Redbrickbear said:

---

I finally learned why Greenland still has a mile thick ice sheet from the Ice Age while everywhere else in the Arctic does not. Ice sheets lose mass by sliding off into the ocean, but Greenland’s can’t because a ring of mountains trap the ice inside like a bowl for 400,000 years. pic.twitter.com/zr0kGeIRJU

— Hernan Cortes (@CyberPunkCortes) January 23, 2026

---

I've had the opportunity to fly over the southern part of Greenland on a trip back from Europe. It's stunning from the air - if you've been to Iceland...think that times 100.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

I take it you're ready and willing to pay up for whatever your ancestors may have done?

---

Unlike the Left I don't believe in collective punishments for historical "crimes"

But are arguing that land never changes hands? Or that history is static and unchanging?

---

You could say that about anything. Slaves have changed hands throughout history too, but that doesn't justify it.

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sadly, this is what FLBear has become:

Rant.

Ignore facts.

Repeat rant, to the point of pretending the facts support his lies.

---

LOL here we see a rehash of the conversation I've had with him

Batya Ungar-Sargon on a potential Greenland deal: "That is epic!"

CNN's Abby Phillip: "That is something that could have been hashed out in one of the many meetings that Trump had…"

Batya: "Then how come nobody did that before?"pic.twitter.com/Lj5pmWqxNu

— Thomas Sowell Quotes (@ThomasSowell) January 22, 2026

---

What does that have to do with the agreement we have had in place since 1951?

Or, why he didn't ask in in 2016 to 2017?

Or, why he just didn't ask 2 months ago before threatening to invade?

You think that was a positive comment toward Trump by Sowell?

---

LOL. So sad to see you wallowing in ignorance here. Trump did make a run at Greenland later in his first term. He cancelled a planned state visit to Denmark in 2019 over it. He's better prepared this time, and more resolute. Ergo the outcome is better. He is certainly not the first POTUS to make serious run at it.

https://www.labrujulaverde.com/en/2024/11/the-4-times-the-united-states-tried-to-acquire-greenland-from-denmark/
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/brief-history-of-us-trying-failing-buy-greenland-ps-010826
https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/07/politics/us-greenland-trump-denmark-history-hnk

Here's what your vanities about how the public persona of a president causes you to misread the situatin. We most certainly will invade Greenland if Denmark demands we leave. or if an independent Greenland asks us to leave. or if a rival power gains a foothold there. Greenland is absolutely more important to us, in geopolitical terms, than it is to Denmark. It's a costly unexploitable asset to the Danes. It's a strategic imperative for us. So if it really is important, isn't it necessary to get where we need to get, however it takes? The deal we see unfolding today echoes of the Truman era.

The orange dude is crude but effective, which is preferrable to polite and impotent.

---

He made a run and failed to buy it, as have several Presidents. As he did again.

What deal? So far the ONLY thing different than the situation before is a reference to China and Russia. Russia, no one wants there. China is problematic as they bring investment and infrastructure. What are we giving to counter that? We building the infrastructure in Greenland?

Look into China/Europe energy collaboration.

---

Weird how you forgot about the access to rare earth minerals... must have been an honest mistake on your part. Lol

---

Access? We have had access, they have asked us and everyone else to invest in rare earth minerals and we said no. It is too expensive and the conditions too harsh, it was cheaper to get them on the open market. Denmark and Greenland have been trying for decades to get someone to invest. If Trump wanted to partner on rare earths all he had to do was ask...

But, the reality show is a much better approach. It gets guys like you blood up. We showed them, damn Eurotrash...

Also, look up if the NATO Secretary has the authority to negotiate anything on this for Denmark. He allowed Donald to save face with your ilk, that is what he does. Look up his career. Internet is great, a wealth of information out there to learn what is really going on. Or, rely Bannon, he will tell you what to think.

Did you look into the China/Europe energy deal? Donald did accomplish that.

---

And now China and Russia have no access to those minerals, thanks to this yet to be signed deal.

And for the record, it was YOU idiots that claimed Trump would invade Greenland. It was YOU idiots taking the unanswered loaded questions from biased reporters as answers from Trump. You morons take Trump literally so you can point at the outcome and claim it was a failure because it didn't match the bluster of the negotiations at the beginning . You know nothing of politics, economics nor history and your voting habits bear this out. Whether your ignorance is willful or you come by it honestly, it's destroyed any honest objective opinions you might have ever had.

---

That is exactly what I said, the only thing I can see is the Russia/China exclusion. Thanks for parroting.

No one takes him literally? He is not being literal? Also, even if he isn't. China is using this.

Xi assures Brazil's Lula of China's support in 'turbulent' times
A China-Europe energy alliance could deliver a new world order
Carney reaches 'preliminary but landmark' China deal on tariffs, quotas - National | Globalnews.ca
China's Davos Agenda: Countering US Hegemony, Promoting a "Shared Future" - Modern Diplomacy



Canada part of the Gaza? Or do we need to check Truth Social????

I am sure it means nothing. People like being called stupid and ungracious. You guys keep cheering.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sadly, this is what FLBear has become:

Rant.

Ignore facts.

Repeat rant, to the point of pretending the facts support his lies.

---

LOL here we see a rehash of the conversation I've had with him

Batya Ungar-Sargon on a potential Greenland deal: "That is epic!"

CNN's Abby Phillip: "That is something that could have been hashed out in one of the many meetings that Trump had…"

Batya: "Then how come nobody did that before?"pic.twitter.com/Lj5pmWqxNu

— Thomas Sowell Quotes (@ThomasSowell) January 22, 2026

---

What does that have to do with the agreement we have had in place since 1951?

Or, why he didn't ask in in 2016 to 2017?

Or, why he just didn't ask 2 months ago before threatening to invade?

You think that was a positive comment toward Trump by Sowell?

---

LOL. So sad to see you wallowing in ignorance here. Trump did make a run at Greenland later in his first term. He cancelled a planned state visit to Denmark in 2019 over it. He's better prepared this time, and more resolute. Ergo the outcome is better. He is certainly not the first POTUS to make serious run at it.

https://www.labrujulaverde.com/en/2024/11/the-4-times-the-united-states-tried-to-acquire-greenland-from-denmark/
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/brief-history-of-us-trying-failing-buy-greenland-ps-010826
https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/07/politics/us-greenland-trump-denmark-history-hnk

Here's what your vanities about how the public persona of a president causes you to misread the situatin. We most certainly will invade Greenland if Denmark demands we leave. or if an independent Greenland asks us to leave. or if a rival power gains a foothold there. Greenland is absolutely more important to us, in geopolitical terms, than it is to Denmark. It's a costly unexploitable asset to the Danes. It's a strategic imperative for us. So if it really is important, isn't it necessary to get where we need to get, however it takes? The deal we see unfolding today echoes of the Truman era.

The orange dude is crude but effective, which is preferrable to polite and impotent.

---

He made a run and failed to buy it, as have several Presidents. As he did again.

What deal? So far the ONLY thing different than the situation before is a reference to China and Russia. Russia, no one wants there. China is problematic as they bring investment and infrastructure. What are we giving to counter that? We building the infrastructure in Greenland?

Look into China/Europe energy collaboration.

---

Weird how you forgot about the access to rare earth minerals... must have been an honest mistake on your part. Lol

---

Access? We have had access, they have asked us and everyone else to invest in rare earth minerals and we said no. It is too expensive and the conditions too harsh, it was cheaper to get them on the open market. Denmark and Greenland have been trying for decades to get someone to invest. If Trump wanted to partner on rare earths all he had to do was ask...

But, the reality show is a much better approach. It gets guys like you blood up. We showed them, damn Eurotrash...

Also, look up if the NATO Secretary has the authority to negotiate anything on this for Denmark. He allowed Donald to save face with your ilk, that is what he does. Look up his career. Internet is great, a wealth of information out there to learn what is really going on. Or, rely Bannon, he will tell you what to think.

Did you look into the China/Europe energy deal? Donald did accomplish that.

---

And now China and Russia have no access to those minerals, thanks to this yet to be signed deal.

And for the record, it was YOU idiots that claimed Trump would invade Greenland. It was YOU idiots taking the unanswered loaded questions from biased reporters as answers from Trump. You morons take Trump literally so you can point at the outcome and claim it was a failure because it didn't match the bluster of the negotiations at the beginning . You know nothing of politics, economics nor history and your voting habits bear this out. Whether your ignorance is willful or you come by it honestly, it's destroyed any honest objective opinions you might have ever had.

---

That is exactly what I said, the only thing I can see is the Russia/China exclusion. Thanks for parroting.

No one takes him literally? He is not being literal? Also, even if he isn't. China is using this.

Xi assures Brazil's Lula of China's support in 'turbulent' times
A China-Europe energy alliance could deliver a new world order
Carney reaches 'preliminary but landmark' China deal on tariffs, quotas - National | Globalnews.ca
China's Davos Agenda: Countering US Hegemony, Promoting a "Shared Future" - Modern Diplomacy



Canada part of the Gaza? Or do we need to check Truth Social????

I am sure it means nothing. People like being called stupid and ungracious. You guys keep cheering.

---

So your statement was, "Except for all the changes that bar our enemies from accessing those rare earth minerals, this new deal is the same as the existing deal! Trump lost!!!!" ? THAT is your big victory lap?

And now you're worried about China? Hilarious. They will use anything, including lies, to further their own power. Probably why democrats identify with them so closely.

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sadly, this is what FLBear has become:

Rant.

Ignore facts.

Repeat rant, to the point of pretending the facts support his lies.

---

LOL here we see a rehash of the conversation I've had with him

Batya Ungar-Sargon on a potential Greenland deal: "That is epic!"

CNN's Abby Phillip: "That is something that could have been hashed out in one of the many meetings that Trump had…"

Batya: "Then how come nobody did that before?"pic.twitter.com/Lj5pmWqxNu

— Thomas Sowell Quotes (@ThomasSowell) January 22, 2026

---

What does that have to do with the agreement we have had in place since 1951?

Or, why he didn't ask in in 2016 to 2017?

Or, why he just didn't ask 2 months ago before threatening to invade?

You think that was a positive comment toward Trump by Sowell?

---

LOL. So sad to see you wallowing in ignorance here. Trump did make a run at Greenland later in his first term. He cancelled a planned state visit to Denmark in 2019 over it. He's better prepared this time, and more resolute. Ergo the outcome is better. He is certainly not the first POTUS to make serious run at it.

https://www.labrujulaverde.com/en/2024/11/the-4-times-the-united-states-tried-to-acquire-greenland-from-denmark/
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/brief-history-of-us-trying-failing-buy-greenland-ps-010826
https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/07/politics/us-greenland-trump-denmark-history-hnk

Here's what your vanities about how the public persona of a president causes you to misread the situatin. We most certainly will invade Greenland if Denmark demands we leave. or if an independent Greenland asks us to leave. or if a rival power gains a foothold there. Greenland is absolutely more important to us, in geopolitical terms, than it is to Denmark. It's a costly unexploitable asset to the Danes. It's a strategic imperative for us. So if it really is important, isn't it necessary to get where we need to get, however it takes? The deal we see unfolding today echoes of the Truman era.

The orange dude is crude but effective, which is preferrable to polite and impotent.

---

He made a run and failed to buy it, as have several Presidents. As he did again.

What deal? So far the ONLY thing different than the situation before is a reference to China and Russia. Russia, no one wants there. China is problematic as they bring investment and infrastructure. What are we giving to counter that? We building the infrastructure in Greenland?

Look into China/Europe energy collaboration.

---

Weird how you forgot about the access to rare earth minerals... must have been an honest mistake on your part. Lol

---

Access? We have had access, they have asked us and everyone else to invest in rare earth minerals and we said no. It is too expensive and the conditions too harsh, it was cheaper to get them on the open market. Denmark and Greenland have been trying for decades to get someone to invest. If Trump wanted to partner on rare earths all he had to do was ask...

But, the reality show is a much better approach. It gets guys like you blood up. We showed them, damn Eurotrash...

Also, look up if the NATO Secretary has the authority to negotiate anything on this for Denmark. He allowed Donald to save face with your ilk, that is what he does. Look up his career. Internet is great, a wealth of information out there to learn what is really going on. Or, rely Bannon, he will tell you what to think.

Did you look into the China/Europe energy deal? Donald did accomplish that.

---

And now China and Russia have no access to those minerals, thanks to this yet to be signed deal.

And for the record, it was YOU idiots that claimed Trump would invade Greenland. It was YOU idiots taking the unanswered loaded questions from biased reporters as answers from Trump. You morons take Trump literally so you can point at the outcome and claim it was a failure because it didn't match the bluster of the negotiations at the beginning . You know nothing of politics, economics nor history and your voting habits bear this out. Whether your ignorance is willful or you come by it honestly, it's destroyed any honest objective opinions you might have ever had.

---

Are you really this thick? Him backing off using the military against NATO is a good thing? He shouln't be going there at all. It is Denmark! I guess the Canada comments were positives too?

You really think Davos was a positive successful meeting for the US?

Olympics in Italy gonna be fun...

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sadly, this is what FLBear has become:

Rant.

Ignore facts.

Repeat rant, to the point of pretending the facts support his lies.

---

LOL here we see a rehash of the conversation I've had with him

Batya Ungar-Sargon on a potential Greenland deal: "That is epic!"

CNN's Abby Phillip: "That is something that could have been hashed out in one of the many meetings that Trump had…"

Batya: "Then how come nobody did that before?"pic.twitter.com/Lj5pmWqxNu

— Thomas Sowell Quotes (@ThomasSowell) January 22, 2026

---

What does that have to do with the agreement we have had in place since 1951?

Or, why he didn't ask in in 2016 to 2017?

Or, why he just didn't ask 2 months ago before threatening to invade?

You think that was a positive comment toward Trump by Sowell?

---

LOL. So sad to see you wallowing in ignorance here. Trump did make a run at Greenland later in his first term. He cancelled a planned state visit to Denmark in 2019 over it. He's better prepared this time, and more resolute. Ergo the outcome is better. He is certainly not the first POTUS to make serious run at it.

https://www.labrujulaverde.com/en/2024/11/the-4-times-the-united-states-tried-to-acquire-greenland-from-denmark/
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/brief-history-of-us-trying-failing-buy-greenland-ps-010826
https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/07/politics/us-greenland-trump-denmark-history-hnk

Here's what your vanities about how the public persona of a president causes you to misread the situatin. We most certainly will invade Greenland if Denmark demands we leave. or if an independent Greenland asks us to leave. or if a rival power gains a foothold there. Greenland is absolutely more important to us, in geopolitical terms, than it is to Denmark. It's a costly unexploitable asset to the Danes. It's a strategic imperative for us. So if it really is important, isn't it necessary to get where we need to get, however it takes? The deal we see unfolding today echoes of the Truman era.

The orange dude is crude but effective, which is preferrable to polite and impotent.

---

He made a run and failed to buy it, as have several Presidents. As he did again.

What deal? So far the ONLY thing different than the situation before is a reference to China and Russia. Russia, no one wants there. China is problematic as they bring investment and infrastructure. What are we giving to counter that? We building the infrastructure in Greenland?

Look into China/Europe energy collaboration.

---

Weird how you forgot about the access to rare earth minerals... must have been an honest mistake on your part. Lol

---

Access? We have had access, they have asked us and everyone else to invest in rare earth minerals and we said no. It is too expensive and the conditions too harsh, it was cheaper to get them on the open market. Denmark and Greenland have been trying for decades to get someone to invest. If Trump wanted to partner on rare earths all he had to do was ask...

But, the reality show is a much better approach. It gets guys like you blood up. We showed them, damn Eurotrash...

Also, look up if the NATO Secretary has the authority to negotiate anything on this for Denmark. He allowed Donald to save face with your ilk, that is what he does. Look up his career. Internet is great, a wealth of information out there to learn what is really going on. Or, rely Bannon, he will tell you what to think.

Did you look into the China/Europe energy deal? Donald did accomplish that.

---

And now China and Russia have no access to those minerals, thanks to this yet to be signed deal.

And for the record, it was YOU idiots that claimed Trump would invade Greenland. It was YOU idiots taking the unanswered loaded questions from biased reporters as answers from Trump. You morons take Trump literally so you can point at the outcome and claim it was a failure because it didn't match the bluster of the negotiations at the beginning . You know nothing of politics, economics nor history and your voting habits bear this out. Whether your ignorance is willful or you come by it honestly, it's destroyed any honest objective opinions you might have ever had.

---

Are you really this thick? Him backing off using the military against NATO is a good thing? He shouln't be going there at all. It is Denmark! I guess the Canada comments were positives too?

You really think Davos was a positive successful meeting for the US?

Olympics in Italy gonna be fun...

---

All taken out of context by media in order to trigger the lowest IQ voters into fear and rage. Looks like it worked, as usual.

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sadly, this is what FLBear has become:

Rant.

Ignore facts.

Repeat rant, to the point of pretending the facts support his lies.

---

LOL here we see a rehash of the conversation I've had with him

Batya Ungar-Sargon on a potential Greenland deal: "That is epic!"

CNN's Abby Phillip: "That is something that could have been hashed out in one of the many meetings that Trump had…"

Batya: "Then how come nobody did that before?"pic.twitter.com/Lj5pmWqxNu

— Thomas Sowell Quotes (@ThomasSowell) January 22, 2026

---

What does that have to do with the agreement we have had in place since 1951?

Or, why he didn't ask in in 2016 to 2017?

Or, why he just didn't ask 2 months ago before threatening to invade?

You think that was a positive comment toward Trump by Sowell?

---

LOL. So sad to see you wallowing in ignorance here. Trump did make a run at Greenland later in his first term. He cancelled a planned state visit to Denmark in 2019 over it. He's better prepared this time, and more resolute. Ergo the outcome is better. He is certainly not the first POTUS to make serious run at it.

https://www.labrujulaverde.com/en/2024/11/the-4-times-the-united-states-tried-to-acquire-greenland-from-denmark/
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/brief-history-of-us-trying-failing-buy-greenland-ps-010826
https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/07/politics/us-greenland-trump-denmark-history-hnk

Here's what your vanities about how the public persona of a president causes you to misread the situatin. We most certainly will invade Greenland if Denmark demands we leave. or if an independent Greenland asks us to leave. or if a rival power gains a foothold there. Greenland is absolutely more important to us, in geopolitical terms, than it is to Denmark. It's a costly unexploitable asset to the Danes. It's a strategic imperative for us. So if it really is important, isn't it necessary to get where we need to get, however it takes? The deal we see unfolding today echoes of the Truman era.

The orange dude is crude but effective, which is preferrable to polite and impotent.

---

He made a run and failed to buy it, as have several Presidents. As he did again.

What deal? So far the ONLY thing different than the situation before is a reference to China and Russia. Russia, no one wants there. China is problematic as they bring investment and infrastructure. What are we giving to counter that? We building the infrastructure in Greenland?

Look into China/Europe energy collaboration.

---

Weird how you forgot about the access to rare earth minerals... must have been an honest mistake on your part. Lol

---

Access? We have had access, they have asked us and everyone else to invest in rare earth minerals and we said no. It is too expensive and the conditions too harsh, it was cheaper to get them on the open market. Denmark and Greenland have been trying for decades to get someone to invest. If Trump wanted to partner on rare earths all he had to do was ask...

But, the reality show is a much better approach. It gets guys like you blood up. We showed them, damn Eurotrash...

Also, look up if the NATO Secretary has the authority to negotiate anything on this for Denmark. He allowed Donald to save face with your ilk, that is what he does. Look up his career. Internet is great, a wealth of information out there to learn what is really going on. Or, rely Bannon, he will tell you what to think.

Did you look into the China/Europe energy deal? Donald did accomplish that.

---

And now China and Russia have no access to those minerals, thanks to this yet to be signed deal.

And for the record, it was YOU idiots that claimed Trump would invade Greenland. It was YOU idiots taking the unanswered loaded questions from biased reporters as answers from Trump. You morons take Trump literally so you can point at the outcome and claim it was a failure because it didn't match the bluster of the negotiations at the beginning . You know nothing of politics, economics nor history and your voting habits bear this out. Whether your ignorance is willful or you come by it honestly, it's destroyed any honest objective opinions you might have ever had.

---

Are you really this thick? Him backing off using the military against NATO is a good thing? He shouln't be going there at all. It is Denmark! I guess the Canada comments were positives too?

You really think Davos was a positive successful meeting for the US?

Olympics in Italy gonna be fun...

---

All taken out of context by media in order to trigger the lowest IQ voters into fear and rage. Looks like it worked, as usual.

---

Yeah, that's the way it is being taken. I am sure Donald is glad he has you 9 or 10 who actually got it.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sadly, this is what FLBear has become:

Rant.

Ignore facts.

Repeat rant, to the point of pretending the facts support his lies.

---

LOL here we see a rehash of the conversation I've had with him

Batya Ungar-Sargon on a potential Greenland deal: "That is epic!"

CNN's Abby Phillip: "That is something that could have been hashed out in one of the many meetings that Trump had…"

Batya: "Then how come nobody did that before?"pic.twitter.com/Lj5pmWqxNu

— Thomas Sowell Quotes (@ThomasSowell) January 22, 2026

---

What does that have to do with the agreement we have had in place since 1951?

Or, why he didn't ask in in 2016 to 2017?

Or, why he just didn't ask 2 months ago before threatening to invade?

You think that was a positive comment toward Trump by Sowell?

---

LOL. So sad to see you wallowing in ignorance here. Trump did make a run at Greenland later in his first term. He cancelled a planned state visit to Denmark in 2019 over it. He's better prepared this time, and more resolute. Ergo the outcome is better. He is certainly not the first POTUS to make serious run at it.

https://www.labrujulaverde.com/en/2024/11/the-4-times-the-united-states-tried-to-acquire-greenland-from-denmark/
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/brief-history-of-us-trying-failing-buy-greenland-ps-010826
https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/07/politics/us-greenland-trump-denmark-history-hnk

Here's what your vanities about how the public persona of a president causes you to misread the situatin. We most certainly will invade Greenland if Denmark demands we leave. or if an independent Greenland asks us to leave. or if a rival power gains a foothold there. Greenland is absolutely more important to us, in geopolitical terms, than it is to Denmark. It's a costly unexploitable asset to the Danes. It's a strategic imperative for us. So if it really is important, isn't it necessary to get where we need to get, however it takes? The deal we see unfolding today echoes of the Truman era.

The orange dude is crude but effective, which is preferrable to polite and impotent.

---

He made a run and failed to buy it, as have several Presidents. As he did again.

What deal? So far the ONLY thing different than the situation before is a reference to China and Russia. Russia, no one wants there. China is problematic as they bring investment and infrastructure. What are we giving to counter that? We building the infrastructure in Greenland?

Look into China/Europe energy collaboration.

---

Weird how you forgot about the access to rare earth minerals... must have been an honest mistake on your part. Lol

---

Access? We have had access, they have asked us and everyone else to invest in rare earth minerals and we said no. It is too expensive and the conditions too harsh, it was cheaper to get them on the open market. Denmark and Greenland have been trying for decades to get someone to invest. If Trump wanted to partner on rare earths all he had to do was ask...

But, the reality show is a much better approach. It gets guys like you blood up. We showed them, damn Eurotrash...

Also, look up if the NATO Secretary has the authority to negotiate anything on this for Denmark. He allowed Donald to save face with your ilk, that is what he does. Look up his career. Internet is great, a wealth of information out there to learn what is really going on. Or, rely Bannon, he will tell you what to think.

Did you look into the China/Europe energy deal? Donald did accomplish that.

---

And now China and Russia have no access to those minerals, thanks to this yet to be signed deal.

And for the record, it was YOU idiots that claimed Trump would invade Greenland. It was YOU idiots taking the unanswered loaded questions from biased reporters as answers from Trump. You morons take Trump literally so you can point at the outcome and claim it was a failure because it didn't match the bluster of the negotiations at the beginning . You know nothing of politics, economics nor history and your voting habits bear this out. Whether your ignorance is willful or you come by it honestly, it's destroyed any honest objective opinions you might have ever had.

---

Are you really this thick? Him backing off using the military against NATO is a good thing? He shouln't be going there at all. It is Denmark! I guess the Canada comments were positives too?

You really think Davos was a positive successful meeting for the US?

Olympics in Italy gonna be fun...

---

All taken out of context by media in order to trigger the lowest IQ voters into fear and rage. Looks like it worked, as usual.

---

Yeah, that's the way it is being taken. I am sure Donald is glad he has you 9 or 10 who actually got it.

---

Well, it's takes a special kind of stupid to believe Trump is going to invade Greenland. Good rule of thumb; If Jr is on your side, you're on the side of ignorance.

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sadly, this is what FLBear has become:

Rant.

Ignore facts.

Repeat rant, to the point of pretending the facts support his lies.

---

LOL here we see a rehash of the conversation I've had with him

Batya Ungar-Sargon on a potential Greenland deal: "That is epic!"

CNN's Abby Phillip: "That is something that could have been hashed out in one of the many meetings that Trump had…"

Batya: "Then how come nobody did that before?"pic.twitter.com/Lj5pmWqxNu

— Thomas Sowell Quotes (@ThomasSowell) January 22, 2026

---

What does that have to do with the agreement we have had in place since 1951?

Or, why he didn't ask in in 2016 to 2017?

Or, why he just didn't ask 2 months ago before threatening to invade?

You think that was a positive comment toward Trump by Sowell?

---

LOL. So sad to see you wallowing in ignorance here. Trump did make a run at Greenland later in his first term. He cancelled a planned state visit to Denmark in 2019 over it. He's better prepared this time, and more resolute. Ergo the outcome is better. He is certainly not the first POTUS to make serious run at it.

https://www.labrujulaverde.com/en/2024/11/the-4-times-the-united-states-tried-to-acquire-greenland-from-denmark/
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/brief-history-of-us-trying-failing-buy-greenland-ps-010826
https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/07/politics/us-greenland-trump-denmark-history-hnk

Here's what your vanities about how the public persona of a president causes you to misread the situatin. We most certainly will invade Greenland if Denmark demands we leave. or if an independent Greenland asks us to leave. or if a rival power gains a foothold there. Greenland is absolutely more important to us, in geopolitical terms, than it is to Denmark. It's a costly unexploitable asset to the Danes. It's a strategic imperative for us. So if it really is important, isn't it necessary to get where we need to get, however it takes? The deal we see unfolding today echoes of the Truman era.

The orange dude is crude but effective, which is preferrable to polite and impotent.

---

He made a run and failed to buy it, as have several Presidents. As he did again.

What deal? So far the ONLY thing different than the situation before is a reference to China and Russia. Russia, no one wants there. China is problematic as they bring investment and infrastructure. What are we giving to counter that? We building the infrastructure in Greenland?

Look into China/Europe energy collaboration.

---

Weird how you forgot about the access to rare earth minerals... must have been an honest mistake on your part. Lol

---

Access? We have had access, they have asked us and everyone else to invest in rare earth minerals and we said no. It is too expensive and the conditions too harsh, it was cheaper to get them on the open market. Denmark and Greenland have been trying for decades to get someone to invest. If Trump wanted to partner on rare earths all he had to do was ask...

But, the reality show is a much better approach. It gets guys like you blood up. We showed them, damn Eurotrash...

Also, look up if the NATO Secretary has the authority to negotiate anything on this for Denmark. He allowed Donald to save face with your ilk, that is what he does. Look up his career. Internet is great, a wealth of information out there to learn what is really going on. Or, rely Bannon, he will tell you what to think.

Did you look into the China/Europe energy deal? Donald did accomplish that.

---

And now China and Russia have no access to those minerals, thanks to this yet to be signed deal.

And for the record, it was YOU idiots that claimed Trump would invade Greenland. It was YOU idiots taking the unanswered loaded questions from biased reporters as answers from Trump. You morons take Trump literally so you can point at the outcome and claim it was a failure because it didn't match the bluster of the negotiations at the beginning . You know nothing of politics, economics nor history and your voting habits bear this out. Whether your ignorance is willful or you come by it honestly, it's destroyed any honest objective opinions you might have ever had.

---

Are you really this thick? Him backing off using the military against NATO is a good thing? He shouln't be going there at all. It is Denmark! I guess the Canada comments were positives too?

You really think Davos was a positive successful meeting for the US?

Olympics in Italy gonna be fun...

---

All taken out of context by media in order to trigger the lowest IQ voters into fear and rage. Looks like it worked, as usual.

---

Yeah, that's the way it is being taken. I am sure Donald is glad he has you 9 or 10 who actually got it.

---

Well, it's takes a special kind of stupid to believe Trump is going to invade Greenland. Good rule of thumb; If Jr is on your side, you're on the side of ignorance.

---

You really think he wouldn't? Who is being naive now...

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sadly, this is what FLBear has become:

Rant.

Ignore facts.

Repeat rant, to the point of pretending the facts support his lies.

---

LOL here we see a rehash of the conversation I've had with him

Batya Ungar-Sargon on a potential Greenland deal: "That is epic!"

CNN's Abby Phillip: "That is something that could have been hashed out in one of the many meetings that Trump had…"

Batya: "Then how come nobody did that before?"pic.twitter.com/Lj5pmWqxNu

— Thomas Sowell Quotes (@ThomasSowell) January 22, 2026

---

What does that have to do with the agreement we have had in place since 1951?

Or, why he didn't ask in in 2016 to 2017?

Or, why he just didn't ask 2 months ago before threatening to invade?

You think that was a positive comment toward Trump by Sowell?

---

LOL. So sad to see you wallowing in ignorance here. Trump did make a run at Greenland later in his first term. He cancelled a planned state visit to Denmark in 2019 over it. He's better prepared this time, and more resolute. Ergo the outcome is better. He is certainly not the first POTUS to make serious run at it.

https://www.labrujulaverde.com/en/2024/11/the-4-times-the-united-states-tried-to-acquire-greenland-from-denmark/
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/brief-history-of-us-trying-failing-buy-greenland-ps-010826
https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/07/politics/us-greenland-trump-denmark-history-hnk

Here's what your vanities about how the public persona of a president causes you to misread the situatin. We most certainly will invade Greenland if Denmark demands we leave. or if an independent Greenland asks us to leave. or if a rival power gains a foothold there. Greenland is absolutely more important to us, in geopolitical terms, than it is to Denmark. It's a costly unexploitable asset to the Danes. It's a strategic imperative for us. So if it really is important, isn't it necessary to get where we need to get, however it takes? The deal we see unfolding today echoes of the Truman era.

The orange dude is crude but effective, which is preferrable to polite and impotent.

---

He made a run and failed to buy it, as have several Presidents. As he did again.

What deal? So far the ONLY thing different than the situation before is a reference to China and Russia. Russia, no one wants there. China is problematic as they bring investment and infrastructure. What are we giving to counter that? We building the infrastructure in Greenland?

Look into China/Europe energy collaboration.

---

Weird how you forgot about the access to rare earth minerals... must have been an honest mistake on your part. Lol

---

Access? We have had access, they have asked us and everyone else to invest in rare earth minerals and we said no. It is too expensive and the conditions too harsh, it was cheaper to get them on the open market. Denmark and Greenland have been trying for decades to get someone to invest. If Trump wanted to partner on rare earths all he had to do was ask...

But, the reality show is a much better approach. It gets guys like you blood up. We showed them, damn Eurotrash...

Also, look up if the NATO Secretary has the authority to negotiate anything on this for Denmark. He allowed Donald to save face with your ilk, that is what he does. Look up his career. Internet is great, a wealth of information out there to learn what is really going on. Or, rely Bannon, he will tell you what to think.

Did you look into the China/Europe energy deal? Donald did accomplish that.

---

And now China and Russia have no access to those minerals, thanks to this yet to be signed deal.

And for the record, it was YOU idiots that claimed Trump would invade Greenland. It was YOU idiots taking the unanswered loaded questions from biased reporters as answers from Trump. You morons take Trump literally so you can point at the outcome and claim it was a failure because it didn't match the bluster of the negotiations at the beginning . You know nothing of politics, economics nor history and your voting habits bear this out. Whether your ignorance is willful or you come by it honestly, it's destroyed any honest objective opinions you might have ever had.

---

Are you really this thick? Him backing off using the military against NATO is a good thing? He shouln't be going there at all. It is Denmark! I guess the Canada comments were positives too?

You really think Davos was a positive successful meeting for the US?

Olympics in Italy gonna be fun...

---

All taken out of context by media in order to trigger the lowest IQ voters into fear and rage. Looks like it worked, as usual.

---

Yeah, that's the way it is being taken. I am sure Donald is glad he has you 9 or 10 who actually got it.

---

Well, it's takes a special kind of stupid to believe Trump is going to invade Greenland. Good rule of thumb; If Jr is on your side, you're on the side of ignorance.

---

You really think he wouldn't? Who is being naive now...

---

You. You're being naive. Gullible, is another way to put it.

Where do the penguins live in Greenland?

Embrace the penguin. pic.twitter.com/kKlzwd3Rx7

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) January 23, 2026

Jack Bauer said:

---

Where do the penguins live in Greenland?

Embrace the penguin. pic.twitter.com/kKlzwd3Rx7

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) January 23, 2026

---

I think they mean the guy on the right.

ron.reagan said:

---

Trump failed to acquire Greenland but at least he sabotaged our relationship with allies.

---

But in reality he didn't

"In politics, there are no permanent friends nor enemies, only permanent interests." - Kissinger

And the permanent interests of Europe's nations align with the USA far more than they do (ever will) with Russia or China or Africa

Trump's hard negotiation tactics over a glacier covered large island in the Arctic change nothing fundamental about the relationship between Americans and Europeans

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sadly, this is what FLBear has become:

Rant.

Ignore facts.

Repeat rant, to the point of pretending the facts support his lies.

---

LOL here we see a rehash of the conversation I've had with him

Batya Ungar-Sargon on a potential Greenland deal: "That is epic!"

CNN's Abby Phillip: "That is something that could have been hashed out in one of the many meetings that Trump had…"

Batya: "Then how come nobody did that before?"pic.twitter.com/Lj5pmWqxNu

— Thomas Sowell Quotes (@ThomasSowell) January 22, 2026

---

What does that have to do with the agreement we have had in place since 1951?

Or, why he didn't ask in in 2016 to 2017?

Or, why he just didn't ask 2 months ago before threatening to invade?

You think that was a positive comment toward Trump by Sowell?

---

LOL. So sad to see you wallowing in ignorance here. Trump did make a run at Greenland later in his first term. He cancelled a planned state visit to Denmark in 2019 over it. He's better prepared this time, and more resolute. Ergo the outcome is better. He is certainly not the first POTUS to make serious run at it.

https://www.labrujulaverde.com/en/2024/11/the-4-times-the-united-states-tried-to-acquire-greenland-from-denmark/
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/brief-history-of-us-trying-failing-buy-greenland-ps-010826
https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/07/politics/us-greenland-trump-denmark-history-hnk

Here's what your vanities about how the public persona of a president causes you to misread the situatin. We most certainly will invade Greenland if Denmark demands we leave. or if an independent Greenland asks us to leave. or if a rival power gains a foothold there. Greenland is absolutely more important to us, in geopolitical terms, than it is to Denmark. It's a costly unexploitable asset to the Danes. It's a strategic imperative for us. So if it really is important, isn't it necessary to get where we need to get, however it takes? The deal we see unfolding today echoes of the Truman era.

The orange dude is crude but effective, which is preferrable to polite and impotent.

---

He made a run and failed to buy it, as have several Presidents. As he did again.

What deal? So far the ONLY thing different than the situation before is a reference to China and Russia. Russia, no one wants there. China is problematic as they bring investment and infrastructure. What are we giving to counter that? We building the infrastructure in Greenland?

Look into China/Europe energy collaboration.

---

Weird how you forgot about the access to rare earth minerals... must have been an honest mistake on your part. Lol

---

Access? We have had access, they have asked us and everyone else to invest in rare earth minerals and we said no. It is too expensive and the conditions too harsh, it was cheaper to get them on the open market. Denmark and Greenland have been trying for decades to get someone to invest. If Trump wanted to partner on rare earths all he had to do was ask...

But, the reality show is a much better approach. It gets guys like you blood up. We showed them, damn Eurotrash...

Also, look up if the NATO Secretary has the authority to negotiate anything on this for Denmark. He allowed Donald to save face with your ilk, that is what he does. Look up his career. Internet is great, a wealth of information out there to learn what is really going on. Or, rely Bannon, he will tell you what to think.

Did you look into the China/Europe energy deal? Donald did accomplish that.

---

And now China and Russia have no access to those minerals, thanks to this yet to be signed deal.

And for the record, it was YOU idiots that claimed Trump would invade Greenland. It was YOU idiots taking the unanswered loaded questions from biased reporters as answers from Trump. You morons take Trump literally so you can point at the outcome and claim it was a failure because it didn't match the bluster of the negotiations at the beginning . You know nothing of politics, economics nor history and your voting habits bear this out. Whether your ignorance is willful or you come by it honestly, it's destroyed any honest objective opinions you might have ever had.

---

Are you really this thick? Him backing off using the military against NATO is a good thing? He shouln't be going there at all. It is Denmark! I guess the Canada comments were positives too?

You really think Davos was a positive successful meeting for the US?

Olympics in Italy gonna be fun...

---

All taken out of context by media in order to trigger the lowest IQ voters into fear and rage. Looks like it worked, as usual.

---

Yeah, that's the way it is being taken. I am sure Donald is glad he has you 9 or 10 who actually got it.

---

Well, it's takes a special kind of stupid to believe Trump is going to invade Greenland. Good rule of thumb; If Jr is on your side, you're on the side of ignorance.

---

TDS is funny. One of the reasons TDSers hate President Trump is because of the stupid crap he says ... yet after all the stupid crap he says they still believe literally everything he says ... it does not take an IQ of 100 to glean when he's just bloviating and when he's serious.

Before there was a TDS there was Bush Derangement Syndrome, a term coined by the late Charles Krauthammer I believe. The Left had the same disease with Reagan, although not as severe. They were not always insane about it then.

historian said:

---

Before there was a TDS there was Bush Derangement Syndrome, a term coined by the late Charles Krauthammer I believe. The Left had the same disease with Reagan, although not as severe. They were not always insane about it then.

---

That's the latent authoritarianism of the Democrat Party at work. Anyone in their way gets savaged.

Like classic fascists, our fascists lie, cheat, steal, murder, scapegoat, etc in their evil obsession gif power. They want to control everyone and everything. And they have no morality. They are totally evil.

The U.S. men's Olympic hockey team just defeated Denmark 6-3.

By the ancient laws of combat, Greenland is now rightfully ours. pic.twitter.com/G6uTqXMP7H

— 🇺🇸 The American Culturist 🇺🇸 (@MericaCulture) February 14, 2026

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sadly, this is what FLBear has become:

Rant.

Ignore facts.

Repeat rant, to the point of pretending the facts support his lies.

---

LOL here we see a rehash of the conversation I've had with him

Batya Ungar-Sargon on a potential Greenland deal: "That is epic!"

CNN's Abby Phillip: "That is something that could have been hashed out in one of the many meetings that Trump had…"

Batya: "Then how come nobody did that before?"pic.twitter.com/Lj5pmWqxNu

— Thomas Sowell Quotes (@ThomasSowell) January 22, 2026

---

What does that have to do with the agreement we have had in place since 1951?

Or, why he didn't ask in in 2016 to 2017?

Or, why he just didn't ask 2 months ago before threatening to invade?

You think that was a positive comment toward Trump by Sowell?

---

LOL. So sad to see you wallowing in ignorance here. Trump did make a run at Greenland later in his first term. He cancelled a planned state visit to Denmark in 2019 over it. He's better prepared this time, and more resolute. Ergo the outcome is better. He is certainly not the first POTUS to make serious run at it.

https://www.labrujulaverde.com/en/2024/11/the-4-times-the-united-states-tried-to-acquire-greenland-from-denmark/
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/brief-history-of-us-trying-failing-buy-greenland-ps-010826
https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/07/politics/us-greenland-trump-denmark-history-hnk

Here's what your vanities about how the public persona of a president causes you to misread the situatin. We most certainly will invade Greenland if Denmark demands we leave. or if an independent Greenland asks us to leave. or if a rival power gains a foothold there. Greenland is absolutely more important to us, in geopolitical terms, than it is to Denmark. It's a costly unexploitable asset to the Danes. It's a strategic imperative for us. So if it really is important, isn't it necessary to get where we need to get, however it takes? The deal we see unfolding today echoes of the Truman era.

The orange dude is crude but effective, which is preferrable to polite and impotent.

---

He made a run and failed to buy it, as have several Presidents. As he did again.

What deal? So far the ONLY thing different than the situation before is a reference to China and Russia. Russia, no one wants there. China is problematic as they bring investment and infrastructure. What are we giving to counter that? We building the infrastructure in Greenland?

Look into China/Europe energy collaboration.

---

Weird how you forgot about the access to rare earth minerals... must have been an honest mistake on your part. Lol

---

Access? We have had access, they have asked us and everyone else to invest in rare earth minerals and we said no. It is too expensive and the conditions too harsh, it was cheaper to get them on the open market. Denmark and Greenland have been trying for decades to get someone to invest. If Trump wanted to partner on rare earths all he had to do was ask...

But, the reality show is a much better approach. It gets guys like you blood up. We showed them, damn Eurotrash...

Also, look up if the NATO Secretary has the authority to negotiate anything on this for Denmark. He allowed Donald to save face with your ilk, that is what he does. Look up his career. Internet is great, a wealth of information out there to learn what is really going on. Or, rely Bannon, he will tell you what to think.

Did you look into the China/Europe energy deal? Donald did accomplish that.

---

And now China and Russia have no access to those minerals, thanks to this yet to be signed deal.

And for the record, it was YOU idiots that claimed Trump would invade Greenland. It was YOU idiots taking the unanswered loaded questions from biased reporters as answers from Trump. You morons take Trump literally so you can point at the outcome and claim it was a failure because it didn't match the bluster of the negotiations at the beginning . You know nothing of politics, economics nor history and your voting habits bear this out. Whether your ignorance is willful or you come by it honestly, it's destroyed any honest objective opinions you might have ever had.

---

Are you really this thick? Him backing off using the military against NATO is a good thing? He shouln't be going there at all. It is Denmark! I guess the Canada comments were positives too?

You really think Davos was a positive successful meeting for the US?

Olympics in Italy gonna be fun...

---

All taken out of context by media in order to trigger the lowest IQ voters into fear and rage. Looks like it worked, as usual.

---

Yeah, that's the way it is being taken. I am sure Donald is glad he has you 9 or 10 who actually got it.

---

Well, it's takes a special kind of stupid to believe Trump is going to invade Greenland. Good rule of thumb; If Jr is on your side, you're on the side of ignorance.

---

TDS is funny. One of the reasons TDSers hate President Trump is because of the stupid crap he says ... yet after all the stupid crap he says they still believe literally everything he says ... it does not take an IQ of 100 to glean when he's just bloviating and when he's serious.

---

Calling people deranged is just plain offensive. It is not funny and it might split the Republican Party. We should not have a President that says so many stupid things.

Guy Noir said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sadly, this is what FLBear has become:

Rant.

Ignore facts.

Repeat rant, to the point of pretending the facts support his lies.

---

LOL here we see a rehash of the conversation I've had with him

Batya Ungar-Sargon on a potential Greenland deal: "That is epic!"

CNN's Abby Phillip: "That is something that could have been hashed out in one of the many meetings that Trump had…"

Batya: "Then how come nobody did that before?"pic.twitter.com/Lj5pmWqxNu

— Thomas Sowell Quotes (@ThomasSowell) January 22, 2026

---

What does that have to do with the agreement we have had in place since 1951?

Or, why he didn't ask in in 2016 to 2017?

Or, why he just didn't ask 2 months ago before threatening to invade?

You think that was a positive comment toward Trump by Sowell?

---

LOL. So sad to see you wallowing in ignorance here. Trump did make a run at Greenland later in his first term. He cancelled a planned state visit to Denmark in 2019 over it. He's better prepared this time, and more resolute. Ergo the outcome is better. He is certainly not the first POTUS to make serious run at it.

https://www.labrujulaverde.com/en/2024/11/the-4-times-the-united-states-tried-to-acquire-greenland-from-denmark/
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/brief-history-of-us-trying-failing-buy-greenland-ps-010826
https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/07/politics/us-greenland-trump-denmark-history-hnk

Here's what your vanities about how the public persona of a president causes you to misread the situatin. We most certainly will invade Greenland if Denmark demands we leave. or if an independent Greenland asks us to leave. or if a rival power gains a foothold there. Greenland is absolutely more important to us, in geopolitical terms, than it is to Denmark. It's a costly unexploitable asset to the Danes. It's a strategic imperative for us. So if it really is important, isn't it necessary to get where we need to get, however it takes? The deal we see unfolding today echoes of the Truman era.

The orange dude is crude but effective, which is preferrable to polite and impotent.

---

He made a run and failed to buy it, as have several Presidents. As he did again.

What deal? So far the ONLY thing different than the situation before is a reference to China and Russia. Russia, no one wants there. China is problematic as they bring investment and infrastructure. What are we giving to counter that? We building the infrastructure in Greenland?

Look into China/Europe energy collaboration.

---

Weird how you forgot about the access to rare earth minerals... must have been an honest mistake on your part. Lol

---

Access? We have had access, they have asked us and everyone else to invest in rare earth minerals and we said no. It is too expensive and the conditions too harsh, it was cheaper to get them on the open market. Denmark and Greenland have been trying for decades to get someone to invest. If Trump wanted to partner on rare earths all he had to do was ask...

But, the reality show is a much better approach. It gets guys like you blood up. We showed them, damn Eurotrash...

Also, look up if the NATO Secretary has the authority to negotiate anything on this for Denmark. He allowed Donald to save face with your ilk, that is what he does. Look up his career. Internet is great, a wealth of information out there to learn what is really going on. Or, rely Bannon, he will tell you what to think.

Did you look into the China/Europe energy deal? Donald did accomplish that.

---

And now China and Russia have no access to those minerals, thanks to this yet to be signed deal.

And for the record, it was YOU idiots that claimed Trump would invade Greenland. It was YOU idiots taking the unanswered loaded questions from biased reporters as answers from Trump. You morons take Trump literally so you can point at the outcome and claim it was a failure because it didn't match the bluster of the negotiations at the beginning . You know nothing of politics, economics nor history and your voting habits bear this out. Whether your ignorance is willful or you come by it honestly, it's destroyed any honest objective opinions you might have ever had.

---

Are you really this thick? Him backing off using the military against NATO is a good thing? He shouln't be going there at all. It is Denmark! I guess the Canada comments were positives too?

You really think Davos was a positive successful meeting for the US?

Olympics in Italy gonna be fun...

---

All taken out of context by media in order to trigger the lowest IQ voters into fear and rage. Looks like it worked, as usual.

---

Yeah, that's the way it is being taken. I am sure Donald is glad he has you 9 or 10 who actually got it.

---

Well, it's takes a special kind of stupid to believe Trump is going to invade Greenland. Good rule of thumb; If Jr is on your side, you're on the side of ignorance.

---

TDS is funny. One of the reasons TDSers hate President Trump is because of the stupid crap he says ... yet after all the stupid crap he says they still believe literally everything he says ... it does not take an IQ of 100 to glean when he's just bloviating and when he's serious.

---

Calling people deranged is just plain offensive. It is not funny and it might split the Republican Party. We should not have a President that says so many stupid things.

---

Were you this passionate about any so called stupid things obama sotoro or biden said?

Guy Noir said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sadly, this is what FLBear has become:

Rant.

Ignore facts.

Repeat rant, to the point of pretending the facts support his lies.

---

LOL here we see a rehash of the conversation I've had with him

Batya Ungar-Sargon on a potential Greenland deal: "That is epic!"

CNN's Abby Phillip: "That is something that could have been hashed out in one of the many meetings that Trump had…"

Batya: "Then how come nobody did that before?"pic.twitter.com/Lj5pmWqxNu

— Thomas Sowell Quotes (@ThomasSowell) January 22, 2026

---

What does that have to do with the agreement we have had in place since 1951?

Or, why he didn't ask in in 2016 to 2017?

Or, why he just didn't ask 2 months ago before threatening to invade?

You think that was a positive comment toward Trump by Sowell?

---

LOL. So sad to see you wallowing in ignorance here. Trump did make a run at Greenland later in his first term. He cancelled a planned state visit to Denmark in 2019 over it. He's better prepared this time, and more resolute. Ergo the outcome is better. He is certainly not the first POTUS to make serious run at it.

https://www.labrujulaverde.com/en/2024/11/the-4-times-the-united-states-tried-to-acquire-greenland-from-denmark/
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/brief-history-of-us-trying-failing-buy-greenland-ps-010826
https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/07/politics/us-greenland-trump-denmark-history-hnk

Here's what your vanities about how the public persona of a president causes you to misread the situatin. We most certainly will invade Greenland if Denmark demands we leave. or if an independent Greenland asks us to leave. or if a rival power gains a foothold there. Greenland is absolutely more important to us, in geopolitical terms, than it is to Denmark. It's a costly unexploitable asset to the Danes. It's a strategic imperative for us. So if it really is important, isn't it necessary to get where we need to get, however it takes? The deal we see unfolding today echoes of the Truman era.

The orange dude is crude but effective, which is preferrable to polite and impotent.

---

He made a run and failed to buy it, as have several Presidents. As he did again.

What deal? So far the ONLY thing different than the situation before is a reference to China and Russia. Russia, no one wants there. China is problematic as they bring investment and infrastructure. What are we giving to counter that? We building the infrastructure in Greenland?

Look into China/Europe energy collaboration.

---

Weird how you forgot about the access to rare earth minerals... must have been an honest mistake on your part. Lol

---

Access? We have had access, they have asked us and everyone else to invest in rare earth minerals and we said no. It is too expensive and the conditions too harsh, it was cheaper to get them on the open market. Denmark and Greenland have been trying for decades to get someone to invest. If Trump wanted to partner on rare earths all he had to do was ask...

But, the reality show is a much better approach. It gets guys like you blood up. We showed them, damn Eurotrash...

Also, look up if the NATO Secretary has the authority to negotiate anything on this for Denmark. He allowed Donald to save face with your ilk, that is what he does. Look up his career. Internet is great, a wealth of information out there to learn what is really going on. Or, rely Bannon, he will tell you what to think.

Did you look into the China/Europe energy deal? Donald did accomplish that.

---

And now China and Russia have no access to those minerals, thanks to this yet to be signed deal.

And for the record, it was YOU idiots that claimed Trump would invade Greenland. It was YOU idiots taking the unanswered loaded questions from biased reporters as answers from Trump. You morons take Trump literally so you can point at the outcome and claim it was a failure because it didn't match the bluster of the negotiations at the beginning . You know nothing of politics, economics nor history and your voting habits bear this out. Whether your ignorance is willful or you come by it honestly, it's destroyed any honest objective opinions you might have ever had.

---

Are you really this thick? Him backing off using the military against NATO is a good thing? He shouln't be going there at all. It is Denmark! I guess the Canada comments were positives too?

You really think Davos was a positive successful meeting for the US?

Olympics in Italy gonna be fun...

---

All taken out of context by media in order to trigger the lowest IQ voters into fear and rage. Looks like it worked, as usual.

---

Yeah, that's the way it is being taken. I am sure Donald is glad he has you 9 or 10 who actually got it.

---

Well, it's takes a special kind of stupid to believe Trump is going to invade Greenland. Good rule of thumb; If Jr is on your side, you're on the side of ignorance.

---

TDS is funny. One of the reasons TDSers hate President Trump is because of the stupid crap he says ... yet after all the stupid crap he says they still believe literally everything he says ... it does not take an IQ of 100 to glean when he's just bloviating and when he's serious.

---

Calling people deranged is just plain offensive. It is not funny and it might split the Republican Party. We should not have a President that says so many stupid things.

---

You're right, we shouldn't have a president that says so many stupid things. So now you should ask yourself, how did we get here? How did we get to the point where the voters are so desperate for change that they'll elect a guy that doesn't care what people think about him or say in the press so long as he drives his agenda.

So Guy, how about it, how did we get here?