To be clear: on a Donald Trump scale, keeping things the same, only losing decades of political good will, not killing thousands of civilians, not starting a new pointless war, and not losing a few trillion dollars of American taxpayer money, is technically a win.
The bar is so damned low…
Literally doing nothing would be an improvement
Biden did nothing for 4 years and i felt pretty good about that
Tripping hazard in the basement of hell.
not killing thousands of civilians
To be fair, he’s a little sad about this.
The text of the deal hasn’t been released. No terms in a joint communiqué. The only information we have on what’s in this deal is coming from the social media posts and anonymous background sources.
I wouldn’t be surprised if they haven’t actually closed on a final text yet.
That’s his usual MO, post something on his twitter clone before anything is agreed upon, let alone signed, and act like it is.
I wish it wasn’t such an easy way of generating clicks for journalists/media, it’s textbook troll shit, should be ignored.
post something on his twitter clone before anything is agreed upon, let alone signed, and act like it is.
Like when he said the news conference would be held at the Four Seasons…
The same playbook as Iran. Just delay until hopefully in 2028 there is a regime change - in the US that is - and maybe, if you are lucky, you can negotiate with a more, I guess normal, government?
Negotiate what though? Greenland isn’t a US territory. Denmark should just tell the US to fuck off.
The Danish and Greenlandic side og the officials, currently traveling to the US, to sign the deal are pretty excited in the danish media.
Macron from France said that he was informed of the deal a few weeks ago
Personally I think this is a distraction from the losses in Iran, and to present a nothing deal as a victory
Are…are you suggesting the president lies? And that there may not even be a deal? In fact it’s difficult to say if he’s even aware what Greenland is?
Canada had a deal too until they didn’t
I wouldn’t be surprised either. I’m sure Denmark is being incredibly careful with the wording of any “deal”.
Trump has been doing this all the time. He’d try to make a fuss out of an already good deal and when the negotiations doesn’t go his way, he’d try to negotiate back to the status quo and reframe it as a new and better deal.
My account on Xitter is now blocked from access because I replied to Eric Trumps post about this. I did not write anything bad I merely linked to the old deal from 1951.
Blocked by who?
Even if this was true, he’d break the agreement inside 72 hours.
He did still win though, because Denmark let him. We’re all pretending it’s ok because we’re informed and know.
His supporters don’t know. His supporters think he won. A week before midterms.
He didn’t get anything he didn’t have before. The things he bragged about he got from the deal is things USA have been allowed to do since 1951. There’s possibly the new bit where we pinky promised that Russia or China would never be allowed to have military bases on Greenland but that never gonna happen anyway.
Is there any surprise he’d simply declare victory regardless of reality? It isn’t like his followers can tell the difference.
His followers will hear the Fox News sanewashed version where they just use his quotes instead of real journalism.
He will probably threaten to nuke them within two days from now
He did the exact same thing with tariffs. Lots of threats, then return to status quo is presented as some grand victory.
Trump Always Chickens Out
Hey now, lots of regular folks ended up paying a bunch of taxes that got refunded to the corps.
Trump Always Chickens Out
I haven’t seen anyone say this since he bombed that school.
I haven’t seen it in a little while, but I did see it plenty after that point - when people were still paying attention to the weekly “We kicked Iran’s ass!” - “We need to go bomb Iran some more” stupidity. That seems to have either calmed down or the media stopped reporting on it. Either way, they probably lost the market effects so weren’t making as much money so moved on to other ways to steal money.
So we got what we already had?
Yes, but at great political (and financial) cost!
The reality is irrelevant. What matters is that MAGA truly believes he won a great new deal.
The comparison to 5 year olds is getting apter and apter.
To be fair, he almost didn’t get that, what with threatening the EU and NATO.
I speak with no source but a feeling from his past dealin’ and I think he changed the deal to have his family profit from the mineral exploitation in some way. (Like he did with Ukraine aid)
Everything Trump has been bragging about is what was also part of the 1951 deal. No one has mentioned minerals yet. It’s of course not set in stone before the final text is signed and published, but I’m pretty sure if minerals were part of it, Trump would have mentioned it. And I think minerals were one of the red lines our foreign minister (implicitly) mentioned. It would take way some of the sovereignty since the majority of the elected officials in Greenland is against extraction of minerals.
Yes, it’s all my presumption at this time. This example of an article is what leads my mind towards it.
The text of the agreement has not been published. The BBC has contacted the Danish Embassy in the US and the White House.
However, an unnamed US State Department official outlined the deal without providing specifics.
Among the agreed provisions is one stating the deal would not expire even if Greenland became an independent country in the future.
The official added that under the deal, the US has unilateral power to build additional military structures with no approval needed from Greenland or Denmark. It includes “permanent access, basing and overflights rights,” the official said.
Rare mineral exploitation for military purposes would fall under “unilateral power to build additional military structures with no approval needed from Greenland or Denmark” as those resources are needed for electronics used by military equipment such as AA defenses for that dumbass golden dome of his.
No, that’s quite a stretch to call mineral exploitation a military purpose. It would at most be a strategic independence from other sources of minerals like China.
The other parts “permanent access” with “no approval needed” was part of the 1951 agreement. While I don’t know the specifics on the independence of Greenland and what the old agreement said, I think Greenland didn’t have the influence back then and it wasn’t a matter to be discussed, so it might have been void in that case. But if Greenland goes independent they’re basically up for grabs and Trump would be first in line.
… permanent security and all other needs.
Poor bastards. They’re now being fed only American beef!
