Jump to content

Trump foreign policy


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

 

To where,  Russia?  Why not buy Canada while he's at it?  

 

 

 

He's accepting Global warming now?  

 

Even with melting ice caps those routes would be closed half of the year.   Is that really productive?  

 

It's not the Panama Canal. 

 

 

Another stupid idea to deflect another stupid idea is my guess.

We already own Canada. We're its daddy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

We already own Canada. We're its daddy.

 

we are free and looking forward to a good federal election where issues will be important

 

without all the circus show hatred your media loves to drum up

 

 

and routinely treatable illnesses, many fatal, are taken care of without a bill at the end of the day

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, GG said:

 

Start with a globe and then map out the shipping routes in a warming Arctic Ocean.

 

We're just completing our long-term goal of surrounding Canada to contain the Red Maple Leaf Menace within their own borders. It also helps to be able to flank them from both sides, should they try to invade the US.

 

It's not a coincidence that 90% of Canadians live within a few hundred miles of the US border.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

We're just completing our long-term goal of surrounding Canada to contain the Red Maple Leaf Menace within their own borders. It also helps to be able to flank them from both sides, should they try to invade the US.

 

It's not a coincidence that 90% of Canadians live within a few hundred miles of the US border.

Even a Canadian realizes he can't suck from our teet if he's too far away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, keepthefaith said:

 

Exactly.

 

Quote

Why does Trump want the United States to buy the world's biggest island? The reason, in large part, is likely that Greenland is rich in natural resources, including iron ore, lead, zinc, diamonds, gold, rare-earth elements, uranium and oil, according to the Brookings Institution, a nonprofit public-policy organization in Washington, D.C. 

Not only does Greenland boast these resources, but more are being exposed there as the Earth warms due to human-caused climate change. 

 

It's not like we haven't purchased resource rich areas in the past.  The Louisiana Purchase and Seward's Icebox come to mind.

 

If Hillary had won and suggested this it would be considered brilliant and very progressive.  

Edited by reddogblitz
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

Exactly.

 

 

It's not like we haven't purchased resource rich areas in the past.  The Louisiana Purchase and Seward's Icebox come to mind.

 

I Hillary had won and suggested this it would be considered brilliant and very progressive.  

...could we recoup uranium in Greenland?....or offer more to cozy up?....just askin'............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

 

Exactly.

 

 

It's not like we haven't purchased resource rich areas in the past.  The Louisiana Purchase and Seward's Icebox come to mind.

 

If Hillary had won and suggested this it would be considered brilliant and very progressive.  

 

If Hillary had won and suggested this, she'd be purchasing it for Putin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh great....

 

Trump has done a bang-up job wrecking our relationship with European allies, and now this: “According to a document obtained by POLITICO, European Commission officials are pushing their president-elect, Ursula von der Leyen, to set up a European Future Fund that would invest more than $100 billion in equity stakes in high-potential European companies. . . . They’re also advocating for Europe to show more grit in Trump’s trade war, saying the [European Union] should slap tariffs unilaterally on the United States.” 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BMW and Mercedes would lose most of their American sales if we slapped big tariffs on them. Driving a Cadillac might become a status symbol once again. We might not have the most people but we are the biggest market for expensive toys. The EU should be kissing our ass a little.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://news.usni.org/2019/08/23/marines-considering-flying-u-s-f-35bs-off-of-japans-largest-warships

 

One of those Japanese warships is named the Kaga. The previous Kaga was one of four carriers (other three were the Akagi, Hiryu and Soryu) which the U.S. defeated at the Battle of Midway. Weird twist in history. It seems like current China has taken on the role of WWII era imperialistic Japan. Perhaps China will need to get Midway'ed in the near future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Pilsner said:

https://news.usni.org/2019/08/23/marines-considering-flying-u-s-f-35bs-off-of-japans-largest-warships

 

One of those Japanese warships is named the Kaga. The previous Kaga was one of four carriers (other three were the Akagi, Hiryu and Soryu) which the U.S. defeated at the Battle of Midway. Weird twist in history. It seems like current China has taken on the role of WWII era imperialistic Japan. Perhaps China will need to get Midway'ed in the near future.

 

The previous class were named Hyuga and Ise - their namesakes being two "hybrid" battleship-carriers (WWI-style super-dreadnoughts, with the X and Y turrets removed and a flight deck built in their place).  Kaga and Izumo are evolutions of that design, intended to be fully flight-capable for STOVL aircraft like the F-35B.

 

It's not a "weird coincidence."  It's an announcement, pointed directly at China, that Japan is back in the carrier aviation business.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

The previous class were named Hyuga and Ise - their namesakes being two "hybrid" battleship-carriers (WWI-style super-dreadnoughts, with the X and Y turrets removed and a flight deck built in their place).  Kaga and Izumo are evolutions of that design, intended to be fully flight-capable for STOVL aircraft like the F-35B.

 

It's not a "weird coincidence."  It's an announcement, pointed directly at China, that Japan is back in the carrier aviation business.  

 

What do you not know? You are an endless source of information. Hopefully the current Japanese (*****) ships have improved fire fighting capabilities over their WWII brethren.

 

Why won’t this sight let me say J.a.p?

Edited by Pilsner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Pilsner said:

 

What do you not know? You are an endless source of information. Hopefully the current Japanese (*****) ships have improved fire fighting capabilities over their WWII brethren.

 

Why won’t this sight let me say J.a.p?

 

Edited by 3rdnlng
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...