If we consider the persecution of Christians as the focus for intervention, the current government of Nigeria would be the most obvious target for a surgical military intervention. However, that country lacks an element as attractive as oil production. As for the case of Greenland, there is no legitimacy in trampling international law, and, in the end, causing the collapse of NATO would only benefit countries that represent the old communism of 1917, such as Russia and China.
The US launched strikes in Nigeria against isis linked militants persecuting Christians on Christmas.
The US is at least doing something and my understanding is that the US is working with the current Nigerian government to prevent further attacks on Christians. I haven't seen other nations getting involved. I don't know that a regime change has to happen in Nigeria. The problem is that isis-aligned militants are difficult to deal with for the current Nigerian government. Who is funding those groups is a better question for me. Also, Greenland is currently protected militarily by the US and not so much by Denmark. The US has the Pituffik space base, formerly known as Thule, whereas the Danish military doesn't have much of an existence there. So if it gets taken by the US it wouldn't be much of a deal, it's not like Denmark invested much in Greenland. It's virtually the same thing for NATO, all the other members simply relied on the US and hardly invested in their military. So suddenly when the US wants to leave, the US gets blamed for the faults of the other NATO members. If they were worried about Russia and China perhaps they should have acted like it. Instead of building up their nations military, they flooded their countries with migrants to the detriment of their security. Nature abhors a vacuum. There is this kind of mentality that the US should do what other nations want instead of being accountable for their own messes. The EU had plenty of time and opportunity to get their act together.
Whatever cooperation the United States may have with Greenland does not give it the prerogative to override international law. I agree that the other members of the alliance should invest more in it, but the United States itself also depends on the alliance, since it has a large military force dispersed around the world that could have difficulty reorganizing in time to return to its own territory and defend it against an invasion. Triggering an internal short circuit within NATO would, in the long run, benefit only Russia and China, which see a united alliance as a wall of deterrence.
There are legal paths for Greenland to become a US territory. All it takes is for the people of Greenland to vote in favor of independence followed by a vote for integration into the US. The people of Greenland want to join the US for the most part. As for US issues with leaving NATO, that is up to them. I highly doubt it would ever be an issue for them. As for benefiting Russia and China, the US has made it abundantly clear they have wanted the war in Ukraine to end for a year now. Yet all the same players in the EU want it to keep going, even if they don't have the means to continue fighting it. These same players have destroyed their countries with different policies, especially migration. You would think that these nations would think to themselves "maybe we should find a way to peace before the US decides to leave NATO". Instead they keep forcefully doubling down to their own demise. Should the US continue to support this death wish? At what point do you walk away because you aren't being heard? In many ways it isn't the US leaving NATO, but instead NATO forcing the US out because they don't have the capacity to listen and compromise. The EU is begging for Russia to invade at this point so the US is walking away. How many American tax payer dollars have been laundered at this point as well? Corruption everywhere in the Ukraine, weapons being sold all over the world, gold toilets, high end sports cars, luxury cars, luxury properties, while poor under equipped Ukrainians die in the trenches. Ukrainian officials involved in corruption schemes, and who knows how far these extend into the EU. They don't want the war to end because they are getting rich off of it. If this war was serious all of this money and material would be used honestly. Also, how much laundered oil has the EU bought since this war began? What a bunch of hypocrites. They are afraid of Russia, need American intervention, but continue to fund Russia by buying their oil. What a joke, how can anyone take the EU seriously anymore at this point?
The fact that there could be a plebiscite in which an economically very attractive proposal is presented—namely, belonging to the world’s largest economic power—does not eliminate the fact that this would be illegal and a violation of international law. As for the war in Ukraine, the Russian side does not truly seek peace, but rather a proposal that merely pauses the conflict in exchange for reducing Ukrainian sovereignty to nothing and that aligns with its nationalist conception that Ukraine is an artificial state. It is possible that, in many countries, if a referendum were organized with the aim of full integration into the United States, the majority of people would vote yes, because they believe it is simply an advantageous status to belong to that country, even if they were treated as second-class citizens.
Exactly, Greenland's people would vote yes to joining the US because it would be advantageous. People don't typically vote for things that they don't see as advantageous. This is a 100% legal path forward. The attractive proposal to my knowledge would only work in the purchase of Greenland from Denmark, which they say is not for sale, but who knows because things can change. You keep going back to Russia Luan, but you don't mention all the corruption and failed policies I have pointed out to you on the Ukrainian/EU side. What Russia wants or plans would be entirely irrelevant if the EU didn't keep running on the path towards its own self destruction. If the EU had actually invested in its own people and military properly we wouldn't be having this discussion. EU nations had a massive lead on Russia since 1989, now it can't even put a military together to counter Russia even though it has 2.5 times the population and had 45 years to do so. And instead of choosing a peaceful exit, because it knows it cannot win this war, it decides the better option is to continue fighting it. Nature abhors a vacuum, if it wasn't Russia it would eventually be another super power flexing in the EU because it is actively choosing to kill itself. This is 100% of the problem.
These are all political arguments. But I call to mind Pope St John 23'd encyclical Peace on Earth (Pacem in Terris) . In this he said that with the advent of nuclear weapons the world had changed. It only takes one mistake, the press of one wrong button and we all go up in smoke. I lived and grew up in the era of the Cold War when we lived in constant fear of going up in smoke. People have forgotten this. I don't think we can afford these constant never ending wars. Catholic Prophecy and the Marian Apparitions constantly warn us about this. Our salvation does not come from these constant wars or military actions. It is through the way of prayer and peace. Mary Queen of Peace, pray for us.
Another thing I notice about what is going on at the minute is these new military weapons. For instance the helicopters the USA have that do not show up on radar and do not make any noise. The missile that the Russians have that goes so fast that no one can stop it. The AI controlled drones that do their own thing. There are many. many other secret weapons out there that we cannot even guess at A new widespread war would be a total. total horror picture..
I personally don't see these entirely as political. I try to figure out a general theme from what I see occurring in the world in an attempt to try to see where things are moving from a prophetic point of view. Currently, I see the US moving in a positive direction away from the current trajectory of prophecy whereas I see the EU running directly into it. The US has tried repeatedly to get the EU to change course but it is insistent on keeping course.
Trump himself said in an interview with The New York Times that he does not need international law to carry out his plans regarding Greenland. In other words, he does not care about operating outside the bounds of legality to achieve his goals. I mentioned the economic issue as an attraction for Trump with regard to Greenland because it is an example of how the United States could become a global empire simply by offering economic advantages to those who agreed to annexation—something that would trample international law and set a dangerous precedent in which a single man would wield more power than all global leaders combined. I do not believe, moreover, that many of the people seeking the economic advantages of integration into the United States would care if the U.S. consolidated a more liberal policy on abortion, as occurred during the bleak years of Obama and Biden. Trump also spoke about turning Canada into an American state, and I am certain that he did not give a single thought to the impact this would have on the definition of the American electorate, which is ultimately responsible for sustaining the pro-life cause. Trump 2.0 is the inverse of Trump 1.0—not only because of interventionist policies, but because he is, in fact, the most globalist president in the military sense, in that he does not respect the territorial limits of other countries. From this point forward, the United States could become an expanding empire, and I would not like the only key to stopping it to be the Russian and Chinese nuclear arsenals.
Time will tell Luan, personally I am not afraid of any what you consider to be worst case scenarios happening, not that I even think they will happen at all. Trump has a flair for the sensational. Things would only get better for the people of Greenland and Canada under a US flag. Everyone who has been calling doom and gloom from Trump since his first day in office has come up wrong time and again. I am personally concerned for the EU. There is so much moving in the right way for the US and it's people it is amazing to me. The EU, the exact opposite.
Our European leaders have turned into satanic, despot traitors. Hellbent on war. Psychopaths one and all
I felt the same; that was until Trump came out and reversed his stance on abortion. Its as if that 'wee issue' doesn't matter anymore. When in fact it is the issue of our time. Shame on him!
I saw on Instagram that Trump asked why America doesn't get any good immigrants - from Sweden, Norway etc. Instead, America gets ppl from Somali. He said they are dirty & filthy. Idk if what he said was real or fake, but I say real as he called a woman 'Little piggy.' He's not against IVF, but how else do same sex couples have babies?? I don't see the logic in being against abortion, but not IVF. God is probably illuminating his conscience somewhat, in the sense that Trump said he's not likely going to Heaven. So, he knows he's doing a lot of evil. Prayers for conversion for these world leaders, but at this point I honestly don't think they care, it's just the harsh reality we face...
Abortion is absolutely the litmus test of our time. A very holy woman i knew ( since died) said it was the Blood of the Lamb marking our doors.
I don't necessarily see all the good things happening in the US as coming from Trump, I believe Our Lady is moving. I do believe if things continue on the path we are currently on we could see him change position. My understanding is that the matter of abortion he was talking about was in regards to federal funding because of the mess with Obamacare in order to get a deal done on health care. He is thinking from a pragmatic point of view, but with prayer and pressure this could change.
