Trump
Comments
-
Yes - but I think that UK is safe from Trump interference - ie) He's not going to demand that he "runs" UK - Just yet !
It is absolutely incredible what Trump is trying to do with an allied nation - beyond any understanding and assume that when Trump is finally kicked out - the next President will reverse any action that Trump takes/causes….
He is acting identically to Putin - that's a worry for the rest of the free world - but he will not live forever - he is now 79 [Removed by moderator] I give him another 10 years max…..
1 -
Mark Carney doesn't agree with you. He just told an audience at Davos that the old way of doing business is not coming back.
0 -
He's just been Tango'd
3 -
The big orange balloon strikes again!
1 -
Wish I had even a fraction of his money
0 -
If only the big orange balloon would burst ?
It would make a big mess - but the world would be a much happier place……
0 -
Yes - he's worth $7.3 billion, but somehow doesn't pay any tax ??
He's added $3billion during his last 12 months as president………
2 -
We had all this when he wanted Canada and nothing came of that, and nothing will come of this either. It takes two with the same key to release any weapons, so I don't think they'll let Donald Duck go alone. Half the Republicans know they have an idiot in charge, if you saw the clown who was on News Night, you'd realise there's a few clones of him who think they know what they're talking about, but repeat the same garbage all the time.
1 -
I agree about Canada - but he could make it extremely hard, financially on Europe with his tariffs unless he gets his way with Greenland.
I just feel so sorry for the Greenland population being involved in such an unfair future.
0 -
Besides - Greenland is worth $2.7 Trillion (including it's oil and mineral deposits) - which is far more than Trump can afford and no Bank / Building Society is going to offer a $2.7 Trillion mortgage/loan to an Orange 79 year old madman…..
1 -
Here’s the current situation with Donald Trump’s “offer” or proposals regarding Greenland — and it’s important to stress: there is no finalized deal or officially accepted purchase price on the table. Greenland is emphatically not for sale according to both Danish and Greenlandic leaders. (Yahoo News UK)
🧊 What Trump has proposed or discussed
1. Cash payments to Greenland residents
Trump’s administration has been internally discussing offering payments directly to Greenlanders — hypothetically to encourage them to support independence from Denmark and possible eventual U.S. integration. These figures being talked about range from:- $10,000 per person up to
- $100,000 per person
for Greenland’s population of ~57,000 — which would imply a rough total cost of roughly $5–6 billion if this approach were pursued. (www.ndtv.com)
This isn’t an official “offer to Denmark” to buy the island; it’s part of a strategy internal to U.S. planning — and it hasn’t been presented formally to either Denmark or Greenland. (www.ndtv.com)
2. No specific purchase price announced
Unlike President Harry S. Truman’s 1946 offer of $100 million in gold (which would be roughly $1.6 billion in today’s money), Trump has not publicly stated a concrete price that he has formally offered or submitted to Denmark. (Newsweek)Various commentators and analysts have speculated about potential values based on strategic or resource worth, suggesting figures from tens of billions up to over $1 trillion — but these are estimates, not actual offers made by Trump. (Business Today)
3. Broader tactics discussed internally
In addition to cash payments, U.S. officials have discussed a range of other ways to try to influence Greenland’s status — including greater investment, trade incentives, or even using tariffs as leverage. None of these have translated into a formal purchase offer. (AP News)🧭 Key takeaway
➡️ There’s no confirmed, formal dollar figure that Trump has officially offered to Denmark to buy Greenland.
What has been discussed internally includes potential cash payments to residents in the tens of billions (e.g., $5–6 bn scale), but those discussions aren’t a formal offer and Greenland is not for sale.If you want, I can break down why Greenland is strategically important (military, resources, geography), which helps explain Trump’s interest — many people aren’t aware of the full context behind this unusual proposal.
He's going to have to offer a lot more than $5-6bn in order to satisfy the population !
Here’s a clear picture of how much property in Greenland typically costs — remembering that Greenland is a sovereign country (part of the Kingdom of Denmark), not to be confused with other places called “Greenland”:
🏠 Typical Property Prices in Greenland
1. Nuuk (capital)
- Mid-range homes (70–100 m²): ~$300,000 – $450,000 USD
- Single-family homes: $500,000 – $800,000+
- Premium or larger homes can exceed $1 million
Prices are high mainly due to limited supply, remote location, and high construction costs. (PRAI NEWS)
2. Other towns (e.g., Sisimiut, Ilulissat)
- Often 30 – 60% cheaper than in Nuuk
- Prices can range roughly $200,000 – $450,000 for typical residential homes in secondary towns. (PRAI NEWS)
3. Broader range by property type (approx.)
Based on broader cost data across Greenland’s property market:- Studio apartments: ~$70,000 – $210,000 USD
- 1-bedroom apartments: ~$82,000 – $520,000 USD
- 2-bedroom apartments: ~$140,000 – $820,000 USD
- Townhouses: ~$590,000 – $5,200,000+ USD
- Large houses/villas: ~$690,000 – $6,900,000+ USD
(These ranges vary a lot by location, condition, and size.) (Copound)
📍 Key Things to Know
- Land itself is publicly owned — what’s bought is the building plus a long-term usage right. (PRAI NEWS)
- Housing supply is limited, so Nunavut and other settlements often have longer waits and higher demand pressures. (Le Monde.fr)
- Foreign buyers might need special permits and face extra rules. (har.com)
💡 Summary
- Average homes in Nuuk: ~$300k – $800k+
- Smaller towns: cheaper, often <$400k
- Luxury or larger homes: can exceed $1 million depending on size and location.
This is a hypothetical scenario, but the consequences are clear and severe.
If the United States attacked Greenland, here is what would realistically happen — politically, militarily, and globally.🚨 First: the core reality
Greenland is part of the Kingdom of Denmark.
Denmark is a NATO member.👉 An attack on Greenland = an attack on Denmark = a NATO issue.
🛡️ 1. NATO response (Article 5)
Under NATO Article 5:
An armed attack against one member is considered an attack against all.
If the U.S. attacked Greenland:
- The U.S. would be attacking a NATO ally
- NATO would face an unprecedented crisis
- Other NATO countries would be legally entitled to:
- Sanctions
- Military defense of Denmark
- Suspension or expulsion of the U.S. from NATO (not automatic, but possible)
This would likely collapse NATO as it currently exists.
🇺🇸 2. U.S. internal consequences
Inside the U.S.:
- Massive constitutional crisis
- Congress would likely block funding or declare the action illegal
- Courts could rule the attack unconstitutional
- Widespread protests
- Impeachment proceedings would be very likely
There is no legal justification under U.S. or international law for such an attack.
🌍 3. Global reaction
Immediate consequences:
- Universal condemnation at the UN
- Emergency UN Security Council session
- Severe sanctions from:
- EU
- UK
- Canada
- Japan
- Collapse of U.S. moral authority abroad
Long-term consequences:
- China and Russia would exploit the situation politically
- Other countries would question U.S. security guarantees
- Global instability would rise sharply
This would be considered an act of aggression, similar in legal terms to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
🧊 4. Military reality on the ground
Ironically:
- The U.S. already has full military access to Greenland through agreements
- The U.S. operates Pituffik Space Base there legally
- Denmark cooperates closely with U.S. defense planning
An attack would gain nothing militarily that the U.S. doesn’t already have — and would lose everything diplomatically.
🇬🇱 5. Greenlandic reaction
Greenlanders would:
- Strongly resist
- See the U.S. as a colonial aggressor
- Permanently reject U.S. influence
Any hope of partnership, investment, or cooperation would be destroyed for generations.
🧭 6. Why this will not happen
This scenario is extraordinarily unlikely because:
- It offers no strategic benefit
- It triggers NATO crisis
- It violates international law
- It harms U.S. security interests
- It contradicts U.S. democratic norms
Every U.S. military, diplomatic, and intelligence institution would oppose it.
✅ What would happen instead (realistic paths)
The U.S. pursues influence via:
- Defense agreements
- Economic investment
- Scientific cooperation
- Diplomatic pressure
- Arctic partnerships
Influence, not invasion, is the only viable strategy.
In one sentence:
A U.S. attack on Greenland would trigger a NATO crisis, destroy U.S. alliances, cause global backlash, and offer zero strategic gain — making it one of the most self-destructive foreign policy moves imaginable.
1 -
Yes of course he should have gone
It looks as if he is scared of trump
0 -
I hadn’t really considered it in those terms.
I was thinking more about the broader international context and what the UK might have gained by being present. Davos is one of those moments where leaders can set out their priorities on the world stage, and it felt like an opportunity to reinforce the UK’s position in global economic discussions.
Rachel Reeves is there, and I’m sure she’s well respected, but it’s not quite the same as the prime minister attending in person. The symbolism and visibility are different, especially when other heads of government are present.
Still, it will be interesting to see what Rachel’s able to do while she’s there. She may well use the platform effectively, and I’m curious to see what messages she puts across on the UK’s behalf.
0 -
AnthonyScaramucci has been proved correct, he said last week that Trump would back down. He is a hedge fund manager and Republican donor, you guys may remember he lasted 9 days in Trump's first administration?
He stated that if Trump invaded, even the cowardly Republican Senators would vote to impeach him. In the same podcast he also bet his fortune, that neither Vance nor Rubio would be POTUS. He said anyone who doubts him, they should look at how Mike Pence's career is going these days.( Everyone who is drawn into Trump's orbit, they leave with their reputation in tatters).
1 -
I did see that [Removed by moderator] farage, who ignores his place in parliament and his constituents to lauding it towards his American friends.
0 -
Have you seen [Removed by moderator] Farage sat in the public gallery, rather than take his place? He can hardly represent his constituents from up there!
2 -
The Speaker should have a word with him i reckon.
0 -
I think he's just been had up before the committee. Not the working men's club one either 😂
1 -
I do not trust who at all
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 15.8K Start here and say hello!
- 7.6K Coffee lounge
- 106 Games den
- 1.8K People power
- 159 Announcements and information
- 25.3K Talk about life
- 6.2K Everyday life
- 508 Current affairs
- 2.5K Families and carers
- 873 Education and skills
- 2K Work
- 579 Money and bills
- 3.7K Housing and independent living
- 1.2K Transport and travel
- 642 Relationships
- 1.6K Mental health and wellbeing
- 2.5K Talk about your impairment
- 879 Rare, invisible, & undiagnosed conditions
- 941 Neurological impairments and pain
- 2.2K Cerebral Palsy Network
- 1.3K Autism and neurodiversity
- 40.8K Talk about your benefits
- 6.1K Employment & Support Allowance (ESA)
- 20.3K PIP, DLA, ADP & AA
- 9.1K Universal Credit (UC)
- 5.3K Benefits and income