Trump Threatens Again To Seize Greenland From NATO "Ally" Denmark

In his daily stream-of-consciousness rant today, King Trump threatened to send more U.S. troops to Greenland, obviously to affect an occupation of that sovereign Danish territory. And again, he insisted the U.S. needs to annex Greenland for U.S. "national security."  [1]

He also still says Canada would be "beautiful" as the 51th state of the U.S.

So the U.S. is threatening two members of the U.S.-created and bosses NATO military alliance with hostile seizures, in the case of Canada the complete extinction of that nation.

Yet media propagandists still refer to Canada and Denmark as U.S. "allies." Allies do not threaten allies territory, sovereignty, and continued existence as nations.

The assembled poodles pretending to be journalists meekly pretended all this is normal and reasonable.
Let me remind you, the U.S. has since World War II maintained military bases on Greenland. Denmark has been most cooperative about this. Also Greenland is inhabited by a civilian population. Of course what they might want doesn't figure in Trump's dictatorial mind.

Let me remind you, the U.S. has since World War II maintained military bases on Greenland. Denmark has been most cooperative about this. Also Greenland is inhabited by a civilian population. Of course what they might want doesn't figure in Trump's dictatorial mind.

It's about time the European lapdogs who run those countries stop pretending the U.S. is their ally and protector. Yet instead, they are racing to assure Trump that they will meet his outrageous demand that they spend the equivalent of 5% of their gross national products (their economies) on "defense." Which actually means buying weapons from U.S. weapons manufacturers. NATO requires "standardization" of weapons, which means for the expensive stuff, largely U.S. ones.

The U.S. doesn't spend 5% of GDP on the military (well, maybe if you count Veterans Affairs, part of NASA, the 2/3rds of the Department of Energy's budget that is for nuclear warhead assembly, disassembly, and research, and more here and there, it might approach 3%), nor should it. NO nation should mindlessly base its military budgets on a percentage of GDP. Instead it should evaluate potential threats, determine the military forces and equipment needed to deal with the threats and their costs, and appropriate the right amount of money. But to my knowledge, NOT A SINGLE POLITICIANS OR MEDIA JABBERER HAS EVER POINTED OUT THIS OBVIOUS FACT OR CHALLENGED THE % DEMANDS!! 

Just how mindlessly conformist are these elite jackasses?

Very conformist, apparently.

Trump can wave the "national security" magical wand to justify anything because that is EXACTLY how that phrase has been used for decades to justify U.S. aggression, U.S. repression inside and outside the U.S., and various U.S. crimes, AND the secrecy used to suppress awareness of these crimes from the American people. A good chunk of those people would support the crimes anyway, contrary to the delusions of leftists who think that if "the people only knew" the truth they would rise up in righteous anger blah blah. The fact that there are always large numbers of reactionaries, national chauvinists- aka "patriots"- racists, and fascists eludes leftists and is the reason that their favorite slogan, "The People, United, Will Never Be Defeated" is fatuous and dangerously misleading. The people are rarely united. The only times they are are during some wars.

"National Security" is NEVER DEFINED by those throwing it around. It really means U.S. POWER. Pure and simple, that is the real meaning. Whether talking about global domination, or suppression of domestic dissidents, that is what they do behind the veil of "national security." And only those with "security clearances," that is, those deemed to have the correct ideological mindset, get to know the details of the dirty crimes being committed behind the veil of "national security."

        He whom the Gods would make King, they first make mad. (Or maybe just drunk on power.)

1] Referring to Greenland, Mad King Trump said "We really need it for national security. Maybe we'll send more and more soldiers. What do you think of that Pete?" [Talking to Peter Hegseth, the alcoholic rapist Trump and the GOP Senators made Secretary of Defense. I did not hear an audible response from Hegseth.]

 

Trump To The Republican Party Is Like Hitler To The Nazi Party

Both men had/have complete control of their respective parties. Both parties were/are effectively personality cults completely devoted to their respective Leaders. (Hitler was "Der Fuhrer," Fuhrer is German for leader, thus "The Leader.")

Trump has sent around a picture of himself wearing a crown. He's really shoving it in everyone's face. Because he knows he has impunity. The Congress is controlled by the Party he controls, so he cannot be impeached and removed from office. (Hell, the Republicans wouldn't even convict him after he was impeached for the violent coup attempt of January 1, 2021. Republican politicians in the Capitol had to flee for their lives. The Republican vice president, Pence, was in mortal danger.) And the Supreme Court paved the way for his dictatorship before the election, first by sabotaging the criminal cases against him for the coup and the theft of classified documents, then gratuitously declaring that the president of the U.S. CANNOT BE GUILTY OF A CRIME, as long as what he does is an "official act." That was the Nixon doctrine, "when the president does it, it's legal." That didn't fly back in the 1970s. Now it's official Constitutional Law, thanks to the Republican Supremacist Court.

Not the first time in history a "King" has crowned Himself.

 It's obvious that revolutionary changes are necessary. The Supreme Court has to be overthrown, for starters. But instead of revolution we're getting revanchism, an attempt to return to the 19th century. Trump pines for the 1890s, which he cites as a golden era. That's when the U.S. conquered the Spanish colonies of Cuba, Puerto Rico, the far off Philippines, and assorted other Pacific and Caribbean islands. His hankering to absorb Canada and Greenland into the U.S. and "renaming" the Gulf of Mexico Gulf of America, Denali in Alaska as Mt. McKinley (his new second favorite president after himself) and threats to seize the Panama canal are all of a piece of anachronistic imperialism. It is a regression to an earlier form of U.S. Imperialism.

We've seen this kind of U.S. arrogance before. Drunk on power, our rulers think they can do anything. George Bush (Bush the Younger) thought the U.S. could "remake" the Middle East (and Afghanistan) more to his liking. Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon tried to cut Vietnam in two and create a permanent client regime in the southern half.

The U.S. is certainly very powerful, but it has more success picking on very small and defenseless countries like Grenada (invaded by Reagan) or Panama (invaded by the Bush the Elder). And yes, it has won major wars- against Mexico (1846), a senile Spanish empire (1896), and with help (the World Wars against mostly Germany). 

The one thing on foreign policy Trump is doing right is trying to end the U.S. proxy war in Ukraine against Russia, which is destroying Ukraine. THAT is the one thing the Democrats hate! They are fine with his support for Israeli genocide, and they don't actually oppose his anti-immigrant policy- which is really just an extension with much nastier rhetoric of the policies of Biden, and Barack "Deporter in Chief" Obama, who set a record for deportations (over 8 years) that Trump has yet to match (but give him time). But the Democrats (and Euroscum like UK prime minister Keir Starmer, who has criminalized anti-genocide protest in Britain) are determined to fight on to the last Ukrainian.

However, the way Trump is trying to end the Ukraine war is unethical. He's cutting the Ukrainians out of the process, same as he sold out the Afghan client regime by dealing only with the Taliban, stabbing the Afghan government in the back. In both cases, the parallel historical analogy is Munich 1938, when Britain and France sold out Czechoslovakia to Nazi Germany at a conference from which the Czechs were banned (not invited- same thing). And yet, the Democrats haven't invoked that analogy. It is an analogy that has been speciously invoked ad nauseam to justify U.S. violence, subversion, and imperialist aggression innumerable times since World War Two, yet not now, when it is actually appropriate, with Trump! Amazing.

With Ukraine cut off from U.S. arms, that would leave the Europeans and the warmongering Keir Starmer, loathing British prime minister, to keep sacrificing Ukrainians if they so choose- Starmer has even said he'd send British "peacekeeping" troops to Ukraine.

But to return to the start of this essay: Trump To The Republican Party Is Like Hitler To The Nazi Party.