Skip to content

It’s not easy being Greenland – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,876
edited January 7 in General
It’s not easy being Greenland – politicalbetting.com

How likely do Britons think it is that the USA will try to seize Greenland by military force?Very likely: 10%Fairly likely: 30%Fairly unlikely: 24%Very unlikely: 11%yougov.co.uk/topics/polit…

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • MelonBMelonB Posts: 16,647
    Most likely seems that they’ll extort it, playground bully style.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 53,741
    Second!
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 46,233
    Fpt
    Ben Wallace being pretty uncompromising about crooked thieving Donald on R4 this am. Though Justin Webb brought up Badenoch’s appeasing bollocks about kidnapping Maduro being the moral thing to do, with his customary feebleness he didn’t ask Wallace what he thought about it.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 125,533
    Our first 2026 voting intention sees Reform lead by 8. The Tories hit their highest since last April on 23%. 4 points above Labour on 19%

    ➡️ REF UK 31% (+3)
    🌳 CON 23% (+1)
    🌹 LAB 19% (-2)
    🔶 LIB DEM 12% (-1)
    🌍 GREEN 10% (+1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)


    https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/2008803898308678017
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 15,016
    The thing that tips it more toward likely is that it would be relative easy, as regime change goes.

    Seize the airport, execute, exile or bribe the political leadership. Done. What's Europe going to do about it? Shit all.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 57,105

    Our first 2026 voting intention sees Reform lead by 8. The Tories hit their highest since last April on 23%. 4 points above Labour on 19%

    ➡️ REF UK 31% (+3)
    🌳 CON 23% (+1)
    🌹 LAB 19% (-2)
    🔶 LIB DEM 12% (-1)
    🌍 GREEN 10% (+1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)


    https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/2008803898308678017

    Right +4, Left -2. Although that Reform number is a bit out of kilter with other recent polling.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 57,105
    Dura_Ace said:

    The thing that tips it more toward likely is that it would be relative easy, as regime change goes.

    Seize the airport, execute, exile or bribe the political leadership. Done. What's Europe going to do about it? Shit all.

    It could bribe.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 59,157
    RedWhiteAndBlueLand!

    (No he isn’t about to send the military into a NATO country. If anything happens it will be a purchase and with a referendum of the people of Greenland).
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 125,533
    Just seen the dismissal of Will Jacks.

    Brain dead doesn't cover it.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 46,233
    I’ve heard a couple of times on the media that the US lacks icebreakers, a necessary factor in securing Greenland. Ironically on checking Wiki, the US is working with Canada and Finland to replace its old and broken down vessels. Tricky stuff this having allies thing..
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 54,663
    Dura_Ace said:

    The thing that tips it more toward likely is that it would be relative easy, as regime change goes.

    Seize the airport, execute, exile or bribe the political leadership. Done. What's Europe going to do about it? Shit all.

    No SMO or Galtieri strategy required.

    Bribery, astroturfing of influencers then becoming a US Protectorate like the Marshall Islands is more likely:

    https://www.politico.eu/article/donald-trump-greenland-easy-steps-nato-policy-deal-military/

    It would put the final nail in the coffin of NATO, and be quite a threat to Canada..

  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 4,563
    Doesn't seem to me his military leaders will push back against his orders if those happen. They'll find some way of turning an invasion into a rescue.

    So odd, really, because the US is already there as a guest, so to speak, and surely a softer approach would have gained them more with preserved goodwill.

    Good morning, everyone.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 85,088
    MelonB said:

    Most likely seems that they’ll extort it, playground bully style.

    Mafia style offer you can't refuse.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 31,596
    Legal Eagle on Triump's assault on Venezuela.

    TLDR: Voices in Trump's head (eg "they're eating the cats and dogs") + industrial quantities of sophistry.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCwdOe6Pm70
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 85,088

    Fpt
    Ben Wallace being pretty uncompromising about crooked thieving Donald on R4 this am. Though Justin Webb brought up Badenoch’s appeasing bollocks about kidnapping Maduro being the moral thing to do, with his customary feebleness he didn’t ask Wallace what he thought about it.

    It goes beyond feebleness. Webb is, I think, simply another Trump fanboy.
  • isamisam Posts: 43,322

    Just seen the dismissal of Will Jacks.

    Brain dead doesn't cover it.

    TNT’s commentary has been very patchy. The non cricketers in particular have grated, and this is just embarrassing

    https://x.com/monsieurjudge/status/2008787604754636947?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 15,016

    I’ve heard a couple of times on the media that the US lacks icebreakers, a necessary factor in securing Greenland. Ironically on checking Wiki, the US is working with Canada and Finland to replace its old and broken down vessels. Tricky stuff this having allies thing..

    Secure it against whom? Who has the desire and capacity to fight the USA for Greenland? Nobody.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 59,157

    Just seen the dismissal of Will Jacks.

    Brain dead doesn't cover it.

    You don’t want to see what happened to Jamie Smith.
  • TazTaz Posts: 23,840
    If it is not easy being Greenland will the EU Kermit to keep it safe ?
  • TazTaz Posts: 23,840
    Dura_Ace said:

    I’ve heard a couple of times on the media that the US lacks icebreakers, a necessary factor in securing Greenland. Ironically on checking Wiki, the US is working with Canada and Finland to replace its old and broken down vessels. Tricky stuff this having allies thing..

    Secure it against whom? Who has the desire and capacity to fight the USA for Greenland? Nobody.
    Sir Keir will send a strongly worded complaint.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 4,563
    Sandpit said:

    RedWhiteAndBlueLand!

    (No he isn’t about to send the military into a NATO country. If anything happens it will be a purchase and with a referendum of the people of Greenland).

    Why would the people of Greenland want a hostile takeover of the country by another country that runs its own place like a cut-throat business exploiting its customers (citizens)?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 125,533
    isam said:

    Just seen the dismissal of Will Jacks.

    Brain dead doesn't cover it.

    TNT’s commentary has been very patchy. The non cricketers in particular have grated, and this is just embarrassing

    https://x.com/monsieurjudge/status/2008787604754636947?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
    I think they're are still commentating off tube, these things happen but it is a disgrace that TNT have done this, doing off tube commentaries is fine during the pandemic but not in 2026.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 31,596

    I’ve heard a couple of times on the media that the US lacks icebreakers, a necessary factor in securing Greenland. Ironically on checking Wiki, the US is working with Canada and Finland to replace its old and broken down vessels. Tricky stuff this having allies thing..

    I’ve heard a couple of times on the media that the US lacks icebreakers, a necessary factor in securing Greenland. Ironically on checking Wiki, the US is working with Canada and Finland to replace its old and broken down vessels. Tricky stuff this having allies thing..

    The USN has some peculiar holes in it; the future stream seems even worse than most of Europe.

    Aside: What's going on with shipping on tankers leaving Venezuela and dodging Mr Rubio's "blockade":
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcpg0S6LSTY

  • MelonBMelonB Posts: 16,647
    Nigelb said:

    Fpt
    Ben Wallace being pretty uncompromising about crooked thieving Donald on R4 this am. Though Justin Webb brought up Badenoch’s appeasing bollocks about kidnapping Maduro being the moral thing to do, with his customary feebleness he didn’t ask Wallace what he thought about it.

    It goes beyond feebleness. Webb is, I think, simply another Trump fanboy.
    A somewhat different tone in Emma Barnett’s later interview with Ed Davey. You could feel in every sentence the irritation, distaste and condescension that goes well beyond journalistic devil’s advocacy.

    Ed and the Lib Dems really don’t fit the Beeb’s preferred narrative that Trump is a great statesman and Britain’s only meaningful international alliance is our special relationship.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 17,992
    Sandpit said:

    RedWhiteAndBlueLand!

    (No he isn’t about to send the military into a NATO country. If anything happens it will be a purchase and with a referendum of the people of Greenland).

    Then why does he, Hegseth etc. keep talking about using the military?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 53,741

    I’ve heard a couple of times on the media that the US lacks icebreakers, a necessary factor in securing Greenland. Ironically on checking Wiki, the US is working with Canada and Finland to replace its old and broken down vessels. Tricky stuff this having allies thing..

    When I was in Finland this summer they were boasting that the US was buying some of theirs, Finland being an expert as possibly the only (?) country that in winter doesn't have a single port where the sea doesn't freeze over
  • isamisam Posts: 43,322
    Scanned this article about the new drink driving laws without properly paying attention, and thought this was strange advice from Alcoholics Anonymous

    He said: “The new rules will send a strong message that it is simply not worth taking the risk. Our message at the AA for everyone is clear: if you are going to drink, don’t drive and if you are going to drive, don’t drink.”

    https://www.thetimes.com/article/798fa10d-2603-4ea2-bffd-007829a8f868?shareToken=610faef91aaa50324618f516a70a5c6d
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 54,663
    One for the PB lawyers.

    With Grok producing sexualised images of women and children on request, does this mean anyone with a twitter account could be prosrcuted for downloading indecent images of children?

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/06/grok-ai-fake-images-women-girls-undressed-uk-minister-liz-kendall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

    I no longer have a twitter account.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 36,510
    AnneJGP said:

    Sandpit said:

    RedWhiteAndBlueLand!

    (No he isn’t about to send the military into a NATO country. If anything happens it will be a purchase and with a referendum of the people of Greenland).

    Why would the people of Greenland want a hostile takeover of the country by another country that runs its own place like a cut-throat business exploiting its customers (citizens)?
    Trump's not going to be asking the people of Greenland.

    I do wonder if there might be legal challenges in the US.
  • TazTaz Posts: 23,840

    Our first 2026 voting intention sees Reform lead by 8. The Tories hit their highest since last April on 23%. 4 points above Labour on 19%

    ➡️ REF UK 31% (+3)
    🌳 CON 23% (+1)
    🌹 LAB 19% (-2)
    🔶 LIB DEM 12% (-1)
    🌍 GREEN 10% (+1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)


    https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/2008803898308678017

    Right +4, Left -2. Although that Reform number is a bit out of kilter with other recent polling.
    Recent polling has seen them stabilise and gain a point.
  • MelonBMelonB Posts: 16,647
    Dura_Ace said:

    I’ve heard a couple of times on the media that the US lacks icebreakers, a necessary factor in securing Greenland. Ironically on checking Wiki, the US is working with Canada and Finland to replace its old and broken down vessels. Tricky stuff this having allies thing..

    Secure it against whom? Who has the desire and capacity to fight the USA for Greenland? Nobody.
    Thing is nobody needs to fight the US over it. They just need to make it look a bit less easy. See Canada and tariffs last year.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 17,992
    Trump is saying Venezuela will give the US up to 50 million barrels of oil. This is despite the US not controlling Venezuela, despite the challenges of extracting that oil, and without any apparent agreement with Venezuela. At what point do we say he’s completely delusional?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 59,157
    There’s now allegedly four more dodgy tankers that have suddenly started flying Russian flags, as well as the one that Russian and American navies are arguing over off the coast of Scotland.

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 46,233
    edited January 7
    Dura_Ace said:

    I’ve heard a couple of times on the media that the US lacks icebreakers, a necessary factor in securing Greenland. Ironically on checking Wiki, the US is working with Canada and Finland to replace its old and broken down vessels. Tricky stuff this having allies thing..

    Secure it against whom? Who has the desire and capacity to fight the USA for Greenland? Nobody.
    You are of course right, but I was momentarily taking seriously the Trump Show bullshit for the purposes of examining the actualité, it has passed.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 17,992
    Sandpit said:

    RedWhiteAndBlueLand!

    (No he isn’t about to send the military into a NATO country. If anything happens it will be a purchase and with a referendum of the people of Greenland).

    Oh, sorry, I get it now. You mean Trump will take over Greenland the way Putin took over Crimea!
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 47,325
    IanB2 said:

    I’ve heard a couple of times on the media that the US lacks icebreakers, a necessary factor in securing Greenland. Ironically on checking Wiki, the US is working with Canada and Finland to replace its old and broken down vessels. Tricky stuff this having allies thing..

    When I was in Finland this summer they were boasting that the US was buying some of theirs, Finland being an expert as possibly the only (?) country that in winter doesn't have a single port where the sea doesn't freeze over
    Greenland not count?
  • isamisam Posts: 43,322
    edited January 7

    isam said:

    Just seen the dismissal of Will Jacks.

    Brain dead doesn't cover it.

    TNT’s commentary has been very patchy. The non cricketers in particular have grated, and this is just embarrassing

    https://x.com/monsieurjudge/status/2008787604754636947?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
    I think they're are still commentating off tube, these things happen but it is a disgrace that TNT have done this, doing off tube commentaries is fine during the pandemic but not in 2026.
    Yes I think the non cricketers are. They have been terrible though, they just don’t sound like they understand Test Match cricket at all, even their tone of voice is unsuitable. One of them hailed a boundary hit by Ben Stokes as being a shot played by Jofra Archer in an earlier match! As well as being a bad fit, they’re just not paying attention.

    Finn, Swann and Rainford-Brent are ok, but Cooky trips over his words a lot, which surprises me. TNT’s coverage has been as bad as England’s fielding
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 54,663
    AnneJGP said:

    Sandpit said:

    RedWhiteAndBlueLand!

    (No he isn’t about to send the military into a NATO country. If anything happens it will be a purchase and with a referendum of the people of Greenland).

    Why would the people of Greenland want a hostile takeover of the country by another country that runs its own place like a cut-throat business exploiting its customers (citizens)?
    Trump is a real estate developer and sees the Greenlanders as the unwanted tennant blocking his business plans that need to be sent packing by his hoods. They will not get a good deal from him.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 17,992
    Carnyx said:

    IanB2 said:

    I’ve heard a couple of times on the media that the US lacks icebreakers, a necessary factor in securing Greenland. Ironically on checking Wiki, the US is working with Canada and Finland to replace its old and broken down vessels. Tricky stuff this having allies thing..

    When I was in Finland this summer they were boasting that the US was buying some of theirs, Finland being an expert as possibly the only (?) country that in winter doesn't have a single port where the sea doesn't freeze over
    Greenland not count?
    Some of south-west Greenland is ice free through the winter.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 31,579
    Trump wants Greenland because of natural resources. They will offer to buy it, be told no, then will do what they think is a performative show of force - drop large numbers of resources into Pituffik and start making threats.

    At which point we see whose resolve is stronger.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 8,016

    AnneJGP said:

    Sandpit said:

    RedWhiteAndBlueLand!

    (No he isn’t about to send the military into a NATO country. If anything happens it will be a purchase and with a referendum of the people of Greenland).

    Why would the people of Greenland want a hostile takeover of the country by another country that runs its own place like a cut-throat business exploiting its customers (citizens)?
    Trump's not going to be asking the people of Greenland.

    I do wonder if there might be legal challenges in the US.
    The great and the good in the US seem remarkably quiet about how the US has shorn all pretensions of being the world’s policeman and morphed into Al Capone.

    Surely there are respected voices on the right who should be pointing out to the American people that this might look like a jolly at the moment but there will be long term damage to the US.

    Denmark should say to the US that they have carte Blanche to agree with Greenland’s government to build as many naval bases and airbases it feels it needs to defend itself from the Russians (surely they just need an agreement from Putin to be nice?) and can knock themselves out by putting as many soldiers as it likes but sovereignty remains as before. Trump can’t then complain about security and will have to confirm (if it wasn’t clear already) that he is the Pirate King and actually only really cares about the money the US can extract.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,696
    Given 72% of US voters and even a majority of Republicans oppose taking Greenland by military force I can't see it happening. Even if he did try, Trump would likely be impeached and convicted by Congress shortly after

    "Few Americans want to take over Greenland — most oppose covert operations and military action | YouGov" https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/52879-few-americans-want-to-take-over-greenland-most-oppose-covert-operations-military-action-poll
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,696
    Foxy said:

    One for the PB lawyers.

    With Grok producing sexualised images of women and children on request, does this mean anyone with a twitter account could be prosrcuted for downloading indecent images of children?

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/06/grok-ai-fake-images-women-girls-undressed-uk-minister-liz-kendall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

    I no longer have a twitter account.

    If they request them
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 46,233
    More parochially, a rare moment of agreement with Labour that Scottish Labour are idiots.

    https://x.com/paulhutcheon/status/2008816540435837388?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 85,088
    MelonB said:

    Nigelb said:

    Fpt
    Ben Wallace being pretty uncompromising about crooked thieving Donald on R4 this am. Though Justin Webb brought up Badenoch’s appeasing bollocks about kidnapping Maduro being the moral thing to do, with his customary feebleness he didn’t ask Wallace what he thought about it.

    It goes beyond feebleness. Webb is, I think, simply another Trump fanboy.
    A somewhat different tone in Emma Barnett’s later interview with Ed Davey. You could feel in every sentence the irritation, distaste and condescension that goes well beyond journalistic devil’s advocacy.

    Ed and the Lib Dems really don’t fit the Beeb’s preferred narrative that Trump is a great statesman and Britain’s only meaningful international alliance is our special relationship.
    Yes, and it's a delusional narrative.

    And it's weird to me that the British right, which has spent the last decade banging on about "sovereignty" is so keen to embrace our new status as America's gimp. It's not quite so odd that the establishment likes to pretend it's not happening, but it's almost as contemptible.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,696
    isam said:

    Scanned this article about the new drink driving laws without properly paying attention, and thought this was strange advice from Alcoholics Anonymous

    He said: “The new rules will send a strong message that it is simply not worth taking the risk. Our message at the AA for everyone is clear: if you are going to drink, don’t drive and if you are going to drive, don’t drink.”

    https://www.thetimes.com/article/798fa10d-2603-4ea2-bffd-007829a8f868?shareToken=610faef91aaa50324618f516a70a5c6d

    Well just ban drink driving completely if even half a pint is apparently unacceptable to drive. Pubs, especially rural pubs would be furious however
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 57,105
    The greater block on Trump going for Greenland is the threat of the early loss of control of Congress. The close margin has got 3 closer in the past couple of days (MTG resignation effective, one death, one in hospital after a car crash) - and that is before further resignations are being threatened over foreign policy.

    Loss of control of Congress = impeachment.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,851
    Morning all :)

    America has had plenty of experience buying territory - the Louisiana Purchase, Florida, Alaska. Indeed, the war with Mexico was one of those exceptions where they got with force far more than they probably would have achieved with a simple commercial transaction.

    Now, you could argue. Florida aside, there weren't that many people involved (well, the Indians and the Eskimos didn't count then). In an era of self-determination, how much will money talk? Imagine if Argentina had been a country with the oil and GDP of Dubai and had offered every Falkland Islander £5 million to either leave the island or stay as Argentine citizens?

    Essentially, Washington could make the Greenlanders an offer they'd find hard to refuse - the kind of money and investment of which they could dream but presumably backed with a 25 year guarantee of maintainign the existing social welfare and education systems.

    How much is your national identity worth? We see many examples of people threatening to leave the UK if the wrong party gets elected and when you have a level of income sufficiently large, you can basically live almost anywhere and you have only an economic identity which is the size of your various accounts and investments. That's the true definition not so much of a citizen of nowhere but a citizen of everywhere.

    Money talks, men walk. Why should anyone fight to preserve a identity which can be bought and sold like any other product?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 125,533
    Foxy said:

    One for the PB lawyers.

    With Grok producing sexualised images of women and children on request, does this mean anyone with a twitter account could be prosrcuted for downloading indecent images of children?

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/06/grok-ai-fake-images-women-girls-undressed-uk-minister-liz-kendall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

    I no longer have a twitter account.

    Potentially, given the strict liability when it comes to this.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 13,146
    Foxy said:

    One for the PB lawyers.

    With Grok producing sexualised images of women and children on request, does this mean anyone with a twitter account could be prosrcuted for downloading indecent images of children?

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/06/grok-ai-fake-images-women-girls-undressed-uk-minister-liz-kendall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

    I no longer have a twitter account.

    You mean literally anyone with a Twitter/X account? That seems remarkably unlikely. I think the offence is “possession” rather than “downloading” but, either way, I can’t see how the offence would be made out just by holding an account.

    I’m not a criminal lawyer but had a couple of clients seek advice on dismissal from work for related issues and AIUI the act of "making" an image is interpreted broadly and includes opening an email attachment or simply viewing an image that automatically downloads to a device. I believe a defendant has a defence in certain circumstances if they can prove that the photograph in question was unsolicited and that they did not keep it for an unreasonable time. So I’m pretty sure just having a Twitter/X account alone, with nothing else, would not cross that threshold.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 31,596
    edited January 7
    Foxy said:

    One for the PB lawyers.

    With Grok producing sexualised images of women and children on request, does this mean anyone with a twitter account could be prosrcuted for downloading indecent images of children?

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/06/grok-ai-fake-images-women-girls-undressed-uk-minister-liz-kendall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

    I no longer have a twitter account.

    That is a very good question. It's been an issue since at least Operation Ore - what happens eg if somebody sends an abuse image to person N by email that is diverted to the SPAM folder and never seen?

    That, I think, counts as possession - which is an "each way" offence.

    On Op Ore the police went in hard with "accept a caution or get taken to Court with all the implications of publicity etc", sometimes on questionable evidence (Journalist Duncan Campbell investigated) Some convictions were overturned, but not many. And there were quite a number of suicides. I'd have to check to see how closely the circs matched.

    I am not aware of detail of more recent case law.

    However, "sent to me anonymously" was one of the defence lines deployed by the former Labour Councillor Sean Morton, which led to the resignation of a Scottish MSP form the Lab front bench over continuing their friendship.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-42647568

    In this case there was also an "extreme pornography" charge (which covers "bestiality"), which I have viewed as a bit of a shitshow ever since the "Cartoon Tiger" case, where the police prosecuted because they did not turn up the volume on the video clip.
    https://www.theregister.com/2010/01/06/tiger_police/

    The CPS dropped a prosecution under the extreme porn law last week when it apparently accepted that the soundtrack on a clip of a tiger apparently having sex with a woman rendered the video comical rather than pornographic.

    Andrew Robert Holland of Coedpoeth near Wrexham appeared at Mold Crown Court on New Year's Eve to answer two charges of possessing extreme porn. Both charges related to video clips sent to him by friends, allegedly as jokes.

    The first charge involved a video clip of a woman having sex with a tiger. The tiger, according to Mr Holland, was an animated image, rather than a real tiger.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 15,016
    boulay said:

    <
    Denmark should say to the US that they have carte Blanche to agree with Greenland’s government to build as many naval bases and airbases it feels it needs to defend itself from the Russians (surely they just need an agreement from Putin to be nice?) and can knock themselves out by putting as many soldiers as it likes but sovereignty remains as before. Trump can’t then complain about security and will have to confirm (if it wasn’t clear already) that he is the Pirate King and actually only really cares about the money the US can extract.

    The US can already do whatever they want in Greenland so that offer is nothing new. That's not what this is about.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 57,105

    Trump wants Greenland because of natural resources. They will offer to buy it, be told no, then will do what they think is a performative show of force - drop large numbers of resources into Pituffik and start making threats.

    At which point we see whose resolve is stronger.

    I can never see that name without reading Pityfuck....
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 125,533

    The greater block on Trump going for Greenland is the threat of the early loss of control of Congress. The close margin has got 3 closer in the past couple of days (MTG resignation effective, one death, one in hospital after a car crash) - and that is before further resignations are being threatened over foreign policy.

    Loss of control of Congress = impeachment.

    He’s been impeached before but the senate has never convicted him and I cannot see them convicting.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 54,663
    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    One for the PB lawyers.

    With Grok producing sexualised images of women and children on request, does this mean anyone with a twitter account could be prosrcuted for downloading indecent images of children?

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/06/grok-ai-fake-images-women-girls-undressed-uk-minister-liz-kendall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

    I no longer have a twitter account.

    If they request them
    They may well appear in a twitter feed (for example in replies) even if unrequested. Viewing them is automatically an offense is it not?

    That Musk hasn't disabled or modified this function of Grok despite it being the most accessible form of AI deepfake pornography does make it look intentional. Perhaps he sees the future of his AI is to gain market share in the Gooniverse.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,696

    Our first 2026 voting intention sees Reform lead by 8. The Tories hit their highest since last April on 23%. 4 points above Labour on 19%

    ➡️ REF UK 31% (+3)
    🌳 CON 23% (+1)
    🌹 LAB 19% (-2)
    🔶 LIB DEM 12% (-1)
    🌍 GREEN 10% (+1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)


    https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/2008803898308678017

    Terrible poll for Starmer but good poll for Kemi and Farage
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 13,073

    Trump wants Greenland because of natural resources. They will offer to buy it, be told no, then will do what they think is a performative show of force - drop large numbers of resources into Pituffik and start making threats.

    At which point we see whose resolve is stronger.

    The Love Actually moment would see Turnberry and Balmedie revert to the Crown. Won't happen but I like to imagine it.

    How are you doing btw? Aberdeenshire looks apocalyptic. One of my friends in Mountain Rescue is ferrying doctors around in a 4x4.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 125,533
    DougSeal said:

    Foxy said:

    One for the PB lawyers.

    With Grok producing sexualised images of women and children on request, does this mean anyone with a twitter account could be prosrcuted for downloading indecent images of children?

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/06/grok-ai-fake-images-women-girls-undressed-uk-minister-liz-kendall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

    I no longer have a twitter account.

    You mean literally anyone with a Twitter/X account? That seems remarkably unlikely. I think the offence is “possession” rather than “downloading” but, either way, I can’t see how the offence would be made out just by holding an account.

    I’m not a criminal lawyer but had a couple of clients seek advice on dismissal from work for related issues and AIUI the act of "making" an image is interpreted broadly and includes opening an email attachment or simply viewing an image that automatically downloads to a device. I believe a defendant has a defence in certain circumstances if they can prove that the photograph in question was unsolicited and that they did not keep it for an unreasonable time. So I’m pretty sure just having a Twitter/X account alone, with nothing else, would not cross that threshold.
    Superintendent placed on sex offenders register despite ‘never viewing’ child abuse image

    A senior Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) officer has been handed a community order and placed on the sex offenders register after receiving a child abuse video from her sister.


    https://policeprofessional.com/news/superintendent-placed-on-sex-offenders-register-despite-never-viewing-child-abuse-image/
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 31,579
    Eabhal said:

    Trump wants Greenland because of natural resources. They will offer to buy it, be told no, then will do what they think is a performative show of force - drop large numbers of resources into Pituffik and start making threats.

    At which point we see whose resolve is stronger.

    The Love Actually moment would see Turnberry and Balmedie revert to the Crown. Won't happen but I like to imagine it.

    How are you doing btw? Aberdeenshire looks apocalyptic. One of my friends in Mountain Rescue is ferrying doctors around in a 4x4.
    We're ok! Work from an office next door so no commute needed. The snow has been mental fun - a lying 30cm of snow with 2m drifts in lots of places. I think yesterday was the last of it. Now the slow downhill into flooding as it melts.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,851
    On other matters... in the cricket, the spirit of Headingley is needed if we are to prevail it would seem. IF we can get to 150 ahead, perhaps, just perhaps, we can put enough pressure on the Australian batsmen to make a match of it.

    16s about an England win - not the worst bet ever...

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,530
    Eabhal said:

    Trump wants Greenland because of natural resources. They will offer to buy it, be told no, then will do what they think is a performative show of force - drop large numbers of resources into Pituffik and start making threats.

    At which point we see whose resolve is stronger.

    The Love Actually moment would see Turnberry and Balmedie revert to the Crown. Won't happen but I like to imagine it.

    How are you doing btw? Aberdeenshire looks apocalyptic. One of my friends in Mountain Rescue is ferrying doctors around in a 4x4.
    Worth noting that the R&A have still not announced the venue for the 2028 Open. I'm almost certain it's being used as a bargaining chip.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,696

    DougSeal said:

    Foxy said:

    One for the PB lawyers.

    With Grok producing sexualised images of women and children on request, does this mean anyone with a twitter account could be prosrcuted for downloading indecent images of children?

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/06/grok-ai-fake-images-women-girls-undressed-uk-minister-liz-kendall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

    I no longer have a twitter account.

    You mean literally anyone with a Twitter/X account? That seems remarkably unlikely. I think the offence is “possession” rather than “downloading” but, either way, I can’t see how the offence would be made out just by holding an account.

    I’m not a criminal lawyer but had a couple of clients seek advice on dismissal from work for related issues and AIUI the act of "making" an image is interpreted broadly and includes opening an email attachment or simply viewing an image that automatically downloads to a device. I believe a defendant has a defence in certain circumstances if they can prove that the photograph in question was unsolicited and that they did not keep it for an unreasonable time. So I’m pretty sure just having a Twitter/X account alone, with nothing else, would not cross that threshold.
    Superintendent placed on sex offenders register despite ‘never viewing’ child abuse image

    A senior Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) officer has been handed a community order and placed on the sex offenders register after receiving a child abuse video from her sister.


    https://policeprofessional.com/news/superintendent-placed-on-sex-offenders-register-despite-never-viewing-child-abuse-image/
    Only as she didn't notify police
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 57,105

    The greater block on Trump going for Greenland is the threat of the early loss of control of Congress. The close margin has got 3 closer in the past couple of days (MTG resignation effective, one death, one in hospital after a car crash) - and that is before further resignations are being threatened over foreign policy.

    Loss of control of Congress = impeachment.

    He’s been impeached before but the senate has never convicted him and I cannot see them convicting.
    But he's a very sensitive soul about being impeached - he was recently bleating that it would happen if they lose the mid-terms - so vote to help Trump in the mid-terms....
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 125,533
    I am shocked.

    Shocked that it is only a third admitting to this.

    Survey Warns a Third of UK Adults Use VPNs to Bypass Internet Porn Age Checks

    https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2026/01/survey-warns-a-third-of-uk-adults-use-vpns-to-bypass-internet-porn-age-checks.html
  • boulayboulay Posts: 8,016
    Dura_Ace said:

    boulay said:

    <
    Denmark should say to the US that they have carte Blanche to agree with Greenland’s government to build as many naval bases and airbases it feels it needs to defend itself from the Russians (surely they just need an agreement from Putin to be nice?) and can knock themselves out by putting as many soldiers as it likes but sovereignty remains as before. Trump can’t then complain about security and will have to confirm (if it wasn’t clear already) that he is the Pirate King and actually only really cares about the money the US can extract.

    The US can already do whatever they want in Greenland so that offer is nothing new. That's not what this is about.
    Absolutely agree but it wouldn’t be a bad idea for Denmark to make that public offer - frankly it might make some in the administration pause and back away from the more permanent alternatives.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,696
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    One for the PB lawyers.

    With Grok producing sexualised images of women and children on request, does this mean anyone with a twitter account could be prosrcuted for downloading indecent images of children?

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/06/grok-ai-fake-images-women-girls-undressed-uk-minister-liz-kendall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

    I no longer have a twitter account.

    If they request them
    They may well appear in a twitter feed (for example in replies) even if unrequested. Viewing them is automatically an offense is it not?

    That Musk hasn't disabled or modified this function of Grok despite it being the most accessible form of AI deepfake pornography does make it look intentional. Perhaps he sees the future of his AI is to gain market share in the Gooniverse.

    They are created for the requester, so highly unlikely to be in your feed unless you requested them from Grok
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 31,579

    The greater block on Trump going for Greenland is the threat of the early loss of control of Congress. The close margin has got 3 closer in the past couple of days (MTG resignation effective, one death, one in hospital after a car crash) - and that is before further resignations are being threatened over foreign policy.

    Loss of control of Congress = impeachment.

    Thanks for raising this point. Perhaps the clip that made my jaw drop most was "you need to win the midterms or they'll impeach me". He knows that losing control means he goes to jail. And not just him.

    I saw the Caracas raid as evidence that they are on the Go Big side of the go big or go home choice facing them in 2026. Hold midterms and they lose and they go to jail. An oil heist immediately followed by a pivot to open threats against NATO allies does not feel like they are planning to go out there and win over their critics.

    There is a democratic window of opportunity to overthrow the regime and restore America. Not the midterms, I am talking about the battle to actually hold them in places they would lose. Whether that happens or not I am unclear about...
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 2,218

    Trump is saying Venezuela will give the US up to 50 million barrels of oil. This is despite the US not controlling Venezuela, despite the challenges of extracting that oil, and without any apparent agreement with Venezuela. At what point do we say he’s completely delusional?

    Would this WhiteHouse J6 page be a data point?

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/j6/
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 31,579

    I am shocked.

    Shocked that it is only a third admitting to this.

    Survey Warns a Third of UK Adults Use VPNs to Bypass Internet Porn Age Checks

    https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2026/01/survey-warns-a-third-of-uk-adults-use-vpns-to-bypass-internet-porn-age-checks.html

    Not for porn, but my VPN does connect to the Isle of Man much of the time. UK without the UK...
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 13,146
    edited January 7

    DougSeal said:

    Foxy said:

    One for the PB lawyers.

    With Grok producing sexualised images of women and children on request, does this mean anyone with a twitter account could be prosrcuted for downloading indecent images of children?

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/06/grok-ai-fake-images-women-girls-undressed-uk-minister-liz-kendall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

    I no longer have a twitter account.

    You mean literally anyone with a Twitter/X account? That seems remarkably unlikely. I think the offence is “possession” rather than “downloading” but, either way, I can’t see how the offence would be made out just by holding an account.

    I’m not a criminal lawyer but had a couple of clients seek advice on dismissal from work for related issues and AIUI the act of "making" an image is interpreted broadly and includes opening an email attachment or simply viewing an image that automatically downloads to a device. I believe a defendant has a defence in certain circumstances if they can prove that the photograph in question was unsolicited and that they did not keep it for an unreasonable time. So I’m pretty sure just having a Twitter/X account alone, with nothing else, would not cross that threshold.
    Superintendent placed on sex offenders register despite ‘never viewing’ child abuse image

    A senior Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) officer has been handed a community order and placed on the sex offenders register after receiving a child abuse video from her sister.


    https://policeprofessional.com/news/superintendent-placed-on-sex-offenders-register-despite-never-viewing-child-abuse-image/
    The defence is section 160(2)(c) of the 1988 Act -

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/33/section/160

    It requires the image not to be kept for an unreasonable time, but as your report says -

    “ Judge Richard Marks said Supt Williams made a grave error of judgment in not reporting the video and said she was unlikely to retain her job.”

    Sounds like she didn’t do anything with the image when she got it. If she’d reported it ASAP she may (I emphasise May) have had the defence.

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 47,325
    edited January 7

    More parochially, a rare moment of agreement with Labour that Scottish Labour are idiots.

    https://x.com/paulhutcheon/status/2008816540435837388?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q

    I thought Slab were pretending, doing it performatively with London GHQ backing to try and save some of their vote? Mr Alexander D. being the co-Mastermind of the electoral campaign and all. Or so some think.

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/25744988.glaring-flaw-scottish-labours-theatrical-split-keir-starmer/

    But busy with stuff so not been paying much attention.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,696

    The greater block on Trump going for Greenland is the threat of the early loss of control of Congress. The close margin has got 3 closer in the past couple of days (MTG resignation effective, one death, one in hospital after a car crash) - and that is before further resignations are being threatened over foreign policy.

    Loss of control of Congress = impeachment.

    He’s been impeached before but the senate has never convicted him and I cannot see them convicting.
    Given over 50% of Republicans oppose a US military invasion of Greenland if Trump tried that the Senate would likely convict him.

    Most Republicans back buying Greenland but not invading it though most Americans overall oppose both
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,851
    HYUFD said:

    Our first 2026 voting intention sees Reform lead by 8. The Tories hit their highest since last April on 23%. 4 points above Labour on 19%

    ➡️ REF UK 31% (+3)
    🌳 CON 23% (+1)
    🌹 LAB 19% (-2)
    🔶 LIB DEM 12% (-1)
    🌍 GREEN 10% (+1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)


    https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/2008803898308678017

    Terrible poll for Starmer but good poll for Kemi and Farage
    Yet still completely out of step with YouGov - for comparison - More In Common first, YouGov second:

    Reform: 31% /26%
    Conservatives: 23% / 19%
    Labour: 19% / 17%
    Liberal Democrats: 12% / 16%
    Greens: 10% / 15%

    These aren't small variations - these are significant and substantial differences (apart from the Labour number). Now, why are these differences happening? We can assume sampling, weighting and other aspects of the methodologies differ between More In Common and YouGov and that doesn't make either "right" or "wrong" but it does provide polls for anyone to choose what they want.

    I'm curious - noting in any of the Reform statements suggests any willingness whatsoever to work with or co-operate with the Conservative Party (or the Labour Party). Yet some still seem to subconsciously think, believe or hope (delete as appropriate) Reform and the Conservatives are potential allies and partners.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 17,992
    boulay said:

    AnneJGP said:

    Sandpit said:

    RedWhiteAndBlueLand!

    (No he isn’t about to send the military into a NATO country. If anything happens it will be a purchase and with a referendum of the people of Greenland).

    Why would the people of Greenland want a hostile takeover of the country by another country that runs its own place like a cut-throat business exploiting its customers (citizens)?
    Trump's not going to be asking the people of Greenland.

    I do wonder if there might be legal challenges in the US.
    The great and the good in the US seem remarkably quiet about how the US has shorn all pretensions of being the world’s policeman and morphed into Al Capone.

    Surely there are respected voices on the right who should be pointing out to the American people that this might look like a jolly at the moment but there will be long term damage to the US.

    Denmark should say to the US that they have carte Blanche to agree with Greenland’s government to build as many naval bases and airbases it feels it needs to defend itself from the Russians (surely they just need an agreement from Putin to be nice?) and can knock themselves out by putting as many soldiers as it likes but sovereignty remains as before. Trump can’t then complain about security and will have to confirm (if it wasn’t clear already) that he is the Pirate King and actually only really cares about the money the US can extract.
    There are plenty of Republicans saying the US should not invade Greenland, including even Mike Johnson, as per https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2026/01/06/congress/johnson-trump-greenland-military-force-00713476

    Gallego (D) is trying to force a Senate vote to rule out any Greenland action: https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2026/01/06/congress/greenland-war-powers-gallego-00712605
  • MattWMattW Posts: 31,596
    edited January 7

    The greater block on Trump going for Greenland is the threat of the early loss of control of Congress. The close margin has got 3 closer in the past couple of days (MTG resignation effective, one death, one in hospital after a car crash) - and that is before further resignations are being threatened over foreign policy.

    Loss of control of Congress = impeachment.

    Thanks for raising this point. Perhaps the clip that made my jaw drop most was "you need to win the midterms or they'll impeach me". He knows that losing control means he goes to jail. And not just him.

    I saw the Caracas raid as evidence that they are on the Go Big side of the go big or go home choice facing them in 2026. Hold midterms and they lose and they go to jail. An oil heist immediately followed by a pivot to open threats against NATO allies does not feel like they are planning to go out there and win over their critics.

    There is a democratic window of opportunity to overthrow the regime and restore America. Not the midterms, I am talking about the battle to actually hold them in places they would lose. Whether that happens or not I am unclear about...
    I don't think impeachment can impose a jail sentence - that would be a separate prosecution.

    Also of course, it requires a 2/3 vote in the Senate to make it stick.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 85,088

    Foxy said:

    One for the PB lawyers.

    With Grok producing sexualised images of women and children on request, does this mean anyone with a twitter account could be prosrcuted for downloading indecent images of children?

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/06/grok-ai-fake-images-women-girls-undressed-uk-minister-liz-kendall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

    I no longer have a twitter account.

    Potentially, given the strict liability when it comes to this.
    X has a block function.
    Use it.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 47,325
    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    Foxy said:

    One for the PB lawyers.

    With Grok producing sexualised images of women and children on request, does this mean anyone with a twitter account could be prosrcuted for downloading indecent images of children?

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/06/grok-ai-fake-images-women-girls-undressed-uk-minister-liz-kendall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

    I no longer have a twitter account.

    You mean literally anyone with a Twitter/X account? That seems remarkably unlikely. I think the offence is “possession” rather than “downloading” but, either way, I can’t see how the offence would be made out just by holding an account.

    I’m not a criminal lawyer but had a couple of clients seek advice on dismissal from work for related issues and AIUI the act of "making" an image is interpreted broadly and includes opening an email attachment or simply viewing an image that automatically downloads to a device. I believe a defendant has a defence in certain circumstances if they can prove that the photograph in question was unsolicited and that they did not keep it for an unreasonable time. So I’m pretty sure just having a Twitter/X account alone, with nothing else, would not cross that threshold.
    Superintendent placed on sex offenders register despite ‘never viewing’ child abuse image

    A senior Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) officer has been handed a community order and placed on the sex offenders register after receiving a child abuse video from her sister.


    https://policeprofessional.com/news/superintendent-placed-on-sex-offenders-register-despite-never-viewing-child-abuse-image/
    The defence is section 160(2)(c) of the 1988 Act -

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/33/section/160

    It requires the image not to be kept for an unreasonable time, but as your report says -

    “ Judge Richard Marks said Supt Williams made a grave error of judgment in not reporting the video and said she was unlikely to retain her job.”

    Sounds like she didn’t do anything with the image when she got it. If she’d reported it ASAP she may (I emphasise May) have had the defence.

    From the news report, it looks as if the prosecution argued that she would have seen the thumbnail and inferred what it was, without needing to do anything more? But you're the legal pinniped not me.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 17,992
    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    One for the PB lawyers.

    With Grok producing sexualised images of women and children on request, does this mean anyone with a twitter account could be prosrcuted for downloading indecent images of children?

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/06/grok-ai-fake-images-women-girls-undressed-uk-minister-liz-kendall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

    I no longer have a twitter account.

    If they request them
    You can come across some of these images just by browsing Twitter, without specifically requesting them. This would mean you have broken the law.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 21,751
    AnneJGP said:

    Doesn't seem to me his military leaders will push back against his orders if those happen. They'll find some way of turning an invasion into a rescue.

    So odd, really, because the US is already there as a guest, so to speak, and surely a softer approach would have gained them more with preserved goodwill.

    Good morning, everyone.

    According to Wikipedia the US used to have 6,000 military personnel at its base in Greenland, but since the Cold war this has been reduced to just 150. So, obviously, the public statements about needing to possess Greenland for national security grounds are complete cobblers.

    This leaves us speculating about why he wants Greenland, and without knowing what his motivation is it becomes very difficult to predict what actions he might take in service of those motivations.

    So it's possible that what he wants - self-aggrandisement and self-enrichment in some form most likely - would not have been achievable by a softer approach (while national defence motivations would have been) and this leaves us with extortion or expropriation. Or this could simply be distraction from the previous distraction from his humiliation by Putin as part of his failure to create peace in Ukraine the attempt of which was a distraction from the Epstein Files.

    One of the things about Trump is that he relentlessly and rapidly moves the news agenda on so that critics and impartial observers are unable to detail his failure, corruption, etc.

    There's no criticism of Trump for swallowing Putin's lies about the attack that never happened on Putin's Novgorod Palace, that acted to derail any pressure on Putin for refusing a peace deal, because he forced us to rapidly move on to the abduction of Maduro, his supposed control of Venezuela, his desire to annex Greenland, etc.

    For a normal politician, who tries to move the news agenda on by announcing a new policy on school meals, the tactic doesn't work so well, because the attempted distraction can either be ignored, or dealt with briefly (food is good). But Trump doesn't do half measures. Talking about invading the territory of a supposed NATO ally is not something you can brush off in order to concentrate on the previous news story. And so he escapes scrutiny.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 17,992
    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    America has had plenty of experience buying territory - the Louisiana Purchase, Florida, Alaska. Indeed, the war with Mexico was one of those exceptions where they got with force far more than they probably would have achieved with a simple commercial transaction.

    Now, you could argue. Florida aside, there weren't that many people involved (well, the Indians and the Eskimos didn't count then). In an era of self-determination, how much will money talk? Imagine if Argentina had been a country with the oil and GDP of Dubai and had offered every Falkland Islander £5 million to either leave the island or stay as Argentine citizens?

    Essentially, Washington could make the Greenlanders an offer they'd find hard to refuse - the kind of money and investment of which they could dream but presumably backed with a 25 year guarantee of maintainign the existing social welfare and education systems.

    How much is your national identity worth? We see many examples of people threatening to leave the UK if the wrong party gets elected and when you have a level of income sufficiently large, you can basically live almost anywhere and you have only an economic identity which is the size of your various accounts and investments. That's the true definition not so much of a citizen of nowhere but a citizen of everywhere.

    Money talks, men walk. Why should anyone fight to preserve a identity which can be bought and sold like any other product?

    Also, Trump and the Republicans are not known for their generosity with spending! They’re not going to offer Greenlanders wheelbarrows full of money.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,851
    The only YouGov sub sample worth considering is the England which has a sample number of around 2000.

    Compared with the 2024 GE, the poll indicates (if you want a cheap laugh on a Wednesday morning):

    Reform: 26% (+11)
    Conservative: 21% (-5)
    Labour: 18% (-16)
    Liberal Democrat: 17% (+4)
    Greens: 16% (+9)
    Independents & Others: 2% (-3)

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 85,088
    .
    HYUFD said:

    The greater block on Trump going for Greenland is the threat of the early loss of control of Congress. The close margin has got 3 closer in the past couple of days (MTG resignation effective, one death, one in hospital after a car crash) - and that is before further resignations are being threatened over foreign policy.

    Loss of control of Congress = impeachment.

    He’s been impeached before but the senate has never convicted him and I cannot see them convicting.
    Given over 50% of Republicans oppose a US military invasion of Greenland if Trump tried that the Senate would likely convict him.
    Would they, though ?

    When did they last show any sign of exercising their constitutional powers against Trump ?
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 13,146
    edited January 7
    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    Foxy said:

    One for the PB lawyers.

    With Grok producing sexualised images of women and children on request, does this mean anyone with a twitter account could be prosrcuted for downloading indecent images of children?

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/06/grok-ai-fake-images-women-girls-undressed-uk-minister-liz-kendall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

    I no longer have a twitter account.

    You mean literally anyone with a Twitter/X account? That seems remarkably unlikely. I think the offence is “possession” rather than “downloading” but, either way, I can’t see how the offence would be made out just by holding an account.

    I’m not a criminal lawyer but had a couple of clients seek advice on dismissal from work for related issues and AIUI the act of "making" an image is interpreted broadly and includes opening an email attachment or simply viewing an image that automatically downloads to a device. I believe a defendant has a defence in certain circumstances if they can prove that the photograph in question was unsolicited and that they did not keep it for an unreasonable time. So I’m pretty sure just having a Twitter/X account alone, with nothing else, would not cross that threshold.
    Superintendent placed on sex offenders register despite ‘never viewing’ child abuse image

    A senior Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) officer has been handed a community order and placed on the sex offenders register after receiving a child abuse video from her sister.


    https://policeprofessional.com/news/superintendent-placed-on-sex-offenders-register-despite-never-viewing-child-abuse-image/
    The defence is section 160(2)(c) of the 1988 Act -

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/33/section/160

    It requires the image not to be kept for an unreasonable time, but as your report says -

    “ Judge Richard Marks said Supt Williams made a grave error of judgment in not reporting the video and said she was unlikely to retain her job.”

    Sounds like she didn’t do anything with the image when she got it. If she’d reported it ASAP she may (I emphasise May) have had the defence.

    From the news report, it looks as if the prosecution argued that she would have seen the thumbnail and inferred what it was, without needing to do anything more? But you're the legal pinniped not me.
    I’m not a criminal lawyer but the report does cite a teacher who received the same message and reported it immediately without prosecution nor, it appears, professional consequences.

    If the this officer had done the same (a) I doubt she would have been prosecuted (not in the public interest to prosecute anyone, let alone a police officer, reporting a crime) and (b) she would have had a s.160(2)(c) defence anyway.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 45,662
    Dura_Ace said:

    I’ve heard a couple of times on the media that the US lacks icebreakers, a necessary factor in securing Greenland. Ironically on checking Wiki, the US is working with Canada and Finland to replace its old and broken down vessels. Tricky stuff this having allies thing..

    Secure it against whom? Who has the desire and capacity to fight the USA for Greenland? Nobody.
    Time european countries told them to Feck off
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,696
    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    Our first 2026 voting intention sees Reform lead by 8. The Tories hit their highest since last April on 23%. 4 points above Labour on 19%

    ➡️ REF UK 31% (+3)
    🌳 CON 23% (+1)
    🌹 LAB 19% (-2)
    🔶 LIB DEM 12% (-1)
    🌍 GREEN 10% (+1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)


    https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/2008803898308678017

    Terrible poll for Starmer but good poll for Kemi and Farage
    Yet still completely out of step with YouGov - for comparison - More In Common first, YouGov second:

    Reform: 31% /26%
    Conservatives: 23% / 19%
    Labour: 19% / 17%
    Liberal Democrats: 12% / 16%
    Greens: 10% / 15%

    These aren't small variations - these are significant and substantial differences (apart from the Labour number). Now, why are these differences happening? We can assume sampling, weighting and other aspects of the methodologies differ between More In Common and YouGov and that doesn't make either "right" or "wrong" but it does provide polls for anyone to choose what they want.

    I'm curious - noting in any of the Reform statements suggests any willingness whatsoever to work with or co-operate with the Conservative Party (or the Labour Party). Yet some still seem to subconsciously think, believe or hope (delete as appropriate) Reform and the Conservatives are potential allies and partners.
    On the More in Common numbers Reform would win a majority anyway with Kemi Leader of the Opposition.

    On the Yougov numbers though it would be a hung parliament
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 57,105

    AnneJGP said:

    Doesn't seem to me his military leaders will push back against his orders if those happen. They'll find some way of turning an invasion into a rescue.

    So odd, really, because the US is already there as a guest, so to speak, and surely a softer approach would have gained them more with preserved goodwill.

    Good morning, everyone.

    According to Wikipedia the US used to have 6,000 military personnel at its base in Greenland, but since the Cold war this has been reduced to just 150. So, obviously, the public statements about needing to possess Greenland for national security grounds are complete cobblers.

    This leaves us speculating about why he wants Greenland, and without knowing what his motivation is it becomes very difficult to predict what actions he might take in service of those motivations.

    So it's possible that what he wants - self-aggrandisement and self-enrichment in some form most likely - would not have been achievable by a softer approach (while national defence motivations would have been) and this leaves us with extortion or expropriation. Or this could simply be distraction from the previous distraction from his humiliation by Putin as part of his failure to create peace in Ukraine the attempt of which was a distraction from the Epstein Files.

    One of the things about Trump is that he relentlessly and rapidly moves the news agenda on so that critics and impartial observers are unable to detail his failure, corruption, etc.

    There's no criticism of Trump for swallowing Putin's lies about the attack that never happened on Putin's Novgorod Palace, that acted to derail any pressure on Putin for refusing a peace deal, because he forced us to rapidly move on to the abduction of Maduro, his supposed control of Venezuela, his desire to annex Greenland, etc.

    For a normal politician, who tries to move the news agenda on by announcing a new policy on school meals, the tactic doesn't work so well, because the attempted distraction can either be ignored, or dealt with briefly (food is good). But Trump doesn't do half measures. Talking about invading the territory of a supposed NATO ally is not something you can brush off in order to concentrate on the previous news story. And so he escapes scrutiny.
    "national security grounds" = bagging as much of the world's resources as we can, by force if we have to.

    They now have the worlds largest hydrocarbons resource in Venezuela (albeit, I doubt the dumb fucks in the White House appreciated it is as mobile as boot polish before they went in).
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,696
    Nigelb said:

    .

    HYUFD said:

    The greater block on Trump going for Greenland is the threat of the early loss of control of Congress. The close margin has got 3 closer in the past couple of days (MTG resignation effective, one death, one in hospital after a car crash) - and that is before further resignations are being threatened over foreign policy.

    Loss of control of Congress = impeachment.

    He’s been impeached before but the senate has never convicted him and I cannot see them convicting.
    Given over 50% of Republicans oppose a US military invasion of Greenland if Trump tried that the Senate would likely convict him.
    Would they, though ?

    When did they last show any sign of exercising their constitutional powers against Trump ?
    The risk of losing their seats would concentrate minds
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,851

    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    America has had plenty of experience buying territory - the Louisiana Purchase, Florida, Alaska. Indeed, the war with Mexico was one of those exceptions where they got with force far more than they probably would have achieved with a simple commercial transaction.

    Now, you could argue. Florida aside, there weren't that many people involved (well, the Indians and the Eskimos didn't count then). In an era of self-determination, how much will money talk? Imagine if Argentina had been a country with the oil and GDP of Dubai and had offered every Falkland Islander £5 million to either leave the island or stay as Argentine citizens?

    Essentially, Washington could make the Greenlanders an offer they'd find hard to refuse - the kind of money and investment of which they could dream but presumably backed with a 25 year guarantee of maintainign the existing social welfare and education systems.

    How much is your national identity worth? We see many examples of people threatening to leave the UK if the wrong party gets elected and when you have a level of income sufficiently large, you can basically live almost anywhere and you have only an economic identity which is the size of your various accounts and investments. That's the true definition not so much of a citizen of nowhere but a citizen of everywhere.

    Money talks, men walk. Why should anyone fight to preserve a identity which can be bought and sold like any other product?

    Also, Trump and the Republicans are not known for their generosity with spending! They’re not going to offer Greenlanders wheelbarrows full of money.
    Greenland has roughly 60,000 people so a sixth of the population of the London Borough of Newham.

    Roughly 85% are Inuit - Danes make up most of the rest with very small numbers from other nationalities. To offer each of them $1 million would equal $60 billion - now, I got told off a couple of days ago for suggesting £2 billion for the British economy is a drop in the ocean - from a Conservative supporter by the way, whose perspective is strange given his party wasted £300 billion during Covid but that's different apparently. For the American economy, $60 billion is very little and easily affordable.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,696

    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    One for the PB lawyers.

    With Grok producing sexualised images of women and children on request, does this mean anyone with a twitter account could be prosrcuted for downloading indecent images of children?

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/06/grok-ai-fake-images-women-girls-undressed-uk-minister-liz-kendall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

    I no longer have a twitter account.

    If they request them
    You can come across some of these images just by browsing Twitter, without specifically requesting them. This would mean you have broken the law.
    Only if you search for those already created using search terms to get them.

    If you come across any such images online though as long as you did not request them, notify police and delete them you will not be convicted
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 85,088
    .

    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    One for the PB lawyers.

    With Grok producing sexualised images of women and children on request, does this mean anyone with a twitter account could be prosrcuted for downloading indecent images of children?

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/06/grok-ai-fake-images-women-girls-undressed-uk-minister-liz-kendall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

    I no longer have a twitter account.

    If they request them
    You can come across some of these images just by browsing Twitter, without specifically requesting them. This would mean you have broken the law.
    No, it wouldn't.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,851
    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    Our first 2026 voting intention sees Reform lead by 8. The Tories hit their highest since last April on 23%. 4 points above Labour on 19%

    ➡️ REF UK 31% (+3)
    🌳 CON 23% (+1)
    🌹 LAB 19% (-2)
    🔶 LIB DEM 12% (-1)
    🌍 GREEN 10% (+1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)


    https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/2008803898308678017

    Terrible poll for Starmer but good poll for Kemi and Farage
    Yet still completely out of step with YouGov - for comparison - More In Common first, YouGov second:

    Reform: 31% /26%
    Conservatives: 23% / 19%
    Labour: 19% / 17%
    Liberal Democrats: 12% / 16%
    Greens: 10% / 15%

    These aren't small variations - these are significant and substantial differences (apart from the Labour number). Now, why are these differences happening? We can assume sampling, weighting and other aspects of the methodologies differ between More In Common and YouGov and that doesn't make either "right" or "wrong" but it does provide polls for anyone to choose what they want.

    I'm curious - noting in any of the Reform statements suggests any willingness whatsoever to work with or co-operate with the Conservative Party (or the Labour Party). Yet some still seem to subconsciously think, believe or hope (delete as appropriate) Reform and the Conservatives are potential allies and partners.
    On the More in Common numbers Reform would win a majority anyway with Kemi Leader of the Opposition.

    On the Yougov numbers though it would be a hung parliament
    Assuming you slavishly follow UNS which in a multi party system under FPTP is probably about the worst thing you can do.

    Never mind, if it makes you feel better...
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 17,992
    stodge said:

    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    America has had plenty of experience buying territory - the Louisiana Purchase, Florida, Alaska. Indeed, the war with Mexico was one of those exceptions where they got with force far more than they probably would have achieved with a simple commercial transaction.

    Now, you could argue. Florida aside, there weren't that many people involved (well, the Indians and the Eskimos didn't count then). In an era of self-determination, how much will money talk? Imagine if Argentina had been a country with the oil and GDP of Dubai and had offered every Falkland Islander £5 million to either leave the island or stay as Argentine citizens?

    Essentially, Washington could make the Greenlanders an offer they'd find hard to refuse - the kind of money and investment of which they could dream but presumably backed with a 25 year guarantee of maintainign the existing social welfare and education systems.

    How much is your national identity worth? We see many examples of people threatening to leave the UK if the wrong party gets elected and when you have a level of income sufficiently large, you can basically live almost anywhere and you have only an economic identity which is the size of your various accounts and investments. That's the true definition not so much of a citizen of nowhere but a citizen of everywhere.

    Money talks, men walk. Why should anyone fight to preserve a identity which can be bought and sold like any other product?

    Also, Trump and the Republicans are not known for their generosity with spending! They’re not going to offer Greenlanders wheelbarrows full of money.
    Greenland has roughly 60,000 people so a sixth of the population of the London Borough of Newham.

    Roughly 85% are Inuit - Danes make up most of the rest with very small numbers from other nationalities. To offer each of them $1 million would equal $60 billion - now, I got told off a couple of days ago for suggesting £2 billion for the British economy is a drop in the ocean - from a Conservative supporter by the way, whose perspective is strange given his party wasted £300 billion during Covid but that's different apparently. For the American economy, $60 billion is very little and easily affordable.

    It’s not about the actual sums of money; it’s about how it looks. Trump prides himself on the art of the deal, on not over-paying, on getting a good price. He’s not prone to acts that look generous (unless to his own supporters).
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 46,233
    Carnyx said:

    More parochially, a rare moment of agreement with Labour that Scottish Labour are idiots.

    https://x.com/paulhutcheon/status/2008816540435837388?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q

    I thought Slab were pretending, doing it performatively with London GHQ backing to try and save some of their vote? Mr Alexander D. being the co-Mastermind of the electoral campaign and all. Or so some think.

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/25744988.glaring-flaw-scottish-labours-theatrical-split-keir-starmer/

    But busy with stuff so not been paying much attention.
    I think it can be both, ie Sarwar theatrically pretending there's a a fag paper between him and Starmer, while SLab MSPs pissing & moaning because Starmer is obviously a drag on their chances (while ignoring their own manifest lack of electability).
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 125,533
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    One for the PB lawyers.

    With Grok producing sexualised images of women and children on request, does this mean anyone with a twitter account could be prosrcuted for downloading indecent images of children?

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/06/grok-ai-fake-images-women-girls-undressed-uk-minister-liz-kendall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

    I no longer have a twitter account.

    If they request them
    You can come across some of these images just by browsing Twitter, without specifically requesting them. This would mean you have broken the law.
    Only if you search for those already created using search terms to get them.

    If you come across any such images online though as long as you did not request them, notify police and delete them you will not be convicted
    There was a Tweet the other day from a guy who was searching for news on Stranger Things and one of the search results was of the kids undressed.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 85,088
    Dura_Ace said:

    I’ve heard a couple of times on the media that the US lacks icebreakers, a necessary factor in securing Greenland. Ironically on checking Wiki, the US is working with Canada and Finland to replace its old and broken down vessels. Tricky stuff this having allies thing..

    Secure it against whom? Who has the desire and capacity to fight the USA for Greenland? Nobody.
    But that is Trump and Miller's explicit justification for wanting to take Greenland.

  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,851

    stodge said:

    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    America has had plenty of experience buying territory - the Louisiana Purchase, Florida, Alaska. Indeed, the war with Mexico was one of those exceptions where they got with force far more than they probably would have achieved with a simple commercial transaction.

    Now, you could argue. Florida aside, there weren't that many people involved (well, the Indians and the Eskimos didn't count then). In an era of self-determination, how much will money talk? Imagine if Argentina had been a country with the oil and GDP of Dubai and had offered every Falkland Islander £5 million to either leave the island or stay as Argentine citizens?

    Essentially, Washington could make the Greenlanders an offer they'd find hard to refuse - the kind of money and investment of which they could dream but presumably backed with a 25 year guarantee of maintainign the existing social welfare and education systems.

    How much is your national identity worth? We see many examples of people threatening to leave the UK if the wrong party gets elected and when you have a level of income sufficiently large, you can basically live almost anywhere and you have only an economic identity which is the size of your various accounts and investments. That's the true definition not so much of a citizen of nowhere but a citizen of everywhere.

    Money talks, men walk. Why should anyone fight to preserve a identity which can be bought and sold like any other product?

    Also, Trump and the Republicans are not known for their generosity with spending! They’re not going to offer Greenlanders wheelbarrows full of money.
    Greenland has roughly 60,000 people so a sixth of the population of the London Borough of Newham.

    Roughly 85% are Inuit - Danes make up most of the rest with very small numbers from other nationalities. To offer each of them $1 million would equal $60 billion - now, I got told off a couple of days ago for suggesting £2 billion for the British economy is a drop in the ocean - from a Conservative supporter by the way, whose perspective is strange given his party wasted £300 billion during Covid but that's different apparently. For the American economy, $60 billion is very little and easily affordable.

    It’s not about the actual sums of money; it’s about how it looks. Trump prides himself on the art of the deal, on not over-paying, on getting a good price. He’s not prone to acts that look generous (unless to his own supporters).
    As you say, the "art of the deal". I don't know for example how much last week's little excursion into downtown Caracas "cost" but presumably whatever guarantees he has given to his oil company executive friends will make it worthwhile.

    I'm reminded of the Resource Wars in Fallout - is the 21st century going to be about resources (the 20th Century was as well to an extent)? Will we end up fighting for oil, water, wind - anything from which we can gain control of our own energy supply and deny it to our opponents?
  • StereodogStereodog Posts: 1,223
    HYUFD said:

    The greater block on Trump going for Greenland is the threat of the early loss of control of Congress. The close margin has got 3 closer in the past couple of days (MTG resignation effective, one death, one in hospital after a car crash) - and that is before further resignations are being threatened over foreign policy.

    Loss of control of Congress = impeachment.

    He’s been impeached before but the senate has never convicted him and I cannot see them convicting.
    Given over 50% of Republicans oppose a US military invasion of Greenland if Trump tried that the Senate would likely convict him.

    Most Republicans back buying Greenland but not invading it though most Americans overall oppose both
    That's not the same thing. I'm strongly against the new Vaping Duty but I wouldn't vote to impeach Starmer for introducing it if the opportunity existed. How confident are you that those Republicans consider invading Greenland and impeachable offence?
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 17,550
    MelonB said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I’ve heard a couple of times on the media that the US lacks icebreakers, a necessary factor in securing Greenland. Ironically on checking Wiki, the US is working with Canada and Finland to replace its old and broken down vessels. Tricky stuff this having allies thing..

    Secure it against whom? Who has the desire and capacity to fight the USA for Greenland? Nobody.
    Thing is nobody needs to fight the US over it. They just need to make it look a bit less easy. See Canada and tariffs last year.
    If Trump knows that a US invasion will involve troops coming home in body-bags he won't invade. Nobody has to repell US forces indefinitely, just raise the political cost in the US. The vast majority of Americans have no interest in Greenland and so it should be relatively simple to deter Trump if the rest of NATO has a modicum of backbone.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 85,088
    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    HYUFD said:

    The greater block on Trump going for Greenland is the threat of the early loss of control of Congress. The close margin has got 3 closer in the past couple of days (MTG resignation effective, one death, one in hospital after a car crash) - and that is before further resignations are being threatened over foreign policy.

    Loss of control of Congress = impeachment.

    He’s been impeached before but the senate has never convicted him and I cannot see them convicting.
    Given over 50% of Republicans oppose a US military invasion of Greenland if Trump tried that the Senate would likely convict him.
    Would they, though ?

    When did they last show any sign of exercising their constitutional powers against Trump ?
    The risk of losing their seats would concentrate minds
    It hasn't so far.
    A dozen or so GOP members of Congress have already decided to step down rather than resist Trump.
Sign In or Register to comment.