies that the actors involved are subordinate to rules, which is not the case. 
 

why are these nations arming themselves? 

[Davino]

 

[BlueOak]

4 hours ago, ArcticGong said:

@BlueOak more poles= no order is sloppy analysis. Just because hard power is being distributed around the world does that not mean no-order.  

The limitation of power based-order makes more sense then. Rules implies that the actors involved are subordinate to rules, which is not the case. 
 

why are these nations arming themselves? 

Alright i'll rephrase. Its a poor way to order anything. People have thousands of years fighting over borders, disparity of strengths and influence, no central authority, a dwindling climate, and overreach on resources like water. Just saying multipolar, to me and I am sorry to the people fighting or arguing for this, sounds extremely naive. Its just chaos waiting to happen. - And is indeed chaos happening before our eyes.

Rules do not imply that countries are subordinate to rules alone. They are subordinate to the authority enforcing them.
People don't follow rules they don't like just because they exist; they follow them because if they do not, they are made to.

Countries are arming themselves as other countries are threatening their sovereignty, borders, treaties, established institutions, populations, trade and national interests. With no authority to keep countries in check, people do whatever they like. More specifically North Korea have been given Nukes so they are capable of threatening South Korea and Japan should war break out, ditto Belarus threatening Poland and Eastern Europe.

Edited 1 hour ago by BlueOak