Jump to content

Bozo_Casanova

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    14130
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    6

Everything posted by Bozo_Casanova

  1. I feel the same way I felt when I saw Gina Chavez perform it at Pride Night in 2021 at the FC Game: the song and the flag belong to everyone except the people who think it only belongs to themselves. They don’t get the flag, they don’t get the anthem and as far as I’m concerned they shouldn’t be left any safe spaces for hate, either. Bless your heart. In part because we’ve occupied Greenland, at their invitation, for 85 years.
  2. This is about what Greenland wants, period. Not Trump, not Denmark. The indigenous people of Greenland are holding all the cards. The idea that *Denmark* with a weak claim and no reason to hold onto it other than wounded patriotism could legislatively stop Greenland from declaring itself independent (which is what we are talking about here) and choosing its own destiny is absurd. Your argument is that the Danish parliament refuses to accept, and then …?
  3. Because it wasn’t and hasn’t been for 85 years. lol ok Again, strawman. What else you got?
  4. once more, for clarity: DENMARK CAN’T SELL US GREENLAND. While the words people use may describe something that sounds like that, that framing does not accurately reflect the nature of Denmark’s relationship with Greenland. Greenland can choose to leave Denmark, and can choose to subject itself to us, or independence. Consider for a moment that you are implying that Trump is accurately describing it. It’s like you are screaming “TRUMP IS TRYING TO BULLY OUR ALLIES INTO PAYING TARRIFS ON IMPORTS TO THE US.” This goes may back well before WWII. I summarized the history of Danish and US involvement in Greenland upthread.
  5. If you are seriously equating the Soviet occupation of Ukraine in WWII as a pretext for the current Russian invasion to our welcome presence in Greenland, ongoing since we stopped the Nazis from invading it in 1940 you have no business lecturing anybody about “historical gibberish.” Perhaps the first sentence should be an indication that maybe this isn’t the break you think it is. Trump is obviously nonsensical in his approach, and his motives have nothing to do with the foreign policy stakes at issue here. That said, he can’t bully Denmark to seize Greenland. It doesn’t belong to Denmark. Greenland accepts Danish overlordship and can leave at any time.
  6. Give me a fucking break. That’s a truly stupid analogy and borderline offensive on top of it.
  7. But it’s not your neighbor’s tract.
  8. And one more thing- maybe if the Danes were so worried about Greenland they shouldn’t have left its defense to the allies and signed a non-aggression pact with the Nazis. It’s important to recall that Greenland essentially declared independence in 1940 after the Fall of Denmark and invited the United States to defend it. And we have been holding it ever since.
  9. That’s a how point, not a what point. Me neither. Your rectum perhaps? They want independence (and in the past Denmark has made it clear they would like to be off the hook financially) but haven’t held a referendum for it because they would can’t backfill $500mm/year and NATO protection by themselves. Nice strawman, for the the record: 1) DC should be ceded to Virginia and Maryland 2) Puerto Rico should be a state 3) if someone want to purchase overlordship of Samoa and Guam I’m all ears.
  10. Sure. Probably the best way to explain it is that Greenland isn’t Denmark’s to sell. Greenland can walk when they want to. It’s more that we would be purchasing Greenland’s acceptance as sovereign. Greenland would vote based on some combination of public and private investment, both one time and ongoing, and some component of that would necessarily include a large cash payment to the people there. I also have to imagine that Greenland would set up some kind of bidding war between the US and Canada, and would want to retain at least the autonomy they have or greater.
  11. You can bet the order invoking the Insurrection Act and deploying the armed forces to a city is ready to sign.
  12. 1) Denmark’s claim is actually quite weak, and amounts to possession being 9/10ths of the rule, except in reality we’ve “possessed” it to a greater extent than Denmark for much of the last 80 years. 2) it would be better for the security of the Western Hemisphere for it to be a territory or protectorate of the United States. 3) it’s a mixed bag for the Greenlanders, all 60k of them, 90% of whom are indigenous, but one thing that is almost certain is that they would all become individually quite wealthy, overnight. The United States has been circling around Greenland for over a century, and the protection of Denmark, if you can even call it that, hasn’t done them any favors. I’m not in favor of taking it by force but just because Trump is stupid and bad doesn’t make this particular thing either.
  13. if there’s one thing 2024 should have taught us, it’s that we shouldn’t leave them safe spaces.
  14. While you are at it, you could try driving it from High Island to Sea Rim on 87.
  15. This made me think of this thread https://x.com/mattyglesias/status/1883149980715917496?s=46&t=WQWp8jCL9d3WDAPBWICDFQ
  16. I don’t think a foreign government or agency of one was a party to the assassination, because that seems … messy? But for that matter I don’t think it’s accurate to say “the government” or “the CIA” killed Kennedy. I think some extremely bad people did, with complex personal and political motivations. It does seem possible that once the adults in the room realized what had happened they would have engaged their Soviet counterparts to assist with the clean up and avoid any dangerous misunderstandings, given Oswald’s background. A lot of this has to do with how I think about “conspiracies,” essentially, that the larger the conspiracy needs to be, the less likely is. In my scenario above, only about 8-10 people would need to know what’s going to happen, and only 2-3 would really need to understand the moving parts. In other words, it’s less a conspiracy and more of a plan. The “conspiracy” in my scenario is the cover up after the fact, but that could have been accomplished with exactly the kind of official obscurity that the CIA under Dulles and and his lieutenants specialized in, led by Dulles and his lieutenants.
  17. They served Trotsky a bowl the night he died. When Natalia asked him how it was, he said “Думаю, это нормально, но это не настоящий перец чили.”
  18. Maybe JJ could pry Shawn Watson away from Wofford.
  19. They had “white chili” though, whatever that is…
  20. Not exactly a hot take, but I believe the most likely reality is that: 0) The CIA was in a chaotic semi-mutiny following the firing of Allen Dulles and many of the old guard, Ivy League OSS leadership by Kennedy following the Bay of Pigs fiasco. Dulles was succeeded by military industrialist and nuclear regulator, Californian John McCone who was unable to manage or redirect the organization. 1) The assassination was orchestrated by an element in the CIA that was outside of the control of McCone and went rogue in connection with Cuba policy and contracted with the mob for additional shooters. 2) JFK was shot from the overpass by one of a team of 3-4 shooters 3) Oswald was a long-time CIA sleeper asset that happened to be ideally situated to be a patsy, but his availability for that purpose was largely an artifact of the circumstances. 4) Dulles used the Warren Commission to cover up agency involvement and the old guard was restored under Helms, and remained so until it was finally disassembled by George HW Bush, who more or less brought the agency under the control of the executive branch and White House.
×
×
  • Create New...