FreeLittleBird · F
Djc59 · 56-60, M
@FreeLittleBird Well I stand with freedom, prosperity, and the rights of all people - and that includes the US and western civilization as identified with Europe. In this case - I support the US position as the only morally defensible position.
Djc59 · 56-60, M
I have to disagree with you. I get President Trump is rude, and I wish he weren't, especially in dealing with allies. But he's not wrong about Greenland. It's sad that others are offended - but he's right about what it can be in the defense of the West - both US and Europe, militarily and economically. And he's point of view is easily defendable morally speaking.
You're right that he sees it in real estate terms, but that's a positive, not a net negative.
Secondly, your description of Alaskan natives and their rights has the truth on its head. They benefit from indigenous rights that a lot of tribal peoples have, as well as full US rights. Yet a fairly significant portion of them refuse to benefit from it, and become wards of the state. That's sad but it's a simple fact - and the rest of the population have lost their patience with victim grievance. It's nonsense.
If Greenlander's want their own country - they can certainly be allowed that - but the idea that 65,000 people that have no loyalty to or been responsible for others - get to veto actions necessary for the millions in the west - is absurd, morally as well. Finally, they would benefit immensely in a deal with the US. They turn down the opportunity at their peril.
You're right that he sees it in real estate terms, but that's a positive, not a net negative.
Secondly, your description of Alaskan natives and their rights has the truth on its head. They benefit from indigenous rights that a lot of tribal peoples have, as well as full US rights. Yet a fairly significant portion of them refuse to benefit from it, and become wards of the state. That's sad but it's a simple fact - and the rest of the population have lost their patience with victim grievance. It's nonsense.
If Greenlander's want their own country - they can certainly be allowed that - but the idea that 65,000 people that have no loyalty to or been responsible for others - get to veto actions necessary for the millions in the west - is absurd, morally as well. Finally, they would benefit immensely in a deal with the US. They turn down the opportunity at their peril.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
val70 · 51-55
@Djc59 Personally, I won't dare say that any people is at peril for chosing the right to govern themselves. The thinking in real estate sense is bloody dangerous. Just think back to FDR and King Faisal. There was plenty of strategic planning that went into that relationship, or rather start of. You think that Trump would respect a King of Greenland more? I bet that he would if it was a much smaller island. The fact that it's a large piece of virgin terrority got stuck now in his brain, and that's the end of the actual background to this whole mess. Trump isn't FDR in a very long shot. I wonder what FDR's plaque in the White House is telling. Perhaps that he'd be a fan of Trump? Nothing about being president for so very long time, well, that's my bet
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
FrugalNoodle · 46-50, M
val70 · 51-55
@Djc59 Oh gosh, you think really that the lack of stability that there was for fifty years won't be missed? That no European country, whatever small and such, will get angry and will even start redrawing relationships? You seem to think that Europeans are a lot more fan of America than they actually are
SunshineGirl · 36-40, F
Khenpal1 · M