Post #34542 by albaby1 on the US Policy board

Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy ❤

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (118)

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

No. of Recommendations: 7

You guys are all making the same mistake: you're assuming that the status quo is acceptable. It isn't, not if anyone is serious about confronting China in 2027+.

I'm not assuming that the status quo is acceptable to us. I was just wondering why Greenland would have to accommodate our national security interests in their policy decisions, rather than pursuing a "Greenland First" policy? If it's in their national interest to help us confront China, they'll do that. If it's not, why would we have an expectation that they would put America's interests ahead of Greenland's?

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

Print the post

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (118)

Prev | Next

Announcements

US Policy FAQ

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

A community forum supporting civilized, and highly helpful, self-educating investors that come together for Shrewdness and merry spirits. These message boards closely follow the look and feel of the old message boards at boards.fool.com prior to the boards redirected to discussion.fool.com. Shrewd'm is not affiliated with the comprehensive and excellent investment website, The Motley Fool (TMF), in any way. The Shrewd commmunity here has owed, and continues to owe, gratitude to The Motley Fool for nurturing a culture of jovial irreverence towards Wall St, and that tradition will continue here.