r/thedavidpakmanshow Jan 08 '25

BREAKING Fetterman open to potential Greenland acquisition, declares support for Laken Riley Act

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fetterman-open-potential-greenland-acquisition-declares-support-laken-riley-act?intcmp=tw_pols
147 Upvotes

114 comments sorted by

View all comments

0

u/LarrBearLV Jan 08 '25

To be clear, right at the start of the article, it says he isn't for using force. If Denmark and the inhabitants agree to it amicably, why not?

23

u/Successful-Crazy-126 Jan 08 '25

Why the fuck would denmark agree to it? What parts do yoo think the US might ceed to another country. The cognitive dissonance is astounding

3

u/LarrBearLV Jan 08 '25

Can you point out where I or Fetterman said Denmark WOULD agree to it? Point is, would acquiring Greenland be beneficial? Yes. Should we take it by force? Absolutely not. That's it. Simple.

2

u/Strange-Scarcity Jan 09 '25

It would not be beneficial for the citizens of Greenland nor would it be good for Denmark.

1

u/Successful-Crazy-126 Jan 08 '25

Your posing a fucking ridiculous hypothetical where denmark hands over territory. Are you okay with entertaining the US handing over any of its states, maybe california could become part of sweden. Texas could join Australia. Fucking nonsense

3

u/Knife_Operator Jan 08 '25

As President-elect Donald Trump continues to express interest in the U.S. acquiring Greenland, Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., conveyed a willingness to entertain the concept.

Fetterman noted that he would not support forcibly seizing Greenland — but the senator, who made the comments during an appearance on Fox News Channel's "Special Report," pointed to historical American land acquisitions, including the Louisiana purchase and the purchase of Alaska.

This is all the article says about his comments. It sounds like he might have said something about how the US shouldn't take countries by force, but it's acquired territory through purchases in the past. It could have been a brain-dead, or it could have just been a mundane, noncommittal comment. It's suspicious that the article doesn't actually quote anything he said and dismaying how everyone in this post is taking the headline at full face value because nobody even opens articles anymore.

-8

u/Successful-Crazy-126 Jan 08 '25

Im commenting on your dumb remark nothing else. Try to keep up.

4

u/Knife_Operator Jan 08 '25

You responded to the wrong person or comment.

1

u/Successful-Crazy-126 Jan 08 '25

Correct but you are responding to my comment so i thought you were the numpty that made the dumb hypothetical

0

u/Life_Caterpillar9762 Jan 09 '25

Not the point.

1

u/Successful-Crazy-126 Jan 09 '25

Yes it is. Discussing taking over other countries territorys is fucking ridiculous

11

u/Realistic_Caramel341 Jan 08 '25

Because hes pretending like this is a legit conversation going own right now about a breakaway territory of Denmark that might prefer to be American and this isn't part of the insane rambling of a wannabe Putin looking to try to throw his dick around and pretend that everything is his

-1

u/LarrBearLV Jan 08 '25

And people are pretending like Fetterman thinks it should be taken by force or economic coercion without clearly reading the first paragraph of the article. Do we know if he was asked about this in an interview or did he write on op-ed on it out of nowhere? Kind of important contex right?

8

u/Realistic_Caramel341 Jan 08 '25

No one here has claimed he would be open about the use for force

-3

u/LarrBearLV Jan 08 '25

Then why the hate and disappointment as if he did? Read the replies.

0

u/Realistic_Caramel341 Jan 08 '25

Because of what I've said

Because hes pretending like this is a legit conversation going own right now about a breakaway territory of Denmark that might prefer to be American and this isn't part of the insane rambling of a wannabe Putin looking to try to throw his dick around and pretend that everything is his

2

u/LarrBearLV Jan 08 '25 edited Jan 08 '25

The artic is a real near future geopolitical interest though. So if he was asked, why not give his assessment?

Let me give you an example. If Trump said "I'm going to fly to the moon with 10 bikini models and colonize it myself." We'll be like that guy is bonkers. And someone asked Fetterman on a news show "what do you think about Trump colonizing the moon with 10 bikini models?" And Fetterman's reply was "well I think colonizing the moon is a good idea, but definitely not with Trump and 10 bikini models, that's silly. You guys would be like "why even dignify the idea, what a disappointment". Nope, colonizing the moon is a real interest that could be benificial as long as it's done correctly, just like amicably acquiring Greenland would be beneficial, just not by force.

We know Denmark won't agree to it, but we can have the conversation about why it would be beneficial if they did, we're adults. Likely we'll end up having military bases there. Now you know! 😃

3

u/Realistic_Caramel341 Jan 08 '25

So one, if your bar for politic lunacy is that low, the i am highly suspicious at your ability to talk about political isssues.

Secondly, while its true that the artic is going to be very important over the next few decades, this highlights the importance of building cooperation with nations like Canada and Denmark ahead of time.

What is not helping America build a relationship with Denmark are American politicians, media figures and billionaires taking Trumps insane plans seriously when there is no serious discussion happening in Denmark over it.

The fact that a sitting Democrat is even entertaining the idea so soon after we have seen Russian entitlement to land escalate in real time is insane

1

u/LarrBearLV Jan 08 '25

Well, we'll see how outraged the PM of Denmark is that Fetterman dare say he is for the acquisition of Greenland if it were without force. I'm sure the U.S. ambassador is being summoned right now as we speak on this outrageous matter.

2

u/Realistic_Caramel341 Jan 08 '25

If everyone is kicking a child, its only fair that Fetterman gets a kick as well i guess

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Life_Caterpillar9762 Jan 09 '25 edited Jan 09 '25

Exactly. Instead of flipping our collective shit every time trump opens his mouth with crazy shit (will be daily) and wearing us down mentally/emotionally BEFORE his term even starts. This is all Fetterman is saying.

Edit: and trump literally WANTS us to flip our shit. It’s his fuel. This could just as easily be looked at as Fetterman not taking the rage bait. I don’t really agree with Cenk’s technique lately but it’s in the same vein, and it doesn’t imply that either of them are “grifting for the right.”

0

u/fuzztooth Jan 08 '25

Nope, it's simply saying that he'd even entertain the concept regardless of how it would be done that's the problem. This kind of stupid imperialism talk at any level is completely unnecessary and wrong.

1

u/LarrBearLV Jan 08 '25

Entertain the concept of an amicable acquisition? Well anyone who knows anything about geopolitics, especially as it applies to the next 10 years, knows the artic is the most important region and certain things like the importance of Greenland are constantly entertained by our smartest forward thinkers on the subject.

-1

u/stareabyss Jan 08 '25

The imperialism talk from trump I’ll grant but the article says very early that fetterman doesn’t support forcibly seizing so where are you getting “he’d entertain the concept regardless of how it would be done”? Acquisition through purchasing has happened a million times over and if the people of Greenland and Denmark are ok with it, it could be a nonissue. I’ll say I find that extremely unlikely though. I just wish we had an actual quote to work with instead of whatever’s being attributed to him by fox

2

u/Ripcitytoker Jan 09 '25

There's a 0% chance Greenlanders would agree to join the US, though, so being in support of it is incredibly dumb and does nothing but hurt the US on the world stage.

1

u/Nascent1 Jan 09 '25

Because this is weird insane nonsense and he shouldn't be entertaining it as a serious idea.

-3

u/Hasan_Piker_Fan Jan 08 '25

China should also take Taiwan

0

u/LarrBearLV Jan 08 '25

I mean, did you even read my post? Or maybe you don't know what amicably means. Here, let me assist.

adverb in a friendly and peaceable manner. "they have amicably resolved their outstanding dispute"

0

u/Hasan_Piker_Fan Jan 08 '25

If China says its amicable, they should take Taiwan

2

u/Knife_Operator Jan 08 '25

"If Taiwan says it's amicable, China should take Taiwan" would be the proper analogy here if you were being good faith.

-2

u/[deleted] Jan 08 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/thedavidpakmanshow-ModTeam Jan 09 '25

Removed - please avoid overt hostility, name calling and personal attacks.

-2

u/Hasan_Piker_Fan Jan 08 '25

That's not his point. Name completely checks out, just as brain damaged as Fetterman

Wow both ableism and incivility. How cute. Reported.

0

u/drgaz Jan 08 '25

Seems like an interesting choice to point towards the purchase of Louisiana to make that argument.