Red Mosquito

God damn it, John!

You gotta be quicker with those gifs!

Farmer John wrote:You gotta be quicker with those gifs!

I had to write a couple of drafts of a sarcastic personal attack and think better of it before I resorted to giphy.

Bi_3 wrote:Just so I understand... do folks here think turning Greenland into a US territory is a bad idea?

If it is against the wishes of the people of Greenland, yes.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:Just so I understand... do folks here think turning Greenland into a US territory is a bad idea?

If it is against the wishes of the people of Greenland, yes.

You still haven't learned the lessons of the election, Ruddo.

it's not even about the idea, it's how he goes about it.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:Just so I understand... do folks here think turning Greenland into a US territory is a bad idea?

If it is against the wishes of the people of Greenland, yes.

100% agree

Bi_3 wrote:Cool, I already had you two in the "aggressively misunderstands the issue" bucket.

nothing misunderstanding about it

the orange douche wants to take ownership of greenland for its resources (oil, natural gas ad minerals {lithium anybody?])

he has said it is to keep world peace and protect the world but anyone who believes that has to be incredibly stupid

Peeps wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:Cool, I already had you two in the "aggressively misunderstands the issue" bucket.

nothing misunderstanding about it

the orange douche wants to take ownership of greenland for its resources (oil, natural gas ad minerals {lithium anybody?])

he has said it is to keep world peace and protect the world but anyone who believes that has to be incredibly stupid

"aggressively misunderstands the issue"

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/canada-nat ... sea-route/

https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/chi ... the-north/

And supplies of critical minerals are a national security threat my evenbro.

Bi_3 wrote:

Peeps wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:Cool, I already had you two in the "aggressively misunderstands the issue" bucket.

nothing misunderstanding about it

the orange douche wants to take ownership of greenland for its resources (oil, natural gas ad minerals {lithium anybody?])

he has said it is to keep world peace and protect the world but anyone who believes that has to be incredibly stupid

"aggressively misunderstands the issue"

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/canada-nat ... sea-route/

https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/chi ... the-north/

And supplies of critical minerals are a national security threat my evenbro.

i dont believe for even a second he cares about that. he wants the resources so he and his family can make money off it

Bi_3 wrote:

Peeps wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:Cool, I already had you two in the "aggressively misunderstands the issue" bucket.

nothing misunderstanding about it

the orange douche wants to take ownership of greenland for its resources (oil, natural gas ad minerals {lithium anybody?])

he has said it is to keep world peace and protect the world but anyone who believes that has to be incredibly stupid

"aggressively misunderstands the issue"

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/canada-nat ... sea-route/

https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/chi ... the-north/

And supplies of critical minerals are a national security threat my evenbro.

Do you support the US just taking it, regardless of their wishes? It seems they do not want this, so it’s a moot point unless we’re just going to annex it anyway. And then that begs the question - does US imperialism against western allies threaten our national security? Maybe I’m just aggressively misunderstanding the whole thing?

My question is, does all of this make World War III more or less likely?

Rob wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

Peeps wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:Cool, I already had you two in the "aggressively misunderstands the issue" bucket.

nothing misunderstanding about it

the orange douche wants to take ownership of greenland for its resources (oil, natural gas ad minerals {lithium anybody?])

he has said it is to keep world peace and protect the world but anyone who believes that has to be incredibly stupid

"aggressively misunderstands the issue"

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/canada-nat ... sea-route/

https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/chi ... the-north/

And supplies of critical minerals are a national security threat my evenbro.

Do you support the US just taking it, regardless of their wishes? It seems they do not want this, so it’s a moot point unless we’re just going to annex it anyway. And then that begs the question - does US imperialism against western allies threaten our national security? Maybe I’m just aggressively misunderstanding the whole thing?

http://forums.theskyiscrape.com/viewtop ... 7#p2146377

Rob wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

Peeps wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:Cool, I already had you two in the "aggressively misunderstands the issue" bucket.

nothing misunderstanding about it

the orange douche wants to take ownership of greenland for its resources (oil, natural gas ad minerals {lithium anybody?])

he has said it is to keep world peace and protect the world but anyone who believes that has to be incredibly stupid

"aggressively misunderstands the issue"

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/canada-nat ... sea-route/

https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/chi ... the-north/

And supplies of critical minerals are a national security threat my evenbro.

Do you support the US just taking it, regardless of their wishes? It seems they do not want this, so it’s a moot point unless we’re just going to annex it anyway. And then that begs the question - does US imperialism against western allies threaten our national security? Maybe I’m just aggressively misunderstanding the whole thing?

Does Rob fall into the "Misunderstanding Israel/Palestine" bucket or the "Misunderstanding Greenland" bucket? Can you be in multiple buckets?

tommy wrote:

Rob wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

Peeps wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:Cool, I already had you two in the "aggressively misunderstands the issue" bucket.

nothing misunderstanding about it

the orange douche wants to take ownership of greenland for its resources (oil, natural gas ad minerals {lithium anybody?])

he has said it is to keep world peace and protect the world but anyone who believes that has to be incredibly stupid

"aggressively misunderstands the issue"

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/canada-nat ... sea-route/

https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/chi ... the-north/

And supplies of critical minerals are a national security threat my evenbro.

Do you support the US just taking it, regardless of their wishes? It seems they do not want this, so it’s a moot point unless we’re just going to annex it anyway. And then that begs the question - does US imperialism against western allies threaten our national security? Maybe I’m just aggressively misunderstanding the whole thing?

Does Rob fall into the "Misunderstanding Israel/Palestine" bucket or the "Misunderstanding Greenland" bucket? Can you be in multiple buckets?

I don't think Rob misunderstands Israel/Palestine, I think he and I have different first principles on that topic and to my recollection he has always engaged in open and respectful manner. Solid N&D'er right there.

But Greenland and Canada don't want to be part of the USA, so it's a moot point. Let's all move on.

It would do a lot for economic expansion if we annexed Europe.