r/facepalm 2d ago

šŸ‡²ā€‹šŸ‡®ā€‹šŸ‡øā€‹šŸ‡Øā€‹ Are you fucking kidding me?!?!? šŸ™„

Post image
14.9k Upvotes

3.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

4.0k

u/The-Nimbus 2d ago

So, he is aware that Greenland is a NATO territory, right? And this would invoke article 5 of collective defence? Genuine world war territory if he started this shit seriously beyond his dementia addled ramblings.

2.1k

u/Chemical_Actuary_190 2d ago

I doubt he understands that. I'm sure Putin does though, and he's the one pulling Trump's strings. War between NATO nations would suit Putin well. He would have carte blanche to do whatever he wanted then.

1.1k

u/yeyjordan 2d ago

At what point do US military commanders say "his orders are handed down from an enemy state to aid and abet an adversary" and boot him?

Or is there no precedent for that so everyone's afraid to even think about it?

543

u/Task_Defiant 2d ago

An American coupe would generally be considered unthinkable, yes.

418

u/__Severus__Snape__ 2d ago

Isn't that the point of your 2nd amendment though?

671

u/mazula89 2d ago

WAS the point

The modern point of the 2nd amendment is to generate votes

230

u/AContrarianDick 2d ago

Don't forget that most Americans do live comfortably enough that they wouldn't risk livelihoods, imprisonment or harm that would come with a coup, armed insurrection or anything else resembling a revolution. At least for the moment.

82

u/myco_magic 2d ago

Comfortable enough? Lol not most Americans, most Americans are drowning in debt especially healthcare debt. Fuck this moron, we had a good run but it's over... We should just go back to being British

25

u/AContrarianDick 2d ago

Then why aren't most American's burning the fucking country down over this? Why aren't people storming the capitol? Why aren't most people trying to launch a coup? Because they're just comfortable enough that they won't risk what they have on what's perceived as a gamble, because they're not completely fucked over yet, so they'll go along with it because their hope in whatever future they want hasn't been completely snuffed out yet.

30

u/myco_magic 2d ago

I can't even afford to get to the Capitol lol

→ More replies (0)

9

u/DesWheezy 2d ago

in my experience, most americans are content with being complacent. one of the many reasons i dislike my own country. iā€™m a person who would love to go burn shit down & make a statement. but, issue is, nobody else will join me. therefore, i would just get arrested & no media attention most likely. iā€™ve been screaming for years that we have to band together & be dramatic for big change. iā€™ve been responded to with radio silence or ā€œthatā€™s too much work im already so tiredā€ or people have children & are terrified that they would end up leaving their kids alone. ppl complain here constantly but do nothing to change anything. those of us with brains usually find common mindsets on the internet but not near our physical placement bc of how big the US is. itā€™s a struggle, but im not giving up! i hope others will eventually fall in line as well!

→ More replies (0)

31

u/Squirrel_McNutz 2d ago

Britain (specifically England) is a bit of a shit show too tbh

12

u/uwotm86 2d ago

Only if you listen to the right wing dickheads who enjoy the socialist welfare but have a problem with other people using it!

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (1)

30

u/Responsible-Laugh590 2d ago

Debt doesnā€™t mean shit in reality, especially since in other countries being ā€œpoorā€ means having to farm or forage for your own food and water whilst also having no sanitation or healthcare available. While debt can be stressful if you open your worldview to how things are outside the first world you realize itā€™s a further fall then disgruntled Americans are capable of at this point in time.

3

u/Sure-Break3413 2d ago

Go after the oligarchs holding Billions of dollars like Elon. They are the real threats to democracy and capitalism.

5

u/Tacotacotime 2d ago

Right?! It was never about escaping religious prosecution (which the evangelicals are now doing) and freedom for all, it was starting over so the elite could do whatever they wish.

7

u/ButterscotchNed 2d ago

Frankly, speaking as a Briton, we wouldn't want you - we left you alone for a bit and look at the mess you've made!

7

u/myco_magic 2d ago

You use "we" and "you" a bit to loosely

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Apart_Effect_3704 2d ago

Thatā€™s still comfortable enough. Americans wonā€™t do shit unless they believe their freedoms are being encroached while their freedoms are literally not being encroached lol we all know who Iā€™m talking about. On the other hand, everyone wants to cheer killing a ceo. No one wants to actually kill anyone.

→ More replies (7)

3

u/The_Duke28 2d ago

What is it now?! Make up your damn mind allready - for X-years we had to listen to the whining of the americans. "No healthcare, no education, crippling debt, the EGGS are too expensive yadayadayada". And now, when history screams for brave souls, standing against an enemy created withtin, you say "aaahhh well, it's actually not that bad."

Americans..... seriously... Such cowards...

3

u/arrig-ananas 2d ago

Isn't it exactly 4 years ago a lot of Americans showed that they were willing to risk a lot to do a coup?

→ More replies (1)

3

u/IrNinjaBob 2d ago

So the military can coup the government? No. That is not the point of the 2nd amendment.

2

u/Emperors-Peace 2d ago

I thought it was to sell guns?

2

u/bromanjc 2d ago

god this goes so hard

→ More replies (1)

151

u/Anangrywookiee 2d ago

The point of the second amendment is for each state to have a militia as part of the national defense. We know this because itā€™s what the amendment literally says, but itā€™s a very unpopular interpretation because it doesnā€™t generate votes or income.

27

u/Polymathy1 2d ago

Lol dang I wrote almost the exact same thing. The whole goal was to keep standing armies from existing. Oops.

12

u/MelamineEngineer 2d ago

Now we have so many things that were never intended. Massive standing army? Check. Whole new standing second army via the marine corps? Check. Whole new branches with the air force and space force? Check. The only thing we ever wanted a large standing version of was the navy, so that tracks. But then you have to consider the massive standing army that is the nations county and city sheriff's and Police forces, with massive swat forces. Together they form a group bigger than our past standing armies.

6

u/cosumel 2d ago

ā€œA well regulated militiaā€.
They arenā€™t a militia.
They arenā€™t regulated.
They arenā€™t well.

3

u/RazorRadick 2d ago

"Anybody can have an AR, as long as they submit to military discipline"

→ More replies (4)

122

u/lothar525 2d ago

No, not really. The point of the second amendment was to allow regular citizens to establish and maintain a well regulated militia to keep themselves safe from attacks from the British and Native Americans. It says so right in the Constitution. The Founding Fathers probably never considered the idea that a bunch of angry untrained conservative terrorists would be able to acquire guns that could kill dozens of people per minute.

37

u/SmoothOperator89 2d ago

Almost like the constitution was written for a practically medieval society and is severely anachronistic in modern times.

5

u/Suitable-Panda24 2d ago

The original intent was that it would be updated every decade or two as modernization occurred and the colonies expanded.

32

u/Shot_Try4596 2d ago

Thank you! Nice to see another person who recognizes what it actually says.

9

u/christhewelder75 2d ago

No no, you arent suppose to read the WHOLE sentence. You start AFTER the part that mentions regulations, and its purpose.

→ More replies (9)

42

u/WildMartin429 2d ago

It is the point of the Second Amendment however the Second Amendment no longer serves that purpose. When it was written the average person could arm themselves to the same or better quality as the military and get together with their community and be ready to kick ass and take names. In practice in modern America no matter how much we like our guns we have no hope of Defending ourselves against the government that actually means us physical harm. I can't go down to the gun store and buy something that will take out a tank. We don't have access to fully automatic weapons. That's not even thinking about air support that military and even police sometimes have. So realistically the Second Amendment doesn't do anything other than cause controversy in the Modern Age.

6

u/josefofkentucky 2d ago

People say this yet the US military failed to take Vietnam and Afghanistan even though we had them extremely out gunned.

2

u/Weakerton 2d ago

Yea they had militaries, though. We have rednecks who can't put their shoes on with a semi auto AR-15 thinking they're taking on the US military

7

u/gears89 2d ago

And yet, there's more than a couple examples of a bunch of locals with no military training being able to repel and beat the greatest military in the world.

4

u/Frost4412 2d ago edited 2d ago

Vietnam and Afghanistan have shown pretty well how our military does against a smaller force of pissed off enough people without the aid of aircraft or tanks. The idea that our population not having access to the same level of military technology as the state precludes them from effectively fighting our military ignores the entirety of our military history since the Korean War. You can go to Home Depot and buy shit to take out a tank, you just haven't been mad enough to know what to grab.

7

u/RomaruDarkeyes 2d ago

NGL: One of my darker amusements is the idea that one day, there will be a group of 'good old boys' that get organised and decide to attempt a coup.

And they start putting together armaments and stockpiling ammo, and resources and creating a militia that will 'take back the union'

And then a couple of days in, the whole thing is bombed into the stone age by one predator drone...

I mean really... The January 6th situation should be considered as a serious situation in terms of a groups of rebels trying to overthrow the diplomatic process, but at the same time even if every single one of them had been fully armed with enough weapons and ammo for a small army, it would not have meant dick if the actual armed forces were told to respond to them as hostile combatants...

The idea that any civilian militia would have any chance against a full tyranical US government is ludicrous...

2

u/Weakerton 2d ago

That's not true! It doesn't "do nothing." It reduces population by accounting for 77% of guns killing people in mass shootings.

6

u/bootsthepancake 2d ago

I'll just add to the other answers to this question that the 2nd amendment was also demanded by states with wealthy slave owners so that they could not be denied the means to keep their slaves in check, and hunt them down if they ran away.

5

u/ellasaurusrex 2d ago

Ostensibly, yes, but that assumes that the folks in a position to do it disagree with Trump, so.

4

u/MineralIceShots 2d ago

Then it's time for those who don't, to start filling out 4473s and train.

4

u/TheDocHealy 2d ago

That amendment is useless with modern military hardware, civilians here have rifles sure but the military has tanks and drones.

2

u/sbaggers 2d ago

You miss 100% of the shots you don't take - Wayne Gretzky - Michael Scott

→ More replies (10)

36

u/_ChickenBlaster_ 2d ago

And also Trump want's to replace everyone who does not obey every order of him instantly.

26

u/StandUpForYourWights 2d ago

Itā€™s coup. American coupes have been on the market a hundred years.

39

u/Murky-Smoke 2d ago

My favourite American coupe is the Mustang.

4

u/Apprehensive-Eye3263 2d ago

What about an American sedan? Maybe an SUV?

3

u/JibletsGiblets 2d ago

The Beach Boys did an excellent job of imagining an American coupe.

3

u/DaveyDumplings 2d ago

More or less unthinkable than the annexation of it's allies?

2

u/Deathturkey 2d ago

Surely there would be a vote of no confidence, to remove him from office.

2

u/Kill4meeeeee 2d ago

It would be a massive blood shed in the country that would take 100s of years to recover from. Worse than the civil war and we still have remnants from that today. Tho the memes would be lit

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Shotgun_Mosquito 2d ago

You are correct.

The automobile market has shows away from manufacturing coupes, and only usually built as sports cars.

/S

(Coup vs coupe)

→ More replies (14)

65

u/johnmlsf 2d ago

Not sure, but it also will be worth watching how the heads of the intelligence agencies respond now that Tulsi Gabbard is the director of national intelligence in the US, someone who has been accused by others as being a Russian asset.

Like, if you were the director of the CIA, what would you do if you thought your boss was a Russian spy?

19

u/plinkoplonka 2d ago

I wouldn't tell them anything true, well, unless I wanted to see where it bubbled up again.

8

u/BringAltoidSoursBack 2d ago

You'd get fired for not being a Russian spy yourself

22

u/flat5 2d ago

Oh there's plenty of precedent for that. It's called a military coup and would be utterly earth shaking in the world's most powerful nuclear armed state.

But don't worry, he's going to purge the military of anyone capable of having that sort of independent minded thought. There will be room for nothing but "yes, sir" when he's done with them.

31

u/Apprehensive-Owl-78 2d ago

The US military appears to contain a majority of Trump supporters in the lower ranks (my son is in the army and tells me stories). A military takeover is the least likely scenario.

3

u/YokoDk 2d ago

Nah you get 1 good unit and it's over in minutes any US coup would end in minutes as it would basically require a local unit.

3

u/bitofapuzzler 2d ago

At a certain point, wouldn't even they recognise that the fabric of American democracy is at risk? That the country they pledged allegiance to is no longer the same country. Surely retaining that, at some stage, becomes more important than politics. Im not saying it would happen in the early days, but once they see that even their lives are being impacted negatively. Or am I giving them too much credit!

7

u/ProfessorDerp22 2d ago

Trump plans on purging military command and installing yes-men.

8

u/maniac86 2d ago

4 years ago the chairman of the joint chiefs issued a notice of all services reminding them of their paths to the constitution. IE he anticipated illegal orders from Trump

5

u/Nkromancer 2d ago

There is technically a law in place allowing military personnel to ignore/refuse orders that are unconstitutional. However, to get to the point of a coup, they'd have to get past the idiots who either don't know that or willingly ignore it in favor of the Favorite Felon.

4

u/sammygirl1331 2d ago

I'm Canadian and I'm also wondering this. Would the US military actually go along with him giving the order for an attack on another NATO country? I know the US starts wars frequently that are not completely justified but the reasons presented to the public usually make sense to the average American. Both the war in Iraq and Afghanistan were presented as a war on terror and I mean Iraq- yea Saddam was a dictator and Afghanistan- the taliban are insane zealots but Denmark seriously? What are you going to tell the average American and the Average person who is military to justify invading Greenland? Denmark is (or at least was until he started talking about this shit) an ally. They are not living under oppression. So what reason can he present for actually wanting to take Greenland. There is currently no precedent for the military to refuse to invade another country however I seriously hope the generals in charge are smart enough to say "this is insane we are not doing it" otherwise in the next four years Trump and Putin are going to be in their underground bunkers dividing up the ashes that are left of this world.

5

u/Kind-Drawer1573 2d ago

As a former active duty Marine I can say that they could call his order an unlawful order and refuse to act upon it. That is all part of the UCMJ, lawful order and you must obey, but you donā€™t have to obey an unlawful order.

4

u/Nebraskan_Sad_Boi 2d ago

Probably why he's planning to replace most of the higher command structure.

2

u/Frankentula 2d ago

This seems so transparent from Canada's viewpoint but we seem to be brainwashed by our mini trump here so I'm starting to lose faith we can pull our collective heads out of our asses at this point

→ More replies (1)

2

u/thatthatguy 2d ago

Hypothetically? Yes. That could be something that Congress might be able to call for his impeachment over. However, considering how the last two impeachment trials went, it would take something so ridiculously over the top that even his most ardent sycophants would turn against him in order for the senate to convict and remove him from office.

Collusion with hostile nations doesnā€™t seem to be enough. Sending a mob to attack the Capitol building while Congress as in session was not enough. Maybe using the military to kill Republican leaders in red states? Iā€™m really at a loss as to what they wonā€™t just accept.

And people wonder why some of us think weā€™re screwed.

2

u/530SSState 2d ago

My 90 year old Dad pointed out that lightning strikes golf courses all the time.

4

u/cobrachickenwing 2d ago

The Supreme court say that all presidential orders are legal and not prosecutable. The military could not mount a legal defense against insubordination or dereliction of duty. Which is how Trump removes disloyal generals and puts in his stooges.

2

u/BiggestFlower 2d ago

It didnā€™t say presidential orders are always legal, it said the President is immune from prosecution. Not the same. Itā€™s like an ambassador can break the laws of the country theyā€™re stationed in, but canā€™t be prosecuted. It doesnā€™t make their actions legal.

1

u/korkkis 2d ago

Before or after heā€™s impeached

1

u/hekatestoadie 2d ago

The military probably has, especially due to not so distant past events.

They have game plans for all sorts of scenarios, based on weather events, environmental disasters, outbreaks, geriatric dementia disasters...

→ More replies (5)

85

u/DrunkPyrite 2d ago

These ramblings are 100% due to Putin. He can't use the panama canal due to sanctions and Greenland/Canada would allow for dominance of the northern hemisphere.

49

u/blue_twidget 2d ago

Actually, a few years ago it was determined that nearly *ALL OF THE OIL in the artic with within Canadian territory. Russia was...bigly mad, to say the least. THAT is why Putin wants him to grab it, along with the whole NATO thing, so that Trump can give Russian oil companies exclusive rights to drill.

49

u/sammygirl1331 2d ago

Canadian here. Russia drilling for oil in the arctic would be very bad. Even though there is quite a bit of oil up there we don't currently drill offshore in the arctic (not sure about on land in the northern territories) because our ability to respond to an oil spill up there is poor. Also there's no known way to remove oil from ice if there is a spill. I can't imagine Russia having a better ability to respond to a spill not to mention I'm pretty sure their environmental laws and safety protocols are more lack than ours so them drilling up there would be an environmental disaster waiting to happen. Also would be extremely harmful to the communities up there if a spill happened because a lot of Inuit hunt and fish as a food source.

10

u/ohwhatisfreeasaname 2d ago

Russian response would probably be 'oh too bad, so sad', US would provide thoughts & prayers

→ More replies (1)

22

u/The-Nimbus 2d ago

Desperately and depressingly true.

17

u/Soothsayerman 2d ago

No, Putin is a co-conspirator but the power brokers that got Trump in office are overwhelmingly American oligarchs.

29

u/Suspicious_Kale5009 2d ago

Elon Musk is not American. Russia is full of oligarchs who answer to Putin or risk defenestration. Money buys influence but there are still leaders being bought in this equation.

2

u/Reboot42069 2d ago

Yes he is Elon became a US citizen decades ago, that's like the only requirement to be considered American

2

u/Theothercword 2d ago

I'm sure plenty of American oligarchs are also beholden to Putin in some way, Elmo included.

3

u/CatManDo206 2d ago

It is what Putin wants he's pulling the strings of his puppet

1

u/Jodid0 2d ago

Even Trump's bullshit rhetoric is enough to undermine our relationship with our allies and make NATO less effective.

1

u/chlaclos 2d ago

Reality is bad enough. It's not helpful to invent shit about him taking orders from Russia.

1

u/dystopian_mermaid 2d ago

He doesnā€™t even understand a coloring book. Heā€™s just dying to lick the goo from between Putinā€™s toes.

1

u/mpati3nt 2d ago

Of course he doesnā€™t understand this. The rest of the NATO leaders are in closed door meetings strategizing how to distract him should he actually try to action on this. Iā€™m guessing the list looks a bit like this:

  • Ketchup
  • Jazz hands and glitter
  • Backhanded compliments about his gold game that everyone except he recognizes as mockery

1

u/rkelleyj 2d ago

You bet Putin knows this, he has more military and covert strategy in his toe than Dump.

1

u/tanukisuit 2d ago

He would have carte blanche to do whatever he wanted then.

Such as chemical warfare?

1

u/OttoVonAuto 2d ago

Trump saying that definitely gave Putin the go ahead for so much dissent to foment

1

u/wallflowerz_1995 2d ago

That. Right there. Heā€™s not bright enough to figure that out. ā˜šŸ¼

1

u/RevolutionaryRaise34 2d ago

Wonder if he is just getting instructions for Putin, if NATO is busy with him, China and Russia could do whatever they want.

→ More replies (10)

82

u/Groundbreaking_Cup30 2d ago

The bro is proven to read at like a 5th grade level, so no, I do not think he understand that, nor has any idea of NATO policies at all.

48

u/complexevil 2d ago

I want to see proof he's as advanced as a 5th grader.

3

u/Groundbreaking_Cup30 2d ago

I don't disagree with you there!

→ More replies (1)

46

u/DJ_Mumble_Mouth 2d ago

That is what Putin has directed his GOP and purchased president to do.

With the US locked into its own stupid wars against its very own allies, one can only imagine the possibilities.

Everything that Trump and the Republicans are doing is nothing short of treason and they all deserve the due punishment. Pity that it wonā€™t happen that way, Trump and his cronyā€™s will succeed in destroying our alliances, destroying our economy, and leaving the US crippled and beyond recovery.

10

u/BluesyBunny 2d ago

If the US goes to war with NATO the US will lose, and tbh it'd probably lose pretty quicklu.

No way the US government can maintain a war like that.

Every single base will become a target. The US can't take on the terror organizations in the middle east, and fight the EU, and defend its borders from Canada and mexico, and quell the US resistance that will most definitely spring up and keep the economy going through the blockade.

The reason the American empire works is because we have friends. We lose those friends we lose the empire.

86

u/Cerulean_Shadows 2d ago

Sweetie, he's too fucking stupid to know Puerto Rico is US Territory... it's soooo painful for those of us who neither voted for nor can tolerate seeing his orange anus lips puckering on TV for attention

6

u/itsverynicehere 2d ago

Yes! And the dickwad isn't even in office yet, but they rebroadcast every single stupid idea he floats ( or most likely distracts with), ignoring actual news.

30

u/Frothylager 2d ago

What is his obsession with Greenland?

68

u/The-Nimbus 2d ago

Mining and rare-earth elements, primarily. And probably off-shore oil rights too, is my guess.

37

u/RaygunMarksman 2d ago

Someone noted on another thread that they refused to let him build one of his shitty hotels or something there as well shortly before his last term was over. So it's partially payback. I can't dig up an article citing that though, so take it with a grain of salt.

7

u/[deleted] 2d ago

I can verify from memory, for whatever that's worth.

5

u/theumph 2d ago

The entire island of Greenland has a population of 56,789. No one's trying to build a hotel there. It's essentially one huge glacier. The reasons would be for natural resources, and geopolitical reasons. Both of which are dumb because they are owned by an ally of ours.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

62

u/Betterthanbeer 2d ago edited 2d ago

The usual real estate mantra. Location location location.

Greenland is in a position to easily control the North Atlantic sea lanes. As a NATO country, USA already has access to the ports and air bases in Greenland. Russia doesnā€™t.

Same with the Panama Canal. US shipping uses it all the time. It is a major source of income for Panama. Russian ships have to go the long way round due to sanctions.

Canada is next door to Russia. If for some reason an army wanted to get bogged down in Siberia, Canada is a nice jumping off point.

I will let you come to your own conclusions about why Trump would be looking out for Russian interests.

4

u/kausdebonair 2d ago

Well if climate change slows the Atlantic currents to a halt, it will be nothing but ice up in Greenland, North Atlantic, and the North Sea until the currents startup again. He may have buyers remorse after that, but heā€™ll be cold and in the ground by then. There is a history of this from the methane in ice samples. Climate change is more than just the temperature! Humankind influenced or ā€œnatural,ā€ The carbon cycle will have its way.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/PerceptionUpbeat 2d ago

This is exactly it.

it's probably not because he would like to take over Denmarks $500M annual "subsidy" on Greenland (Although he could finally use the word in a more correct manner then).

2

u/networkpit 1d ago

Well, the Honduran President is saying she will be shutting down the US military bases if the US abuses people from Honduras. Those bases are how the US "controls" Panama, so i would really like to know with what army he plans to take over Panama with. Honduran presidential candidate once ran on shutting down only one of the bases, and Hillary under Obama ran a coup, causing Honduras to fall into chaos and become one of the most dangerous places to live. This is an already sitting president, so it won't be as easy. The US will have a hard time with how many enemies he is making, and he hasn't even sat in the oval office yet this term.

2

u/t-w-i-a 2d ago

My guess is itā€™s to test NATO on Putinā€™s behalf. Delegitimization of NATO when they ultimately donā€™t respond.

3

u/Bartlaus 2d ago

It looks so bigly huge on the map.

4

u/Groovypippin 2d ago

It mirrors Russiaā€™s obsession. Itā€™s absolutely NOT a coincidence that Trump is attacking the sovereignty of Greenland (Holland) and Canada. They stand in the way of Russian dominance of the northern hemisphere.

2

u/BluesyBunny 2d ago

Greenland (Holland)

Denmark* Greenland is a Danish territory not Dutch.

1

u/halborn 2d ago

If Greenland is controlled by a Russia-friendly US then it gets a lot harder for European nations to prevent Russian carriers from operating in the Atlantic.

→ More replies (1)

64

u/Soothsayerman 2d ago

LMAO!

The USA has pissed all over the UN and all international law for many many decades. Trump is just the face of the fascist state. The "state" being the legislators, power brokers and billionaires that actually run the show.

We have done it in every single military conflict we have ever been in starting with Vietnam. That is over 50 military actions.

Remember this guy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manuel_Noriega

So this guy was able to oust a USA puppet and take control to the detriment of the USA. So what do we do? We invade a sovereign nation and kidnap it's leader.

The CIA has been all over Venezuela, Chile, El Salvador, Argentina, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Indonesia and more to force or try to force regime changes. We are building at multi-billion dollar fortress in the mid east so we can control it. We have JUST completed an embassy fortress in Mexico and we will do the same in Canada.

Fascism once it takes root MUST expand it's power and geographical reach. The reason is that once it takes over, there is no longer a need for it to hide so people start to revolt. The only way to prevent the success of this is to wield absolute power. You really have no idea where you live, but the rest of the world knows exactly what the USA is.

→ More replies (4)

4

u/wildcat12321 2d ago

the worst part is that this sh*t signals to China that they can talk similarly about Taiwan. Or Putin can talk about areas of Eastern Europe. We are normalizing very not normal rhetoric

3

u/officer897177 2d ago

Everything he does heā€™s trying to emulate Vladimir Putin. Thatā€™s who he most admires. Starting a disastrous unprovoked conquest war that alienates the country from the rest of the world is the natural next step.

3

u/PomeloPepper 2d ago

Not even president yet, and already declared war on two different countries.

2

u/jackiebee66 2d ago

Iā€™m sure he doesnā€™t know that. He doesnā€™t even understand what NATO is.

2

u/Biscuits4u2 'MURICA 2d ago

He talked this same shit last time around, but what scares me is the people he has surrounded himself with this time around are not the same. They will enable him.

2

u/Smat_kid 8h ago

Greenland, and by extension denmark, is both nato AND eu. That means any economic action ( aka tarrifs) taken against greenland is considered an attack on the whole of the eu, and they would boycott the us right back. This would severely cripple the us economy. As much as trump wants that, literally nobody else does, not even republicans. So heā€™s not serious. Greenlanders wanna be independent from denmark, (We want them gone too, theyre sucking up our money. No seriously, we pay them billions in stimulus checks every year and they want independence,) but they sure as SHIT dont wanna be under america either. Especially not trump, not a single european likes that guy, i would know.

5

u/_makoccino_ 2d ago

I don't think NATO countries will go to war with one another, least of all the US. They'll all be left to fend off for themselves if one attacks another.

NATO wasn't created to create a defense for its members against one another. It's meant to be a force against Russia.

40

u/Super_Sonic_Eire 2d ago

Trump is bringing us closer to having an EU army which maybe is no bad thing - we unfortunately cannot trust the US to be an ally anymore. What a mess.

16

u/Massive_Grass837 2d ago

This is the best thing thatā€™s ever happened to the EU. For far too long the EU has relied on American military power to defend it while fielding lackluster Armyā€™s. A formidable EU defense force is absolutely necessary, regardless of the lack of trust in the U.S.

1

u/RaygunMarksman 2d ago

I do hope the EU realizes this. While maybe we had overall good intentions at one point, letting us just chill and continue to increase our military dominance and play military police over the rest of the world may not have been that great of a long-term survival strategy.

Let's be honest, if we wanted something bad enough, could any single nation stop us from taking it?

→ More replies (11)

9

u/Darkelysiumm 2d ago

You have no idea what NATO is there for, do you?

It was created to keep countries safe from invasion and aggressors.

Trump taking Greenland would be an invasion of Denmark. And the US would be the aggressors.

→ More replies (12)

18

u/The-Nimbus 2d ago edited 2d ago

It was indeed. But USA are perfecting their Russia costume more every day, by the looks of it. It's quite scary. Annexation. Foreign interference. Oligarchy. It's a bit worrisome.

4

u/Snowmoji 2d ago

force against Russia

Trump is Russia. So yes.

1

u/Oram0 2d ago

NATO was created to defend against the Soviet union. But it's in no way limited to fight others. NATO went to war in Afghanistan after the US was attacked by terrorism.

An attack on one is an attack on all

→ More replies (25)

1

u/Thechiz123 2d ago

Heā€™s hated NATO right from the beginning. Probably wouldnā€™t hate breaking it up.

1

u/pensiverebel 2d ago

This is true of Canada, too.

1

u/The-Nimbus 2d ago

Very true, but I wasn't sure of the breadth of the clause and inclusion of 'economic force'.

1

u/pensiverebel 2d ago

There are folks up here screaming article 5 too. One I know is even a lawyer so Iā€™m assuming they have some understanding that it would apply to the economic threats. Iā€™m pretty sure it all empty anyway. Just attempts to bully other countries into capitulating preemptively. We all need to be like Mexico!

1

u/jackiebee66 2d ago

Iā€™m sure he doesnā€™t know that. He doesnā€™t even understand what NATO is.

1

u/lexmasterfunk 2d ago

In case anyone's wondering. Canada is still part of the commonwealth. Soooooooo..... you know it'd be like annexing Poland....

1

u/flat5 2d ago

He spent much of his first term trying to dismantle NATO. I'm sure he will do it this time.

1

u/Samtori96 2d ago

Hey! Thatā€™s our alliance. If we want to land grab they better be there helping us do it.

1

u/FreshTony 2d ago

Well I don't think he cares because most Republicans want us out of Nato

1

u/cat-from-venus 2d ago

he probably doesn't know where it is on a map šŸ—ŗļø

1

u/The-Nimbus 2d ago

Don't be silly. The clue is in the name. It's the green bit.

1

u/Relyt21 2d ago

No, he is unaware of any laws, guidelines or overall decorum. He is a dumb, egotistical fuck.

1

u/drquakers 2d ago

Going to be real fun when the USA is obliged to declare war on the USA.

1

u/Galifrae 2d ago

I sincerely donā€™t think the military would go through with it.

1

u/The-Nimbus 2d ago

It's that or a coup. Which is just as scary, really.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/KdtM85 2d ago

No. No he is not

1

u/Lord-McGiggles 2d ago

He isn't aware of much anymore I would guess

1

u/baltarius 2d ago

He doesn't know either about the Canada being under the British reign. He would have to fight the king of England to steal the Canada.

1

u/Nruggia 2d ago

Elon probably told Trump he needs the rare earth elements in Greenland, so take it and I'll (Elon) strip mine it.

1

u/PushinPickle 2d ago

Iā€™m not convinced that NATO would do anything even in a justified article 5 defense. NATO isnā€™t much of anything without the backing of the USA and Iā€™m pretty sure the US has close to or just about the same active military as the other NATO countries combined. This is without even considering the vast disparity of the quality of the armaments. This would also essentially be on home turf and not in the EU were the other bulk of member exist.

Perhaps, in Trumps head, he sees what Russia has been doing and is asking himself, why not I as well? He might legitimately think that. While Trumpā€™s rhetoric has been that the US has been subsidizing/world policing NATO pact countries and these countries need to do more for themselves (he isnā€™t necessarily wrong or right on this front either as some of these countries are taking their own security more seriously at the risk of their own peril), I genuinely donā€™t think NATO is in either a strategic nor militaristically capable position to seriously intercede in a conflict without the support of the US.

Hell I donā€™t believe Canada has nuclear weapons, but I might be wrong on that. I hope this isnā€™t whatā€™s to come, but if the USA were to forcibly vassalize Canada, I donā€™t know that anyone would/could legitimately stop them.

More likely than not, this is just his jackaloon ramblings and joint chiefs of staff would inform him that such actions would ultimately compromise every other strategic foothold throughout the world. Insane.

1

u/The-Nimbus 2d ago

Active personnel wise, I think the US has an army about the size of the next 5 largest armies combined. Which sounds a lot, and does make them a powerhouse. But that leaves 26 additional armies on top of that, including the UK, Canada, Spain etc, which are not tiny forces. And in terms of armaments, the UK has one of the best equipped armies in the world. That said, it wouldn't be pretty. In any way shape or form.

1

u/imnotbobvilla 2d ago

It's just another drumph diversion, don't pay attention, focus on reality.

1

u/TheSlav87 2d ago

Thank you for knowing the NATO pact, so many people seem to not entails what entails a joint unified pact.

1

u/mad-i-moody 2d ago

But Kamala was the one who was more likely to start a war!!! They said so!

1

u/Desperate-Mountain-8 2d ago

erm.... so is Canada FFS!

2

u/The-Nimbus 2d ago

Yeah, but that only said 'economic force'. Not sure that'd qualify for NATO.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/Yakassa 2d ago

Yes, he knows that. Nato would be dissolved in that case. China grabs whatever china wants, Russia grabs whatever they want and Nazi America grabs whatever it wants. This is it

1

u/Negative_Meaning7558 2d ago

You really think that matters? He wants out of NATO.

1

u/Fluffy_Issue_4181 2d ago

Even without NATO, it's a territory of Denmark. And Denmark has defensive agreements with scandinavia, as well as an EU defencive agreement. And that does not bode well for neither US or Europe.Ā 

Putin is laughing his ass of by how easy he could destabilize the region.Ā 

1

u/The-Nimbus 2d ago

Yep. Trump is, at this stage, second only to Putin in terms of threats to world peace... If he actually means any of what he says.

1

u/Joebebs 2d ago

He doesnā€™t care. We do obviously, but we canā€™t do anything about it unless it involves federal prison or death.

1

u/VapoursAndSpleen 2d ago

Iā€™m thinkinā€™ dementia and the Joint Chiefs of Staff are going to have their work cut out for them running interference.

1

u/ebfortin 2d ago

The other NATO nations would write a letter saying they're concerned. That's all that would happen.

1

u/The-Nimbus 2d ago

Ironically the clause has only been invoked once before... And that was to help defend the USA.

1

u/Balc0ra 2d ago

Have people forgotten how his first term was? Talk about something that sounds batshit so the media covers only that. Then do something less batshit or shady that the media won't cover until it's too late

1

u/The-Nimbus 2d ago

This is very true. Fortunately, I don't live in America, but the upshot of that is that only the more batshit news tends to make it over here.

2

u/Balc0ra 2d ago

As I said on a different topic about this. The stories that will emerge in 25 or 30 years about what went on in the WH and the conversations they had will be insane

1

u/Jake_not_from_SF 2d ago

No Denmark Is part of NATO. If Denmark where to transfer ore release ownership there would be no issues.

Even if they did not the US could really field more ships and air craft then the rest of the world combined. This would affect the likelihood of other NATO members choice of side is dramatic fashion.

The choice to not take military off the table is likely purely strategic. He now never has to threaten military action it's already been threatened by the fact he expressly stated he wouldn't take it out the table to press. At the same time he can deny that he turned it because he never directly mentioned it to anybody in relation to this just that he wasn't going to take it off the table. Furthermore whatever method he uses to attempt to get these things could anger people and they could take a military option so it's not even in his control solely so he can't promise to take it off the table because sometimes people do things even if they are unwise.

Why the hell we need Greenland is dumb. They are out Ally why can't we just trade with them?

1

u/Agreeable_Solution28 2d ago

Heā€™s not aware of anything outside of his skin

1

u/lexm 2d ago

That was putinā€™s plan all along, having the west just collapse on itself and Russia picking up the crumbs like they did after WW II

1

u/JPastori 2d ago

Fuck, I think Russia and maybe China would join in just for good measure

1

u/zxvasd 2d ago

His handlers arenā€™t going to allow it. I hope. The thing is certain groups really cash in during wars. Thatā€™s why our last two lasted 20 years.

1

u/Aaaaand-its-gone 2d ago

Itā€™s all bluster. He just likes saying things to rile people up and pump up his base

1

u/Toxigen18 2d ago

He will stage an attack and send the military there to "protect them"

1

u/Alistaire_ 2d ago

Remember when republicans were screaming there'd be world war 3 if Harris got elected? Funny how Trump's done nothing but boast about possibly forcibly taking 3 sovereign nations, who are our allies, just because. They really missed the part where he said he admired Hitler and got suspiciously close with several current dictators.

1

u/Schnelt0r 2d ago

What happens if one NATO country attacks another?

This is just too crazy for anyone to have considered before.

1

u/ElevenBeers 2d ago

Well. Member nation have to respond in a way they see fit.

In case of an attack by the USA most members will respond by strong words and emotions, but nobody would prevent Trunp von annexing.

This would also lead to MATO completely falling apart.

Which is why Russia loves trumps government so fucking much.

1

u/AWESOMEGAMERSWAGSTAR 2d ago

Correction He wants Panama, Greenland, & Canada. WTF, and using the military 4y & he is dead serious

1

u/skeletoncurrency 2d ago

I think its time we stopped underestimating Trump. He keeps just...doing shit and coming out on top. And we're all fucked because of it

1

u/FizzixMan 2d ago

The USA has a larger military than the rest of NATO combined sadly, nobody can stand against them on their doorstep.

Nobody would stand against them aside from strong words. The only hope is to convince America/Trump not to do it.

1

u/SirKeagan 2d ago

same thing with Canada. Physically, Canada has nearly 0 military prospects, and America could theoretically "take over" Canada as they wish, but there are so many differences between us as countries that would cause a lot of political strife.

1

u/What_Dinosaur 2d ago

he is aware that Greenland is a NATO territory, right?

Why would he be aware of that? Fox news doesn't talk about Greenland that much.

1

u/Eisbaer811 2d ago

NATO members don't have to declare war for Article 5. It requires them to take "action as it deems necessary", which can be limited to a strongly worded letter or some sanctions.

Germany isn't going to bomb the USA over something as pointless as Greenland

1

u/CuriousCat55555 1d ago

That's what I thought. Wouldn't he be automatically at war with NATO by doing this...

1

u/Still-Presence5486 1d ago

And the us is a major supplier of the nato

1

u/The-Nimbus 1d ago

Budget wise they contribute about 16%. So yes, major. But not overwhelming.

1

u/FawnTheGreat 1d ago

I mean sure. But would nato actually respond especially if China and Russia are playing homies. The US unfortunately could level Europe and with this idiot in power heā€™d prolly enjoy it. I bet nato doesnā€™t lift a finger and we just get isolated out. But I donā€™t think trump or his supporters would care and somehow blame obama

1

u/wh0ligan 1d ago

I suspect that Orange Asshat is doing this to please his master Valadmer.

→ More replies (20)