135
So my guess is, this is to distract from how incredibly bad his Greenland deal was.
Uhhh, what Greenland deal?
The one that hadn’t been signed or even spelled out really. It’s tremendously bigly.
Are news reports of some deal being signed inaccurate?
This is from 3 days ago:
President Donald Trump announced on Friday that the United States has reached an agreement with Denmark and Greenland to give the US “permanent control over security, and all other needs,” in Greenland, which is a semi-autonomous territory of Denmark home to 56,000 people.
“This is an “Infinite Life” Agreement, there is no end!” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “From now on, no U.S. adversary can EVER have a base in Greenland, have a military presence in Greenland, or make sensitive investments in Greenland, without our express written approval.”
The agreement has not yet been signed, and little is known about it beyond Trump’s social media posts. Denmark and Greenland said on Saturday that any agreement with the United States would not compromise Greenland’s sovereignty. And Trump’s words about expanding American military presence in Greenland may not mean much, considering that the US military already enjoys sweeping access to Greenland under a treaty that dates to the 1950s. Service members are, in fact, the single largest group of Americans currently present in the territory.
Signed, very good. No details other than they plan to build more bases there. That’s going to be expensive and pointless, but ok.
In Copenhagen, 40-year-old barber Gavin Sharpe told AFP: "It's just the same situation."
He believes that Trump's messaging was meant to win over US voters, adding that "I think it is exactly the same deal they had before."
. . . Under a 1951 defense pact updated in 2004, Washington was already able to ramp up its military presence on the island provided it informed Denmark and Greenland in advance.
Yeah, there’s language that a non-NATO, non-EU country can’t build military bases there, so, uh, win. I guess? But as an agreement, the whole thing’s a big puffy nothing. Unless there’s something in the other 9 pages that’s a real shocker.
I wouldn't call it a bad deal. He walked in with nothing, asked for a lot, walked away with something, which is more than he deserved to get
I don't think any other potential outcome would've been better for anyone.
Actually I'd rather call it an agreement than a deal, because the only losers of the "deal" (Russia and China) were not part of the negotiation at all.
It was an embarrassing “deal” for him. He went in with enough, threatened with war, walked away with pretty much the same as he went in with “deal” wise, but lost all trust of most Europeans along the way.
The signing of the “deal” was covered heavily on all danish media platforms yesterday, everybody basically praying he wouldn’t find out he’s been played. He thinks he got the best deal ever, we’re just happy that his predatory attention is somewhere else for now.
Sure, the lost trust was not worth it. He could've just asked politely for the same thing.
He talks a lot of bullshit, but even he underestimated the stamina of the Danish Foreign Minister when it comes to maintaining a bullshit dialogue.
However, I don't think that portraying it as if the bully got framed is a good way to see it, because that acknowledges the behaviour of the bully and that Denmark stooped down to play with the bully. It's a fair description, but not really useful for anything other than critisism. We need to look forward.
I still prefer to view it as an agreement between allies rather than a win/lose scenario. Once the passageways over the Arctic opens it will be beneficial to Nato and EU that China doesn't have the opportunity to interfere economically.
It also solidifies Greenlands position among the "western" world if/when they decide to become independent. If they went independent right now, they'd be a 3rd world country, and we already know how China likes to "invest" in 3rd world countries for their own benefit only.
I think the trust is gone for lots of other reasons as well, so it will take decades to rebuild that. Again, we need to look ahead, and this agreement is a small step in the right direction.
Why would you annihilate the very farce that’s making you so much money?
Next week, we’ll be back to “negotiating.”
Nah, keep this gravy train flowing for as long as possible.
While I acknowledge your point, I'm unsure he has the wherewithal to think in coherent enough terms to maintain a cogent thought for more that a couple of seconds.
I agree. I’m not even sure he’s cognizant of much at all. He’s demented. And he was an idiot before all that too.
His puppeteers however, they know exactly what they want.
Fair enough.
What he does understand though is propaganda for stupid people. War is very useful to further radicalize and stoke nationalist sentiment within the republican voter.
His oil holdings didn't jump enough after the last "threat" to be lucrative enough to sell.
Once they do, and he rakes in a few extra billion, he'll be right back to, "They're willing to sign an agreement.. No really this time. They folded like lawn chairs.", and the cycle starts all over.
Meanwhile I'm looking at gas that's just about to hit $5.00 in my area.
Lucky, we're pushing past $5.50 in Oregon. Honestly prices are the least of our worries. I think there will be shortages and the idiot spent our stockpile.
Sure, just before an embarrassing retreat is announced, but it gets framed as oh we are so merciful for not wiping them out. Just like last time before they made a deal to pay 300bn or something to Iran as well as handing control of the straits.
Notice that the markets have jumped the last few days? Because the whales know this is bullshit before big cave in to end / pause hostilities
It's fashionable to dismiss virtually all of Chomsky's work now, but I wonder if even he anticipated someone like donnie eventually just saying this kind of shit out loud on the very flimsiest of pretenses?
Chomsky called all of this in the 70s by spelling out the neoliberal plot and insisting both parties answer to the same masters. He called controlled opposition. That being said, his judgement is clearly suspect given his behavior.
Counterpoint: he had the inside scoop
I think he didn't come up with the quote "The United States is also a one-party state, but with typical American extravagance, they have two of them" but he sure loved stealing the idea.
I was also shocked that apparently that isn't actually a Soviet quote but from the first president of Tanzania.
I hadn't heard it
Fucking lunatic demented rapist embarrasses us all again
if they didn’t have nuclear weapons, america would be laughable today
iran note please do not target everyone it is trump and epstein class and epicenter of where most of wall street is not most of america. lots are brain washed to support a fascist but assure you it is not us he is panicing trying to close a deal before the elections make him impotent
It'll never happen because of the blowback that Israel will receive and we can't have our most precious 51st state being hurt now can we?
Imagine going up to a podium at school and telling everyone in school that you're gonna have your friends beatup the bullies... But then your friends in 5th grade go home first, an hour before you.... Now imagine you're president for the next two years only but you fucked up your entire country, and all other countries including several that you in particular personally ordered destroyed and publically said so. That's a bad move for a non king of the biggest country that rejects kings.
this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2026
135 points (98.6% liked)
politics
31238 readers
2549 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS