Page 1 of 1
Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 20th, 2019, 10:11 pm
by mahalanobis
Everyone, I figured it out! Here's the rough timeline:
Trump will buy Greenland. Global warming melts Greenland and ironically becomes green, go figure. The lost tribes of Israel living under the ice there reveal themselves then march (and swim) southward. The Democrats build a wall to try to keep them out, because hipocracy. The tribes are legal citizens because of the Trump Greenland purchase of 2022. So they blow a trumpet 3 times and the walls come crumbling down. They all gladly conform to voter ID laws then proceed to build Zion and prepare for the millennium.
Plus, I uh, saw it in a dream... ahem. Now buy my book. Cough cough. Coming soon to a (unofficial) fireside near you.
============
For reals though: this is in the news:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/50862/ne ... n-saavedra
Link summary: Trump tweets about purchasing Greenland from Denmark.
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 12:36 am
by Chip
I like it. I mght choose to believe that. It's got promise. Those under-ice tribes could help us win BIGLY.
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 12:57 am
by Matchmaker
Trump says Greenland is costing Denmark $700,000,000 a year to "manage," a cost they can't afford. It was a good idea strategically for the USA to try to buy it in 1947, and it is still a good idea today.
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 1:04 am
by Matchmaker
Matchmaker wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 12:57 am
Trump says Greenland is costing Denmark $700,000,000 to "manage," a cost that they can't afford. It was a good idea strategically for the USA to try to buy it in 1947, and it is still a good idea today.
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 1:04 am
by Robin Hood
I doubt that Greenland costs Denmark $700 million. Not even close.
And as for strategic value, the US already has a significant military presence on the island.
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 1:04 am
by Matchmaker
Matchmaker wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 1:04 am
Matchmaker wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 12:57 am
Trump says Greenland is costing Denmark $700,000,000 to "manage," a cost that they can't afford. It was a good idea strategically for the USA to try to buy it in 1947, and it is still a good idea today.
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 5:57 am
by mahalanobis
If we make it a new state, we'll have a major problem... 51 stars on the flag.
We'll have to vote to kick out a state. Although, there will probably be a few volunteers if Trump wins reelection.
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 7:19 am
by jmack
Mahalanobis Distance wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 5:57 am
If we make it a new state, we'll have a major problem... 51 stars on the flag.
We'll have to vote to kick out a state. Although, there will probably be a few volunteers if Trump wins reelection.
Why make it a state when it could be a territory like other countries we already have? Frankly it doesn't sound like a bad idea, could be a strategic move. Why do people always assume Trump is an idiot? It's a thoughtless knee-jerk reaction it seems.
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 7:35 am
by oneClimbs
We played a family game of Risk years ago that went on way too long namely because one family member annoyingly decided to only occupy Greenland. I don't know how they did it but they were impossible to kill for the longest time and I think might have discovered some kind of flaw in the game.
I don't know how they kept getting reinforcements and such (and they had absolutely no strategic process to it) but when the news of Trump going after Greenland came out we all had a big laugh. "He's going for Greenland, he'll be unstoppable!"
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 9:15 am
by EmmaLee
California! Or Oregon, Washington, Massachusetts, Vermont, New York, etc. etc. I would gladly vote to "unstate" any/all of those and add Greenland in its/their place.
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 9:27 am
by kittycat51
EmmaLee wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 9:15 am
California! Or Oregon, Washington, Massachusetts, Vermont, New York, etc. etc. I would gladly vote to "unstate" any/all of those and add Greenland in its/their place.
CALIFORNIA first and foremost!
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 9:32 am
by Silver Pie
Hasn't Texas wanted to be it's own state for a long time?
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 9:32 am
by EmmaLee
kittycat51 wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 9:27 am
EmmaLee wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 9:15 am
California! Or Oregon, Washington, Massachusetts, Vermont, New York, etc. etc. I would gladly vote to "unstate" any/all of those and add Greenland in its/their place.
CALIFORNIA first and foremost!
Oh, and Illinois, too - or just Chicago would suffice.
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 9:45 am
by Silver Pie
I know the physics don't completely support this, but supposing California floated off into the ocean and became its own island, do you think it would then want to become its own country or would it want to stay with the US?
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 9:54 am
by Davka
EmmaLee wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 9:32 am
kittycat51 wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 9:27 am
EmmaLee wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 9:15 am
California! Or Oregon, Washington, Massachusetts, Vermont, New York, etc. etc. I would gladly vote to "unstate" any/all of those and add Greenland in its/their place.
CALIFORNIA first and foremost!
Oh, and Illinois, too - or just Chicago would suffice.
But that would make a big road tripping problem. “Get out your passports, everyone, we’re coming into Illinois.” Lol.
I would vote California, as well.
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 10:02 am
by EmmaLee
Davka wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 9:54 am
EmmaLee wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 9:32 am
kittycat51 wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 9:27 am
EmmaLee wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 9:15 am
California! Or Oregon, Washington, Massachusetts, Vermont, New York, etc. etc. I would gladly vote to "unstate" any/all of those and add Greenland in its/their place.
CALIFORNIA first and foremost!
Oh, and Illinois, too - or just Chicago would suffice.
But that would make a big road tripping problem. “Get out your passports, everyone, we’re coming into Illinois.” Lol.
We're almost to that state (no pun intended) already. Soon, for example, all U.S. citizens will have to have and present their passport before they can board a plane to anywhere, including other U.S. states, unless they have one of the new, heinous unconstitutional "Real ID" cards.
https://www.cchfreedom.org/cchf.php/1250
Just wall-off the Chicagoland area - no appreciable affect on road tripping at all.
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 11:31 am
by LDS Physician
jmack wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 7:19 am
Mahalanobis Distance wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 5:57 am
If we make it a new state, we'll have a major problem... 51 stars on the flag.
We'll have to vote to kick out a state. Although, there will probably be a few volunteers if Trump wins reelection.
Why make it a state when it could be a territory like other countries we already have? Frankly it doesn't sound like a bad idea, could be a strategic move. Why do people always assume Trump is an idiot? It's a thoughtless knee-jerk reaction it seems.
Thoughtless? Thoughtless Liberal reactions to Trump? Nahhhhhhhhh
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 11:46 am
by Alaris
Come on now people. Liberals carefully, expertly, accidentally craft up nonsense like this:
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 4:57 pm
by lundbaek
Any ideas on how owning Greenland would enhance the U.S. economy or national defense. I certainly would not want Greenlanders voting in our national elections. The tiny North Atlantic shrimp that come from Greenland are among my favourite delicacies. Maybe they would be less expensive if the U.S. owned Greenland.
Friends of ours in Denmark served a 6 month mission in Greenland several years ago. Apparently the Church has some representation there - maybe still does.
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 6:06 pm
by Lord of my dogs
Mahalanobis Distance wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 5:57 am
If we make it a new state, we'll have a major problem... 51 stars on the flag.
We'll have to vote to kick out a state. Although, there will probably be a few volunteers if Trump wins reelection.
It's ok because Cali will fall in the ocean soon enough...
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 8:39 pm
by gkearney
Where in the world did the idea come from that in order to add a state would some how require the dropping of a state. We don't have to have an even number of states. Alaska was admitted to the union on January 3, 1959 Hawaii became a state on August 21, 1959. This means that between January 3, 1959 and August 20, 1959 the union had 49 states and had a 49 star flag:
Indeed the Smithsonian which produces the flag designs already has a 51 star flag designed:
Now let me throw a bit of cold water on the plan to eliminate California, Oregon and Washington from the union. Consider if you will what such a plan would mean in reality. First these three states are net contributors to the U.S. federal tax base. That is to say the federal government collects more money from the residence of these states in taxes than it expends on them. But that is not all...
Imagine a world in which these west coast states are now a separate nation.
This would mean the United States would have no west coast commercial ports, no west coast naval stations including the naval stations at San Diego, Long Beach, Alameda, Oakland or the nuclear submarine base at Bangor, Washington. The Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton would be gone as would several significant naval air stations, air force bases and training facilities. A major supply of food for the United States would now be in foreign hands. We would become completely dependent upon their good will to move any materials overland from the west coast or to west coast ports while they would be free to trade as they choose with the nations of Asia, the Pacific.
Because they are net contributors to the U.S. federal budget they will not feel much in the way of economic distress from the separation. California and the other states are more than capable of producing enough food for their population. California is the world's 6th largest economy with vast amounts of industrial capacity. California builds cars, trucks. Washington state aircraft. The largest technology companies would all be in this now nation as would all the U.S. production of computer chips and design of the same. All manor of strategic resources would be lost. It would take a generation or more to replace such resources.
The U.S. states of Alaska and Hawaii become separated from the rest of the country and would likely either become independent (Hawaii) or part of Canada (Alaska). Alaska would loose it ability to bring it oil from Valdez to the rest of the country without first having to off load it in the newly independent Pacific States or transporting it through the Panama Canal to Gulf ports.
Al this would likely set off a chain reaction in other states as well, how long until Texas decides to go it alone? New England would likely join with a newly emboldened Canada which would give that country access to ice free ports on the Atlantic. Soon after that the Great Lakes states New York, Ohio, Michigan, Illinois Wisconsin and Minnesota would also likely follow New England given their dependence on the St. Lawrence Seaway which would now be under total Canadian domination. The Southern states watching Texas, the Pacific States and New England cut away would soon follow suit leaving the United States a hollowed out shell of landlocked and impoverished regions in the centre of the nation.
I think when you really sit down and think this thing through you will see that such an idea is not only unrealistic but foolhardy as well.
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 8:41 pm
by EmmaLee
- Facepalm-meme-11-300x219.jpg (13.36 KiB) Viewed 3044 times
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 11:14 pm
by mahalanobis
gkearney wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 8:39 pm
Where in the world did the idea come from that in order to add a state would some how require the dropping of a state. We don't have to have an even number of states. Alaska was admitted to the union on January 3, 1959 Hawaii became a state on August 21, 1959. This means that between January 3, 1959 and August 20, 1959 the union had 49 states and had a 49 star flag:
Indeed the Smithsonian which produces the flag designs already has a 51 star flag designed:
Now let me throw a bit of cold water on the plan to eliminate California, Oregon and Washington from the union. Consider if you will what such a plan would mean in reality. First these three states are net contributors to the U.S. federal tax base. That is to say the federal government collects more money from the residence of these states in taxes than it expends on them. But that is not all...
Imagine a world in which these west coast states are now a separate nation.
This would mean the United States would have no west coast commercial ports, no west coast naval stations including the naval stations at San Diego, Long Beach, Alameda, Oakland or the nuclear submarine base at Bangor, Washington. The Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton would be gone as would several significant naval air stations, air force bases and training facilities. A major supply of food for the United States would now be in foreign hands. We would become completely dependent upon their good will to move any materials overland from the west coast or to west coast ports while they would be free to trade as they choose with the nations of Asia, the Pacific.
Because they are net contributors to the U.S. federal budget they will not feel much in the way of economic distress from the separation. California and the other states are more than capable of producing enough food for their population. California is the world's 6th largest economy with vast amounts of industrial capacity. California builds cars, trucks. Washington state aircraft. The largest technology companies would all be in this now nation as would all the U.S. production of computer chips and design of the same. All manor of strategic resources would be lost. It would take a generation or more to replace such resources.
The U.S. states of Alaska and Hawaii become separated from the rest of the country and would likely either become independent (Hawaii) or part of Canada (Alaska). Alaska would loose it ability to bring it oil from Valdez to the rest of the country without first having to off load it in the newly independent Pacific States or transporting it through the Panama Canal to Gulf ports.
Al this would likely set off a chain reaction in other states as well, how long until Texas decides to go it alone? New England would likely join with a newly emboldened Canada which would give that country access to ice free ports on the Atlantic. Soon after that the Great Lakes states New York, Ohio, Michigan, Illinois Wisconsin and Minnesota would also likely follow New England given their dependence on the St. Lawrence Seaway which would now be under total Canadian domination. The Southern states watching Texas, the Pacific States and New England cut away would soon follow suit leaving the United States a hollowed out shell of landlocked and impoverished regions in the centre of the nation.
I think when you really sit down and think this thing through you will see that such an idea is not only unrealistic but foolhardy as well.
I can imagine us all goofing off in class, telling sub-par recycled near-funny jokes, when gkearney (who is sitting in the front of the class of course) raises his hand to correct the grammar of the punchline lol. Love it.
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 21st, 2019, 11:24 pm
by oneClimbs
Surreal buying a sandwich today and the news is all atwitter about Trump wanting to buy Greenland. I just had this moment thinking, “So this is why we die. It is an act of mercy, because after living too long you don’t recognize the world anymore.”
It gets crazy, we all have a built in expiration date to check out and have some peace to recover from all this stuff.
Re: Lost Tribes Under the Ice + Trump
Posted: August 24th, 2019, 5:20 pm
by Silver Pie
I don't know whether to :head_desk: or :face_palm: or :head_bang:
Alaris wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 11:46 am
Come on now people. Liberals carefully, expertly, accidentally craft up nonsense like this:
Image: listen-its-simple-weve-got-to-ban-guns-to-save-5648755.png&f