73 Reds

@Spooky way back when I learned how not to conflate issues. Worth a try. I'll leave it at that.

Most of the issues you bring up have been covered "ad nauseum" upstream in this thread. If you really want to know my opinion go back through the posts. You don't want to acknowledge the sheer hypocrisy of sitting silent on Maduro until he is arrested. That's OK, we get it.

Deflecting? Again, this tells me everything that is needed to know.

I understand completely. Which is why I think your position is indefensible. (That is worse than wrong in case you're wondering).

Well I guess its OK to murder the guy but not put him on trial where he gets due process. Explains a lot.

Where were all the protests and protesters when a bounty was placed on Maduro's head? Anyone want to share their outrage?

Its like watching folks having to perform cartwheels just to defend their narratives. Just can't figure out why people get so emotionally wrapped up in politics. Never-ending extrapolation of the issues du-jour into eternity, only to be forgotten and replaced by more silly non-starters tomorrow. As if Trump owns the exclusive rights to character flaws. Yawn.

There was even greater risk before. Memories tend to be short. You and I have been around long enough to know that.

Actually, you should look up the definition of the word "cult". It is defined as a relatively small group of people. Wouldn't classify tens of millions of people as small. Just saying.

OK, but if I ran a search of all your posts in this thread for the word "cult", how many hits do you think there would be? Over/under 100? I'll take the over.

Wondering where you were LOL.

John, it is understandable why you and those who don't live here (and those who do live here but don't support him) feel that way. But for those of us who did vote for him, we are getting what we voted for (yes!). You may deem it a form of chaos but we knew what we were getting with Trump the second time around. What you see as an erosion of principles for me and others is re-establishing principles that were in danger of being lost. America is better coming from a position of strength. We can argue all day long about how we got there and what we need to do to remain there but under prior leadership that single-most important principle was failing fast. Trump has non-traditional methods and personal incentives, neither of which is a concern to me as long as he fulfills his campaign promises, which he has to date done more than any other elected official in my lifetime. He tackles issues, is not afraid to speak his mind and wins exceed losses. Want diplomacy? That is what diplomats are for. Trump is no diplomat and doesn't need to pretend to be one. He is, however an interesting study in pattern behavior, which people who support him are able to recognize better than others.

@Spooky I'm not even going to try to unpack all the issues you raise eminating from a post to my pal John over a largely unpopulated hunk of ice known as Greenland. Now if the ice were in a glass and you and I were sitting in a pub or lounge enjoying our favorite beverages, that might be a different - and quite animated story.

More UN stable? You've got to be kidding. Way too much there to address in posts but Wow, just Wow. Where would Europe be without the US? Don't have to answer. BTW, this entire discussion reflects how quickly people forget certain REAL issues that were about to destroy the planet as we know it just months ago. Remember Tariffs? Like now with Greenland, Trump came out swinging. Did he negotiate? You guys should really consider recent history and who you're dealing with. Context and perspective.

Sure, but minerals don't extract themselves.

@dealraker agreed.

Whatever. We get it, you hate Trump. But most people here don't really care what you think of our leader any more than you care what we think of yours. But good to know that Europe is finally focusing more on US perspective. In fact, maybe that is one of the goals.

OK, thanks John. Seems as if I opened a hornet's nest.

Wake up; Trump doesn't rule out anything.

Sure, 3 days and you have all the answers, LOL. Let us know how it turns out.

The US doesn't need to annex Greenland to benefit from any such reserves That's where negotiation and agreements come into play. We've got the right guy for the job.

Oh, so maybe you'd prefer Maduro were back in power? That's precisely my point: context and perspective.

Last I checked Stephen Miller was one of a whole lot of advisors. I mean, if the US is really imperialist, don't you think they'd shoot for something more than a large hunk of ice? There are plenty of defenseless places a whole lot more inviting.

It never ceases to amaze me that some here always seem to be confused about what Trump says - except when they are not.

Ancient history is hardly applicable. What about all the conditions, restrictions, reservations, etc.... that you assume have no effect on US ability to carry out its intended objectives? Again, if the issue was that cut and dry we'd have no interest. Its not.