"Do I annihilate the Islamic Republic, and do it quickly, never giving them a chance to kill and destroy people and countries again? Do I drive them into hell"

“Do I annihilate the Islamic Republic, and do it quickly, never giving them a chance to kill and destroy people and countries again? Do I drive them into hell”

The post ‘Do I Annihilate the Islamic Republic?’ Trump Issues Shocking Threat to Iran in UN Speech first appeared on Mediaite.

        • Optional@lemmy.world
          111·
          16 hours ago

          This is from 3 days ago:

          President Donald Trump announced on Friday that the United States has reached an agreement with Denmark and Greenland to give the US “permanent control over security, and all other needs,” in Greenland, which is a semi-autonomous territory of Denmark home to 56,000 people.

          “This is an “Infinite Life” Agreement, there is no end!” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “From now on, no U.S. adversary can EVER have a base in Greenland, have a military presence in Greenland, or make sensitive investments in Greenland, without our express written approval.”

          The agreement has not yet been signed, and little is known about it beyond Trump’s social media posts. Denmark and Greenland said on Saturday that any ​agreement with the United States would not compromise Greenland’s sovereignty. And Trump’s words about expanding American military presence in Greenland may not mean much, considering that the US military already enjoys sweeping access to Greenland under a treaty that dates to the 1950s. Service members are, in fact, the single largest group of Americans currently present in the territory.

            • Optional@lemmy.world
              2·
              16 hours ago

              Signed, very good. No details other than they plan to build more bases there. That’s going to be expensive and pointless, but ok.

              In Copenhagen, 40-year-old barber Gavin Sharpe told AFP: “It’s just the same situation.”

              He believes that Trump’s messaging was meant to win over US voters, adding that “I think it is exactly the same deal they had before.”

              . . . Under a 1951 defense pact updated in 2004, Washington was already able to ramp up its military presence on the island provided it informed Denmark and Greenland in advance.

              Yeah, there’s language that a non-NATO, non-EU country can’t build military bases there, so, uh, win. I guess? But as an agreement, the whole thing’s a big puffy nothing. Unless there’s something in the other 9 pages that’s a real shocker.

    • Eternal192@anarchist.nexusEnglish
      110·
      19 hours ago

      “infinite life contract” in which basically Greenland belongs to America from how i understood it.

      • MBech@feddit.dk
        2·
        9 hours ago

        It’s pretty much the same deal as before, but now Greenland needs to be considered first for supplying of the bases, instead of USA choosing whomever they want as supplier.