For the record, in 1917 the US bought the then Danish West Indies and made them the United States Virgin Islands and gave up Greenland:
> During 1916, the two sides agreed to a sale price of $25,000,000, and the United States accepted a Danish demand for a declaration stating that they would "not object to the Danish Government extending their political and economic interests to the whole of Greenland".[12][18] Although it had a claim on northern Greenland based on explorations by Charles Francis Hall[19] and Robert Peary, the United States decided that the purchase was more important, especially because of the nearby Panama Canal.[20] Historian Bo Lidegaard questions the utility of such a declaration, as the country had never disputed Danish sovereignty.[12]
> In proceeding this day to the signature of the Convention respecting the cession of the Danish West-Indian Islands to the United States of America, the undersigned Secretary of State of the United States of America, duly authorized by his Government, has the honor to declare that the Government of the United States of America will not object to the Danish Government extending their political and economic interests to the whole of Greenland.
The full text of the letter CC'd by Trump directly to multiple European governments:
"Dear [Norwegian PM] Jonas:
Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 Wars PLUS, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace, although it will always be predominant, but can now think about what is good and proper for the United States of America. Denmark cannot protect that land from Russia or China, and why do they have a "right of ownership" anyway? There are no written documents, it's only that a boat landed there hundreds of years ago, but we had boats landing there, also. I have done more for NATO than any other person since its founding, and now, NATO should do something for the United States. The World is not secure unless we have Complete and Total Control of Greenland.
You know what, I kind of like this letter... as an educative example.
After Trump, this should be a required reading for every American student in their American history class. The letter is short, the premise is stupid, and the way it's written is stupider: middle school kids can write better than this.
A distilled example of the insanity of our time, and the cowardice of people who let this happen.
We really should share his writings/speeches more. The sanewashing of his mad ramblings or Truth social posts is omnipresent in media. Once you notice it, you see it everywhere.
This cause a real flutter of activity in Washington as multiple top aides rushed to game out different scenarios and decide how to use their limited influence over Trump to maximize their polymarket winnings betting on the exact date that NATO collapses.
What an absolute embarrassment to be American at this time. We have the most vain & corrupt president that only cares for his personal gain. It's unfortunate he's in control of the largest military in history. I don't know how horrible it must be for the people of Greenland right now, but as an American I would like to apologize to Europe and other nations right now and to let you know that while probably a large majority of Americans disagree with our leadership, there is not much we can do in a police state against our current circumstances. Our elected leaders on the opposition side are weak and spineless and still trying to comprehend that their ideas of how our democracy presently operates are no longer valid if they are merely ignored by the executive branch.
Now is definingly the time to disengage from America as an ally, as unfortunate as that is. The voting populace has been fed decades of bad education, a media of nationalistic propaganda and finds itself in the same position many pre-authoritarian nation states have found themselves in prior to great conflicts - brainwashed, lied to, but mostly apathetic about the situation.
I hope in 2028 we're able to vote ourselves out of this mess, but just the mere fact that all of this can happen without repercussion should make it evident that it's just a matter of time before someone else takes Trump's examples and puts them back into practice another four to eight years after that.
Agree, except I disagree that there is not much you can do.
You write "there is not much we can do in a police state against our current circumstances" and then you state "Our elected leaders on the opposition side are weak and spineless".
I would argue it's not just elected leaders that are being weak at the moment. Civil society too.
It's like saying sanctions will make N. Koreans or Russians rebel against their governments, and then wondering why none of them has done so, "are they cowards?". As if rebelling is so simple and not a life-changing thing...
There is a small window of opportunity to make this right. That window will be gone soon and then we would be in the N. Korean situation. Rebellion must be done early and enthusiastically. Each passing month makes it more and more difficult, in part due to boiling frog situation.
You don't live in North Korea, not even anywhere close. If you don't want to live in a state like North Korea, you need to use the democratic means you still have to make your voice heard. I am tired of this lazy defeatism
Luckily since USA is close to N. Korea your statement holds true. Glad to be not American.
Curiously enough if you do a survey of who of Kim Jong-Un and Donald Trump would be more likely to throw a world-threatening tantrum.. I don't think Kim Jong-Un is going to win that survey.
> Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) predicted [a Greenland war powers bill] would easily pass if an invasion was imminent
I wonder what "imminent" might mean to Tillis? Anchorage to Nuuk is only ~5 hours by air (Newburgh to Nuuk, ~3h15).
(using https://nuclearsecrecy.com/missilemap/ for distances and assuming ~900 km/h for a C-17 — although it would require multiple C-17s [which Anchorage has] to significantly outnumber the allied OOB [per wikipedia])
----
the standard bureaucrats' response to crises, according to Sir Humphrey Appleby GCB KBE MVO:
- Nothing is going to happen.
- Something may be about to happen, but we should do nothing about it.
- Maybe we should do something about it, but there's nothing we can do.
- Maybe there was something we could have done, but it's too late now.
Ah! Having randos call congressmen is generally a great idea for urgent+important+bipartisan issues (tech or fiscal), which at the moment I can think of 3
a)AI (in particular, regulation on the mil/statedept use of "private AI").
I hope in 2028 the electeds take a different path than Biden did in his administration. Currently, dem leadership seems to think this ends with them just getting elected. But it doesn't. Just taking power back and pretending that everything is normal again won't do it.
We need meaningful punishments for the people committing crimes within the Trump administration and we need systems in place to prevent this sort of thing from happening again.
The US has to limit the power of the president and to remove the "the winner takes it all" principle from its "democracy".
Maybe the next election is the right moment to do something about it. I can't believe there will be a time where it's more obvious that the system is broken - other than after it's too late.
I agree wholeheartedly but there's zero chance they make changes that limit their own power. After all, predecessors from both parties got us to where we are now.
> DFW, Neal Stephenson, and Idiocracy seemed funny 25 years ago. Not so much now that they seem to have predicted where we have arrived.
Idiocracy did not predict things accurately: in that movie the President acknowledges that he does not have all the answers and asks questions (and listens) to people he recognizes as knowing more from him. That is not the situation currently.
I have to go back to the source and confirm your analysis. The sheer mental incapacity of the individual cabinet members in the movie most closely matches this current administration than any other cabinet in history as I recall.
Edit: maybe it's predicting the presidency a couple of terms down the line, when a well-meaning Theo Von becomes president. But the Theo Von of today is too smart already, it would have to be the Theo Vom of a decade ago.
I mean, the liberals would all be at brunch, at least. I suppose it's "better" when the mask of destructive empires is firmly in place, because at least then they have to maintain some decorum when mass deporting folks.
It does kind of suck, though, when you're in Ferguson, Occupy, at Standing Rock, protesting the second Iraq war, in the streets because the police murdered another of your fellow humans, because the folks who think all this started on Oct. 7 or Jan 20 will tell you that you're just being hyperbolic and that you should accept all this violence done in your name.
So, I dunno. I'm not stoked about being in an actual insurrectionist moment- I'd rather just be playing music. I'm not at all happy about being in a house I despise while it burns down. But having read at least one or two books, it feels like, I dunno, folks who were actively stoked about Harris don't want -less- violence, they just want it done to folks they don't see...
>But having read at least one or two books, it feels like, I dunno, folks who were actively stoked about Harris don't want -less- violence, they just want it done to folks they don't see...
The thing is you're choosing the violence of American imperialism to be done in your name either way.
And yes, the people who wanted Harris did actually want less violence, and would have gotten less violence. I know it's comforting and cathartic to demonize them and consider them more ignorant than you because it makes your decision seem more righteous. Harris voters were making the best decision they could with the choices they actually had, to not throw all of their allies (including Palestinians, mind you) under the bus and double down on accelerating fascism for the sake of a moral victory.
But hey, whatever helps you sleep at night. It's not as if it matters now, you all got what you wanted.
Hoss, if you'd written "a grilled cheese sandwich would be a better president than DT" I would have just agreed with you out of hand.
However, given the fact that a) the Democrats seemed to have done literally everything that they could do to lose what they called the "most important election of our lifetimes" and b) I have neither control over who they choose to run nor a vote in a contestable state, I am not going to feel bad for my real anger at them and the folks who support them for failing the rest of us so badly.
The "choices they actually had" are the product of the Democratic party, and I feel no end of anger for them chosing as they did and failing to win.
A lot of us just wanted to see them win, which should have been no problem. I'd much rather not be going to stand in front of an ICE detnetion facility every week.
At the same time, you can pretend that Harris was for a less violent world. She was not, she was for a world order that targeted its violence at folks you don't care about.
I sleep just fine. We have been organizing a long time and will continue.
Can some EU country leader (ideally Macron/Denmark PM) punch him in the face in Davos and then claim that it's just a personal matter and not an issue between countries to avoid legal ramifications?
Surely a broken jaw would prove quite the challenge for an 80 year old to recover from and fist fight on personal matter grounds would not constitute an attack on the U.S. henceforth not endangering NATO
At this point they should really do away with the peace prize, or dramatically change how it's granted.
As things stand, it's frequently a complete debacle. (Of course in 2025, but see also, e.g., Abiy Ahmed.) Or an embarrassment. (Too many examples to list.)
They ought to either cancel the thing outright, or invert the usual Nobel Prize rule and only award the peace prize posthumously. That would solve every problem.
One month, a vain, vindictive, mentally unstable, and heavily armed parent who tirelessly lobbied for the award and lost begins physically threatening and menacing their neighbors, declaring that if they won't be recognized as the best parent, then by god they'll just take what they're owed until they feel they've gotten what is "psychologically needed for success."
In that scenario, I don't think focusing on reform of the office politics and favoritism of the PTA award is the most productive use of time.
This analogy would work if 2025 were an isolated incident. But the award has been a joke for a very long time, if not actively harmful, and recent events make such a mockery of its founding premises that it's simply too much to bear. What if the "parent of the month" award were perpetually mired in controversy? I think it would be fair to reconsider the thing.
The Obama prize was a problem that haunts the committee. I agree
But you are simplifying greatly. He got it because he reached out to Arabic leader to lower the tone set by George "crusader" Bush.
"The Norwegian Nobel Committee announced the award on October 9, 2009, citing Obama's promotion of nuclear nonproliferation[2] and a "new climate" in international relations fostered by Obama, especially in reaching out to the Muslim world."
Either way. Stating that you don't care about world peace because you didn't receive a prize. It is a bit childish. I would not let guy near something that requires responsibility. You win some you lose some. Get on with life.
The problem here is that Trump believes that the Norwegian government has any say in what a private organisation is doing, and - to be frank - just shows that Trump is a tyrant who wants everyone to use illegal force to please him.
They would be The Norwegian Nobel Committee, who at this point should realize what a disaster their prize has been, and not only last year. It was inherently poorly conceived, and shouldn't be awarded to the living, who can and do go on to wage war, agitate social instability, and act against the interests of peace.
Having a situation where a president demands the peace prize otherwise he causes a war isn’t a good look for Nobel, and shows that we’ve now moved so far from the original intention of the prize that the peace component really should be scrapped.
Right! Either scrap it, or award it only to (A) those recently deceased who have devoted their lives to making peace, or (B) defunct organizations who have completed their mission and had operated in the interests of peace.
Giving a "peace" award to living people/organizations -- who can and do go on to sully the award with most unpeaceful deeds -- is a proven failure.
> Right! Either scrap it, or award it only to (A) those recently deceased who have devoted their lives to making peace, or (B) defunct organizations who have completed their mission and had operated in the interests of peace.
The legal trust for all the Nobel Prizes state (AIUI) that they can only be awarded to living persons.
The only option would be to not award it (like happened in 1948).
At this point I only suggest patience for 3 more years and hope for the best. And the new government takes steps to severely reduce the irrational powers of POTUS so as to prevent such non sense to happen again. Oh, and to welcome aboard all us tourists that don't dare to visit the US now.
> During 1916, the two sides agreed to a sale price of $25,000,000, and the United States accepted a Danish demand for a declaration stating that they would "not object to the Danish Government extending their political and economic interests to the whole of Greenland".[12][18] Although it had a claim on northern Greenland based on explorations by Charles Francis Hall[19] and Robert Peary, the United States decided that the purchase was more important, especially because of the nearby Panama Canal.[20] Historian Bo Lidegaard questions the utility of such a declaration, as the country had never disputed Danish sovereignty.[12]
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_the_Danish_West_Indi...
See:
> In proceeding this day to the signature of the Convention respecting the cession of the Danish West-Indian Islands to the United States of America, the undersigned Secretary of State of the United States of America, duly authorized by his Government, has the honor to declare that the Government of the United States of America will not object to the Danish Government extending their political and economic interests to the whole of Greenland.
* https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1917/d881
reply