Posts posted by atomheartbevo
-
-
16 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said: For real, if he were to go forward with this, why would the rest of NATO and whoever else not go against us? Venezuela is already nuts enough, but it is a poor dictatorship. If we go after Western Europe, what other choice is there but war?
The Nordic countries have already stated they stand by Denmark.
Putin and Trump have both now managed to pull off getting Sweden and Finland off the fence and picking a side.
My guess is the EU would cut off trade with us, which would crash our economy like nobody’s business.
8 minutes ago, tx ind said: Did Putin put dotard up to the saber rattling about Greenland so NATO/Europe would be looking West instead of East at him?
I have no doubt Putin has a a hand in this.
-
3 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said: I would expect russia / iran / china will be backing rebels. $5k for every dead american invader
3 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said: This is all going to end well I’m sure.
We would be dumbasses to fly fucking Chinooks over a capital city again. Still can’t believe we got away with that. Donnie, Lil Marco, and Whiskey Pete got Maduro, but beyond that, I don’t know how we don’t start taking casualties.
I think that’s why Trump is threatening the VP. He has no leverage other than threat of death.
-
27 minutes ago, tchookem said: It's corruption at such a breakneck pace, I think they're more like looters running through a store grabbing what they can, while they can. They know they're going to get away with it, but they just don't know how long the best shit is going to be on the shelves.
I think they are trying to do it now, before the midterms,
-
-
-
Edited by atomheartbevo
Statement from the Premier of Greenland
We have been a close and loyal friend of the United States for generations. We have stood shoulder to shoulder in difficult times. We have taken responsibility for security in the North Atlantic — and not least for North America. That is what true friends do.
Precisely for that reason, the current and repeated rhetoric coming from the United States is entirely unacceptable.
When the President of the United States speaks of “needing Greenland” and links us to Venezuela and military intervention, it is not only wrong. It is disrespectful.
Our country is not an object in great-power rhetoric. We are a people. A country. A democracy. That must be respected — especially by close and loyal friends.
We are part of NATO, and we are fully aware of our country’s strategic location. We also understand that our security depends on good friends and strong alliances. In that context, a respectful and loyal relationship with the United States is very important. That has been the case for decades.
But alliances are built on trust. And trust requires respect.
Threats, pressure, and talk of annexation have no place between friends. That is not how one speaks to a people who have repeatedly demonstrated responsibility, stability, and loyalty.
Enough is enough.
No more pressure.
No more insinuations.
No more fantasies of annexation.
We are open to dialogue. We are open to conversations. But they must take place through the proper channels and in full respect of international law. And the proper channels are not random and disrespectful posts on social media.
Greenland is our home and our territory.
And it will remain so.
-
Full statement
“I must say this very clearly to the United States:
It makes absolutely no sense to speak of any necessity for the United States to take over Greenland. The United States has no legal basis to annex one of the three countries of the Kingdom of Denmark.
The Kingdom of Denmark — and thus Greenland — is a member of NATO and is therefore covered by the Alliance’s collective security guarantee. We already have a defence agreement between the Kingdom of Denmark and the United States that grants the U.S. broad access to Greenland. In addition, the Kingdom has made significant investments in security in the Arctic.
I therefore strongly urge the United States to cease its threats against a historically close ally, and against another country and another people who have stated very clearly that they are not for sale.”
Mette Frederiksen
Prime Minister of Denmark,,
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Edited by atomheartbevo
Politico
Rubio on Sunday repeatedly deflected about the legality of the capture on ABC's "This Week," while he told NBC that congressional approval for the operation was unnecessary because the arrest was not a military mission.
“This was not an invasion. This was not an extended military operation. This was a very precise operation that involved a couple of hours of action,” Rubio said.
The administration’s actions have prompted Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) to say he will force a vote on a war powers resolution to block further military action against Venezuela without congressional approval.
Rubio appeared unperturbed about the vote, telling NBC’s Kristen Welker that the administration will only seek congressional approval for actions that require it.

-
-
Politico
In the wake of the U.S.’s capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Sunday made it clear that it is somewhat unclear what's next for the Latin American country.
In multiple interviews, Rubio emphasized that the U.S. is not at war with Venezuela but stopped short of explaining exactly what the U.S. role in the country will look like as both nations reel from Maduro’s arrest — and in the aftermath of President Donald Trump's statement Saturday that the U.S. would "run" Venezuela for an indeterminate time.
“We are at war against drug trafficking organizations, not at war against Venezuela,” Rubio told NBC’s “Meet the Press.” Rubio added that oil sanctions will remain in place, and the U.S. reserves the right to issue strikes against alleged drug boats heading toward America.
But while Rubio told CBS’s “Face the Nation” that the U.S. is not occupying Venezuela, he did not reject the idea that it could be a future option from the Trump administration.
Trump, Rubio said, “does not feel like he is going to publicly rule out options that are available for the United States, even though that's not what you're seeing right now.” “What you're seeing right now is a quarantine that allows us to exert tremendous leverage over what happens next,” he added.

-
2 minutes ago, Beau Vine said: Oh. I'm sure socialism like that would never happen under a Trump regime.
it’s amazing that Trump assumed these companies will rush to invest billions in projects that won’t pay off until long after he’s in office. Almost like he didn’t talk to them beforehand or thinks it’s like some real estate development deal that can be finished in a few years or something.
-
8 minutes ago, mchookem said: jfc

He’s only talking about assassinating the Venezuelan VP and attacking a close and long-time democratic nation because we want their rare-earth materials.
Those comments of Trump’s make it clear there was no plan for after Maduro was out.
We now have to run Venezuela even though we don’t have any control over it.
-
-
Edited by atomheartbevo
42 minutes ago, PTINS said: @atomheartbevo , we should get a beer and a dog some time. I'm in Austin.
I'm the son of a doodlebugger who moved into upper management somehow and who was a good troubleshooter, so my dad has seen it all.
41 minutes ago, PTINS said: All 3 have a lot on their plates already, have a vested interest in Venezuela, and they have also been burned, twice. Unlike the military, or CIA, or whatever, they don't have the equivalent of a Delta Force or Seal Team they can mobilize and deploy overnight to restore order. If I, or anybody like me, went back to work (I won't), I would start by asking a lot of questions, and I'm sure all I would get back are blank looks. The first time I went to West Virginia in the 80's was ... different. No way I would take a recon trip to Venezuela right now. It's not like your starting from scratch, but in a lot of ways, you are.
Most important, whatever happens in the next few week, will probably not be embraced by the American populace, and more important, I don't think our next President will follow in the Donald's footsteps. I just can't see those companies going forward anytime soon.
That was similar to what he was saying this morning about his group chat, that there would be a lot of unknowns and doubt about what Venezuela would look like a year, 5 years, 10 years from now. These guys had decades of experience in Central/South America, and one of them joked there was always a Hugo Chavez lurking around the corner. There's just no way to guarantee that they invest billions in revamping/building out new infrastructure in Venezuela only to have another Chavez come along in 5 or 10 years.
Right now, the US Army could go in there and provide security with a massive footprint, but what happens in 2029 with a new President? Or 2027 with a new Congress?
He would be surprised if anybody takes Trump up on that offer unless the US government is footing the entire bill or some kind of financial guarantee of sorts and that there's solid security (massive footprint). There's just going to be a lot of resentment from Maduro's fans (and there are fans of his), not to mention the cartels, etc. Even then, there's the potential of lost contracts with other countries down there (and elsewhere).
-
-


Star Wars Nerds
in Movies and TV