Thoughts on the Trump presidency

[Falcon1200]

Any attempt at military resistance would just make this worse on all counts.

Any failure to resist a hostile military invasion by another country would surely be even worse? But hopefully the prospect of resistance would deter the invasion in the first place.

 

[Cowley]

Any failure to resist a hostile military invasion by another country would surely be even worse? But hopefully the prospect of resistance would deter the invasion in the first place.

Perhaps the symbolism of other NATO troops having to surrender to the USA without even a shot being fired would be the thing here, as in calling his bluff?

 

[nw1]

In a development that should surprise nobody:

Source: MSN News: Trump says US 'shouldn't even have an election' as he threatens Insurrection Act

Actually, it's a little surprising to me - I expected he'd at least wait a few more days.

From the above:

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt was asked on Thursday about Trump suggesting multiple times that the midterms should be canceled. She claimed Trump was just "speaking facetiously," and "simply joking." "Are you saying that the president finds the idea of canceling elections funny?" reporter Andrew Feinberg asked in a follow up.

"Were you in the room?" Leavitt snapped. "I was in the room […] and only someone like you would take that so seriously and pose it as a question in that way."

Leavitt seems like a very sinister individual. Reminds me of an "information minister" of a dictatorship. In fact she reminds me very strongly of Zacharova of Russia.
,

 

[GusB]

From the above:



Leavitt seems like a very sinister individual. Reminds me of an "information minister" of a dictatorship. In fact she reminds me very strongly of Zacharova of Russia.
,

I was thinking more of "Comical Ali" from Saddam Hussain's government!

 

[najaB]

I was thinking more of "Comical Ali" from Saddam Hussain's government!

Comic Ali clearly didn't believe what he was saying but had to spout the official line - like denying there were enemy troops in Baghdad while pausing to be heard between explosions.

Levitt appears to be a full-throated believer who treats her job almost like a religious obligation.

 

[Harpo]

Levitt appears to be a full-throated believer who treats her job almost like a religious obligation.

Or working for a cult? (I double checked my spelling.)

 

[nw1]

Comic Ali clearly didn't believe what he was saying but had to spout the official line - like denying there were enemy troops in Baghdad while pausing to be heard between explosions.

Levitt appears to be a full-throated believer who treats her job almost like a religious obligation.

Indeed, she doesn't come across "comical" but a bit too serious.

 

[Sorcerer]

Any failure to resist a hostile military invasion by another country would surely be even worse? But hopefully the prospect of resistance would deter the invasion in the first place.

European NATO states are reluctant about deploying boots on the ground in Ukraine even for potential security guarantees despite Russia proving itself to be something of a paper tiger even on it's doorstep. Therefore it stands to reason in my opinion that, unfortunate as it may be, there will be little to no resistance if the United States decides to annex Greenland by military force.

The real cost of invasion for the Americans will be the serious irreparable damage to the alliance and total erosion of trust and goodwill they have built over 80 years with both European and non-European allies because they will have proven themselves not merely an unreliable ally, but an actively hostile enemy state, and all because Trump wanted to carve out a legacy for himself.

With any luck, this will be the true deterrent for any potential invasion, but we have to hope even Trump isn't that monumentally stupid, which sadly isn't a given with his increasingly addled mind.

 

[jupiter]

I think "trust" has all-but gone, and "goodwill" is evaporating quickly.

 

[JKF]

I reckon something else playing a role here is that Trump has been thinking about his legacy and his own mortality recently (wasn't there a slightly odd, even by his standards, statement about how he didn't think he'd be going to heaven a few months ago?). He's probably looking at his legacy and thinking that actually it's not all that great. Tariffs haven't worked, the deportation battle isn't particularly popular (outside of a narrow subset of people), stuff from his first administration hasn't really stuck in the mind all that much (and what has wasn't great such as the Covid response), so what's left? Well what about the biggest expansion of US territory ever...

Surely he’s also after naming rights too? It’ll be ‘Trumpland’ won’t it? Definitely going to happen if they move in.

 

[nw1]

Surely he’s also after naming rights too? It’ll be ‘Trumpland’ won’t it? Definitely going to happen if they move in.

Indeed, and Nuuk (formerly Godthab) will have a further renaming and become Trump City, I'm sure. That or Trumpville, or possibly Donaldville or Donaldtown. And the highest mountain of Greenland will become Mount Trump.

I'm surprised Pennsylvania and Michigan didn't become Trumpsylvania and Trumpigan after he (figuratively) captured them.

 

[Annetts key]

Hopefully senior figures in NATO and Europe have quietly told the US administration that, should they start a military operation against Greenland, although they would prevail (thanks to their superiority in weaponry and people) there will be resistance and American ships, aircraft and most importantly soldiers would be lost.

It may not be as simple as some think. The U.S. may have a large and powerful military. But if most of the other NATO member countries combine their forces to help Demark, that combined force may be large enough to cause big problems for the U.S.

Especially if Canada is part of the alliance or allows the alliance to use its airfields, airports and ports.

A conflict over Greenland could become a logistical nightmare for the U.S.

The distance between Nuuk, Greenland and New York, U.S.A. as the crow flies is around 1850 miles. Longer when avoiding Canadian waters or airspace. While the distance between Nuuk and Reykjavik is 890 miles in comparison.

No one really wants any conflict, but if Trump continues to threaten Greenland, given what has happened, the other members of NATO have to plan for a war with the U.S.

If Greenland is not defended, Canada may well be next.

 

[dosxuk]

NATO is not going to go to war with the US over Greenland. A token resistance ended without shots being fired is going to be as far as it gets.

However, the US being effectively kicked out of NATO and losing access to all its foreign locations and intelligence enabled by that alliance is a very real possibility, and what would likely cause the US military to convince him it's a bad idea. Trump may say they need Greenland to enable their missile defence system, but they also need the network of NATO locations where they have observation facilities.

My suspicion is that Trump will maintain they're going to buy it, until suddenly an increased military presence deal is announced that enables him to claim a win of increasing US security, but without the collapsing of NATO. There'll be a few ruffled feathers amongst his business friends, but they're also likely to have interests that would be affected negatively by a stronger Europe that is kicking out US interests.

 

[BAFRA77]

He’s seemed to have reverted to TACO mode on Iran (“Help is on the way etc. that hasn’t materialised as bigger boys said everything there is fine) - so who can say things won’t change on Greenland over the next few days?

Although I can see the Swiss cheese brain kicking in and a load of US Troops ascending out of Grønland Underground Station in Central Oslo in a week.

 

[brad465]

Now going to his beloved tariffs to try and get Greenland:

Starmer tells Trump in phone call that plan to apply tariffs over Greenland 'wrong'

The prime minister also tells the US president that security in the Arctic remains a priority "for all Nato allies".

www.bbc.co.uk

Trump to impose tariffs on European countries over Greenland row
​

US President Donald Trump has announced a new set of tariffs for a swathe of countries that export goods to the US, beginning on 1 February.

Trump says these will remain in place until "such time as a Deal is reached for the Complete and Total purchase of Greenland" by the US.

Writing on social media, Trump says countries including Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Finland will be "charged a 10% tariff" on "all and any" goods sent to the US.

On 1 June, this will be increased to 25%, he writes on Truth Social.

As a reminder, tariffs are taxes on imported goods, and are usually paid to the government by companies bringing in foreign products.

 

[Trackman]

Trump may say they need Greenland to enable their missile defence system, but they also need the network of NATO locations where they have observation facilities.

Indeed, Trump needs NATO.

 

[najaB]

Now going to his beloved tariffs to try and get Greenland

So he's going to tax US consumers in order to force foreign governments to change their policies.

 

[BAFRA77]

Quick question as I might have missed this.

Under the Constitution - don’t Tariffs have to go through approval in Congress?

Has this ever happened yet?

 

[najaB]

Under the Constitution - don’t Tariffs have to go through approval in Congress?

Has this ever happened yet?

In theory, yes. However Congress surrendered their rights and responsibilities in this case.

House Republican leaders on Tuesday quietly moved to shield their members from having to vote on whether to end President Trump’s tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China, tucking language into a procedural measure that effectively removed their chamber’s ability to undo the levies.

The maneuver was a tacit acknowledgment of how politically toxic the issue had become for their party, and another example of how the all-Republican Congress is ceding its power to the executive branch.

In this case, Republican leaders did so using a particularly unusual contortion: They essentially declared the rest of the year one long day, nullifying a law that allows the House and Senate to jointly put an end to a disaster declared by the president.

House Democrats had planned to force a vote on resolutions to end the tariffs on Mexico and Canada, a move allowed under the National Emergencies Act, which provides a mechanism for Congress to terminate an emergency like the one Mr. Trump declared when he imposed the tariffs on Feb. 1.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/11/us/politics/trump-tariffs-house-gop-vote.html

 

[JamesT]

Quick question as I might have missed this.

Under the Constitution - don’t Tariffs have to go through approval in Congress?

Has this ever happened yet?

There’s currently a case before the US Supreme Court regarding the legality of the tariffs. Trump is relying on a law from 1977, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. In that law, Congress delegated the ability for the President to regulate foreign commerce in reaction to a foreign threat.

 

[Falcon1200]

If Greenland is not defended, Canada may well be next.

That is surely the issue, we all know that conceding to aggressors does not end their demands. But as I said earlier, hopefully the prospect of resistance and therefore American losses will cause calmer heads to win the day.

 

[Annetts key]

Now going to his beloved tariffs to try and get Greenland:

Starmer tells Trump in phone call that plan to apply tariffs over Greenland 'wrong'

The prime minister also tells the US president that security in the Arctic remains a priority "for all Nato allies".

www.bbc.co.uk

I personally think that the affected countries (Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Finland) should respond strongly.

I'm just not sure what measures would be best in order to get Trump to TACO. But we (and Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Finland) can't just sit on our hands and take this abuse from a bully.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Jan 2026 ==

That is surely the issue, we all know that conceding to aggressors does not end their demands. But as I said earlier, hopefully the prospect of resistance and therefore American losses will cause calmer heads to win the day.

Absolutely, conceding to Trump will just encourage him more. Far more needs to be done to counter his threats.

 

[AndrewE]

So he's going to tax US [importers and] consumers in order to force foreign governments to change their policies.

My reaction exactly: I wonder how long the US electorate and even the Republican elected representatives will stand for it? They have got to recognise that he is punishing them (and the rest of the US electorate) for other democratic countries not giving in to his barking mad demands.

 

[Gloster]

My reaction exactly: I wonder how long the US electorate and even the Republican elected representatives will stand for it? They have got to recognise that he is punishing them (and the rest of the US electorate) for other democratic countries not giving in to his barking mad demands.

A sufficiently large proportion of them either don’t realise that it is their leader who is causing all these problems to descend on them or they have their snouts deep in the trough. If Fox News is hurrahing Trump’s defeat of immigrant antifa communists, they are so busy cheering him on that they don’t think about why their eggs cost so much.

’You’ve got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know…morons.’ - Blazing Saddles.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Kick them out of Menwith Hill.

Appeasement doesn’t work. It won’t work. It has never worked.

 

[adc82140]

Say this all went out of control, and we told Trump where to go, he had to remove his military from British soil etc.

What's to stop him withdrawing Visa and Mastercard services? The banking system would collapse. Russia had the Mir system as a backup, as they were already a pariah state and were expecting it. I don't think we have any such backup.

 

[Annetts key]

Say this all went out of control

I would say that it's already out of control.

Trump has failed to help Ukraine to defend itself against Russia despite Russia being an enemy of the U.S.
Worse, Trump likes Putin and wants to have trade deals with Russia.

Trump has introduced tariffs on countries that are allies of the U.S.A. but none on Russia.

Trump's administration has broken American and international law.

Trump has threatened multiple counties, including Canada and Greenland.

He has been provoking trouble in Democratic states by sending in the National Guard and ICE.

Now he is imposing tariffs on countries that support Denmark and Greenland.

Oh, and we know that Trump has taken tests that are normally only given to people who are suspected of having Dementia.

 

[The exile]

Say this all went out of control, and we told Trump where to go, he had to remove his military from British soil etc.

What's to stop him withdrawing Visa and Mastercard services? The banking system would collapse. Russia had the Mir system as a backup, as they were already a pariah state and were expecting it. I don't think we have any such backup.

All of which (indirectly) points out how shortsighted offshoring is. We have blithely assumed that we can let “xyz” run systems for us or supply vital equipment and raw materials to save money “because they’re our friends”. More fool us…

 

[nw1]

Say this all went out of control, and we told Trump where to go, he had to remove his military from British soil etc.

What's to stop him withdrawing Visa and Mastercard services? The banking system would collapse. Russia had the Mir system as a backup, as they were already a pariah state and were expecting it. I don't think we have any such backup.

But that would also affect businesses in the US with devastating consequences.

Furthermore, for him to do that would turn the US into a pariah state, and cause its own collapse. Hopefully even the brainless imbecilic MAGA morons understand that.

 

[Strathclyder]

Now going to his beloved tariffs to try and get Greenland:

Starmer tells Trump in phone call that plan to apply tariffs over Greenland 'wrong'

The prime minister also tells the US president that security in the Arctic remains a priority "for all Nato allies".

www.bbc.co.uk

Yeah, shooting yourself and your economy in both feet. Again. Yeah, that'll show us and get us to bend the knee. Idiot.