BruceVC

" The board of peace " ..what a joke Have you seen the countries that are on the board I am prepared to make prediction, they will come up with ideas for Gaza peace that have already been discussed but not implemented and they will achieve nothing substantive in other conflicts And once Trump is no longer president it will collapse into obscurity, like it never existed

The USA was never going invade Greenland, that was just the expected sensationalism and SM drama with this story. There were comparisons to the regime change in Venezuela to how Greenland was going to be annexed and they not remotely the same thing for various reasons that include how Congress wont support any military action over the taking of Greenland despite the rhetoric from several of Trumps spokespeople. Would they declare Greenland an example of narcoterrorism Trump initially tried the threat of economic bullying to try to take Greenland through tariffs and now he was dropped that idea We dont know what this " framework " deal is he suggested and I doubt he even knows. But yes the EU and Canada stood there ground and it was good to see some backbone but its what you expect because as we discussed this was about the future of a sovereign territory that is part of an EU country and they had to draw a line

Thanks, its important to get collaboration with this type of feedback. I am going to share what you guys have mentioned with my family because we currently discussing Greenland and what the US wants to do and my SA family dont know any Danes to get personal feedback so forum feedback like this is important Its interesting you and @Gorgon mentioned Danish Colonialism because its not something I was aware of. In all the discussions and research I have done about European Colonialism its almost all around Africa so Denmark was never mentioned. But I see there was 1 Danish colony which I had never heard of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danish_Gold_Coast Just for the record I have watched lots of interviews with Greenlanders lately and none of them seemed to have a negative opinion of Denmark and they all prefer the current setup to being annexed by the USA Its probably because the anxiety of becoming Trump's latest "win " is much more real than what happened in the past and Denmark has made amends as Gorgon mentioned?

I stopped watching Trumps speeches at live events about 14 months ago and I just follow highlights But my stepmom was very angry and asked me to come watch "what Trump was saying " So to be polite I watched about 20 minutes of his Davos ramblings and it was the predictable waste of time with him going off script and peddling revisionist and selective " facts" He megalomania is getting worse as he gets older, he did make me laugh because he makes such inaccurate points about history and world events

Thanks, this is the feedback I was looking for and expecting and you have to ask Danes to get it The entire Greenland narrative has been hijacked and misrepresented by Trump and the media in general Its become about Trumps hubris or how " important "Greenland is to Denmark but would anyone be talking about how " important " Greenland is to Denmark if Trump wasnt trying to force US control over it? But I do understand the EU pushback because its about the principle and respect of sovereignty and the rules based order and Trump has now resorted to tariffs to get his way So I support the EU position I just wanted information about the reality of Greenland for Denmark which you have provided

Not a surprise at all DOGE became the perfect example of a sensationalized and failed Trump policy Add to that he brought in Musk who thought public sector and private sector restructuring is the same and it was almost guaranteed that all the grandstanding and rhetoric on DOGE achievements would end in the failure it became

I wanted to ask you and @Gorth what is the sentiment from Danes about Greenland normally? But I am not interested in the media stories around Trumps comments but the actual opinions of citizens which will vary and I am interested more in the RL connection Danes have for Greenland And this is not about me trying to support Trumps aspirations about owning Greenland because I dont support that for any of the reasons he has mentioned and I reject his usage of tariffs on several EU countries Is Greenland something that the average Dane is proud of, do people go on holiday there and is Greenland just assumed to be part of Denmark when it comes to your history? What does Denmark gain from " owning" Greenland, I found this information from a quick search. Is this accurate? ( its standard AI initial feedback so it could be inaccurate ) What Greenland Offers Denmark: Strategic Arctic Presence: A strong Danish voice and military footing in the strategically important Arctic region. International Image: Reinforces Denmark's self-perception as a benevolent global actor, fostering its "good global citizen" status. Mineral Resources: Potential future revenues from oil, gas, and critical minerals, though extraction remains challenging. EU Rights (Historically): Previous fisheries access to Greenland's waters contributed to EU development funds for Greenland.

Not at all, I wish US tariff threats were meaningless USA tariffs threats are still a concern for most countries because most of the tariffed countries rely on heavy exports to the US Only China has been able to more or less insulate itself from US tariffs because they learnt from last time But what we are seeing is countries building around US tariffs threats South Africa and almost all of Africa is very concerned with any tariffs from the US but AGOA looks like it will be renewed so thats good news, its gone through Congress and just needs Trumps signature with still some uncertainty specifically for South Africa https://www.forbesafrica.com/current-affairs/2026/01/15/agoa-renewal-moves-one-step-closer-but-south-africas-eligibility-remains-uncertain " The United States (U.S.) House of Representatives has approved a three-year extension of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), following President Donald Trump’s decision to uproot the duty-free agreement in October. Established in 2000 under President Bill Clinton, the preferential trade program offered 32 sub-Saharan African nations duty-free access to the U.S. market for thousands of exports. Despite a renewal receiving the majority vote, 340 to 54, participating states know reinstatement remains uncertain. The bill now heads to the U.S. Senate, which, if approved, will await final approval from Trump, who halted the 25-year agreement just three months ago. "

https://www.wypr.org/2026-01-16/irans-supreme-leader-acknowledges-thousands-killed-as-pressure-builds-on-clerical-rule The Iranian supreme leader has admitted thousands of people were killed during the protests " Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has acknowledged that "thousands" of people have been killed — some of them in what he called an "inhuman, savage manner" — during weeks of unrest across the country. The rare public admission, which took place during a speech broadcast on state television, comes as international scrutiny of Iran's crackdown continues — and after Iranian officials had previously acknowledged significant casualties while blaming terrorists, foreign governments and intelligence agencies for fomenting unrest. But human rights groups say the scale of violence has been far greater than authorities have — until now — admitted publicly. The Norway-based organization Iran Human Rights estimates that more than 3,400 people have been killed nationwide since the protests began, while the U.S.-based Human Rights Activists in Iran group has also documented thousands of deaths and widespread arrests of demonstrators." And the global attention on the brutal crackdown is not going away Obviously Russia and China vetoed any UNSC resolution on Iran but its now been refered to the UN Human Rights Council, I am very interested to see how South Africa will vote because we currently a member https://unwatch.org/after-security-council-meeting-balks-on-iran-30-ngos-demand-unhrc-urgent-session/ "After yesterday’s Security Council meeting on Iran yesterday failed to produce any outcome resolution, a cross-regional coalition of 30 non-governmental organizations and human rights groups today sent an urgent appeal to 100 UN ambassadors in Geneva calling for an emergency session of the UN Human Rights Council to address what they describe as the “horrific mass killings” of protesters by the Islamic Republic of Iran. “Due to the veto power of China and Russia, the Security Council is blocked from taking action on Iran, but we know from past experience that if EU states take the lead at the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council — where there is no veto — they can adopt a strong condemnation of the Iranian regime’s massacre of protesters, and establish mechanisms of investigation, accountability and justice,” said Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of UN Watch, an independent Geneva-based human rights group that plays a leading role in supporting Iranian dissidents. Signatories to today’s appeal come from Australia, Cameroon, Canada, France, Gambia, Ghana, India, Japan, Latvia, Moldova, Morocco, Nigeria, Pakistan, Senegal, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States. The coalition warned that Iran’s violent crackdown on nationwide protests that began on December 28 has resulted in grave, widespread, and systematic violations of international human rights law. Thousands of protesters have been killed by Iranian security forces in recent weeks, with many more injured, arbitrarily detained, tortured, or forcibly disappeared. Protesters have been shot with live ammunition, detainees denied access to lawyers and medical care, and journalists, students, women, and minority communities deliberately targeted. Internet shutdowns and information blackouts have further concealed the full scale of abuses."

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/africa/south-africa-voices-concern-over-iran-unrest-urges-parties-to-show-restraint/3800247 The SA government has finally made a statement about the Iran crackdown. Its days late but at least they said something " South Africa said on Thursday it was monitoring the protests in Iran with concern, urging all parties to exercise “maximum” restraint. “Sustainable peace and stability can only be achieved through solutions that center the agency of the Iranian people,” a Foreign Ministry statement said. Pretoria called on Iranian authorities to guarantee citizens’ right to peaceful protest, responding to “concerning” reports of unrest and fatalities. The ministry stressed that South Africa considers the rights to peaceful protest, freedom of expression, and freedom of association as universal human rights that “must be upheld without exception.”

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2026/01/iran-massacre-of-protesters-demands-global-diplomatic-action-to-signal-an-end-to-impunity/ As predicted Iran has unleashed the full might of its security forces to crush the protests, total deaths are anything from 3k-10k but because of the Internet and information blackout we will never know total deaths And as expected South Africa has a completely inconsistent stance on this latest crackdown. We have failed to unequivocally condemn Iran, there is a deafening silence around what should be the foundation of our foreign policy According to our foreign affairs our foreign policy decisions are based on "human rights and Constitutionalism " So the reason we took a position on countries like Venezuela and Israel is because of this And yet its amazing listening to the mental gymnastics of some people on talk-shows trying to justify why we cant condemn whats happening in Iran, the excuses range from " we shouldn't get involved in the affairs of other countries " to " but Iran is just trying to survive and they have a siege mentality because of years of Western sanctions " None of that matters if the foundation of your foreign policy decisions is based on human rights The DA has demanded that the ANC take Iran to the UN Human Rights Council but I doubt we will see that happening. That type of outrage and global action only applies to Western countries or Israel and BRICS countries get a pass when they flagrantly and egregiously ignore human rights https://www.polity.org.za/article/da-asks-lamola-to-report-iran-for-human-rights-abuses-2026-01-14 "In a letter written to Lamola, the DA said the use of blatantly deadly oppression against civilians by a sitting government is one of the “most egregious forms of human rights abuse witnessed anywhere in the world” with the party questioning South Africa’s relationship with the country. DA spokesperson on International Relations and Cooperation Ryan Smith said the principles of freedom, democracy and human rights enshrined in the South African Constitution compels Lamola to execute his sworn duty, as the custodian of the country’s foreign policy, to protect global citizens against autocratic regimes. Smith said the UNHRC was the “ideal” international forum where South African foreign policy, rooted in the Constitution, could find expression on the international stage. He said as a member of the Government of National Unity (GNU), the DA would not tolerate South Africa “turning a blind eye to brutal authoritarian regimes at the African National Congress’s (ANC’s) behest”.

I had a chat with some of my family last night about this and they agree with you and @Lexx They also support what the Clintons are doing because they believe its just a way to create a distraction from Trumps involvement so the entire inquiry is insincere

Maybe but end of the day isnt it better for Bill Clinton to clarify why Epstein visited him in the WH 17 times and why he flew on Epstein's private plane 27 times? https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/bill-hillary-clinton-refuse-testify-house-epstein-probe-2026-01-13/ I dont think Clinton is guilty of anything but is it really unreasonable to expect him to answer questions? Even if it is a witch-hunt they cant charge him with something he didnt do And these same questions should be asked to everyone, including Trump Thats what this whole thing is suppose to be about, getting clarity on what people did or didnt know

I see the Clintons have refused to testify, I wonder why? I have read all there legal reasons but its not very convincing considering all the attention on Epstein https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/13/bill-hillary-clinton-epstein-investigation

It depends on what you mean by "dangers" and how it impacts you on the geopolitical level and also what specific dangers you concerned about that Trump has created We were living in a world already where countries like Russia can illegally annex parts of other countries and invade countries and yet the world still continues If you just very disappointed with the US under Trump thats understandable and especially if you a supporter of the US and what defines Democracy But if you can be more specific that would be helpful?