UHND.com - Notre Dame Football, Basketball, & Recruiting

Excerpt from Anne Applebaum today:

One could observe many things about this document. One is the childish grammar, including the strange capitalizations (“Complete and Total Control”). Another is the loose grasp of history. Donald Trump did not end eight wars. Greenland has been Danish territory for centuries. Its residents are Danish citizens who vote in Danish elections. There are many “written documents” establishing Danish sovereignty in Greenland, including some signed by the United States. In his second term, Trump has done nothing for NATO—an organization that the U.S. created and theoretically leads, and that has only ever been used in defense of American interests. If the European members of NATO have begun spending more on their own defense (budgets to which the U.S. never contributed), that’s because of the threat they feel from Russia.

Yet what matters isn’t the specific phrases, but the overall message: Donald Trump now genuinely lives in a different reality, one in which neither grammar nor history nor the normal rules of human interaction now affect him. Also, he really is maniacally, unhealthily obsessive about the Nobel Prize. The Norwegian Nobel Committee, not the Norwegian government and certainly not the Danish government, determines the winner of that prize. Yet Trump now not only blames Norway for failing to give it to him, but is using it as a justification for an invasion of Greenland.

Think about where this is leading. One possibility, anticipated this morning by financial markets, is a damaging trade war. Another is an American military occupation of Greenland. Try to imagine it: The U.S. Marines arrive in Nuuk, the island’s capital. Perhaps they kill some Danes; perhaps some American soldiers die too. And then what? If the invaders were Russians, they would arrest all of the politicians, put gangsters in charge, shoot people on the street for speaking Danish, change school curricula, and carry out a fake referendum to rubber-stamp the conquest. Is that the American plan too? If not, then what is it? This would not be the occupation of Iraq, which was difficult enough. U.S. troops would need to force Greenlanders, citizens of a treaty ally, to become American against their will.

For the past year, American allies around the world have tried very hard to find a theory that explains Trump’s behavior. Isolationism, neo-imperialism, and patrimonialism are all words that have been thrown around. But in the end, the president himself defeats all attempts to describe a “Trump doctrine.” He is locked into a world of his own, determined to “win” every encounter, whether in an imaginary competition for the Nobel Peace Prize or a protest from the mother of small children objecting to his masked, armed paramilitary in Minneapolis. These contests matter more to him than any long-term strategy. And of course, the need to appear victorious matters much more than Americans’ prosperity and well-being.

(no message)

Probably not. Who the hell would want Minnesota???

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

Actually, I wouldn't even call Leo my dear leader. I follow the Magisterium of the Church.

Who is your dear leader? The leader of CPUSA?

(no message)

Im just saying I am Catholic without reservation. I guess you plan on holding me to a higher standard than you hold yourself to?

Any time you want to join me in full communion with the Church, let me know.

grants all priests the authority of forgive abortions?"...additionally, you should prep yourself with an article that addresses what happened in Brazil when a 9 yr old was impregnated by a relative (I'll provide it later if you'd like)...

...here is an excerpt from the link...I'd also suggest that you reference the RCC approval - under certain conditions - of the mortal sin "Killing" when it comes to "Prudential Judgement" involved with "Just Wars". I'm sure we'll talk more about this...I'm ready whenever you are.
-------------------
What will change?

What Pope Francis is doing is allowing priests to simultaneously lift the penalty of excommunication and absolving someone who confesses to procuring an abortion. In other words, the intervention of the local bishop is no longer necessary.

In many parts of the Catholic world, the pope’s decision actually does not change anything. For example, in most American dioceses priests already have the permission to do exactly what Pope Francis is allowing: to lift the penalty of excommunication and absolve the sin of procuring abortion.

So, perhaps the most relevant questions are, “Why is Pope Francis doing this now and what difference does it make?”

On one level, Pope Francis is extending a practice that has now become common in many places and making it universal throughout the Catholic Church: not all Catholic dioceses or bishops allow their priests to lift excommunication along with absolving the sin of procured abortion. As the 2009 Brazilian case makes clear, that authority is not in place in many dioceses.

But on another level, Pope Francis’s act is encouraging priests to be more sensitive to context of their parishioners’ lives, as in the case of the nine-year-old girl, and to rely less upon legalistic formulas and definitions when it comes to dealing with the complex realities of human life.

In the United States, for example, Catholic women tend to obtain abortions at a greater rate than Protestant women. In 2014, 24 percent of U.S. abortion patients identified as Catholic.

Given the strong prohibition against abortion in the Catholic Church, it is clear that a significant number of Catholic women in the United States believe that an abortion is a personal decision that reflects their own assessment of what is not only in their best interest but also in the best interests of their families.

A path for the church to be more merciful

While Pope Francis’ decision in relation to abortion is not surprising in and of itself, it is part of an overall approach to Catholic teaching and practice that seeks to make it more humane, more merciful and more easily adaptable to the vicissitudes of everyday human life.

And just as this approach has many supporters who value flexibility and sensitivity, it also has detractors who value the clarity and cogency of timeless truths that allow no variation in their application and enforcement.
---------------------


Link: https://theconversation.com/what-changes-when-pope-francis-grants-all-priests-the-authority-to-forgive-abortions-69330

(no message)

Seriously, voting is always selecting the lesser of two evils for me, which is why your dear leader accusation makes no sense. Trump is as much my dear leader just as Kamala would be yours if you voted for her...perhaps more so, since I suspect you like her more than I like Trump.

Besides, if you vote based on mortal sin, you would have to vote for Trump over any candidate who supports abortion. Publicly supporting mortal sin is far worse than personally committing mortal sin.

(no message)

Trump, you’re a fool. And the lesser of two evils? That’s comical. Thanks for the laugh.

Accordingly, she is far worse than Trump by that measure...a measure that you suggested be used for this discussion.

(no message)

Does that make sense?

People sin all the time. Even the pope goes to confession. The first pope, Peter, denied Christ three times. We have had many sinful popes. Our leaders sin; we know that. But the real question is, do they sin out of personal weakness, or do they publicly support and encourage sin in others. The latter is worse.


Any candidate who publicly supports hundreds of thousands of homicides per year of innocent people, and indeed wants to use public money to encourage those homicides by paying for them domestically and overseas, is a far worse candidate than any candidate the GOP has run, including Trump...at least if you want to compare those candidates using the measuring stick of mortal sin, as you tried to do.

(no message)

We get to vote every 4 years, not every day. If I get 4 years of credit for supporting Trump, then you get 4 years of supporting Harris (although I'm beginning to think you did not vote at all). So, your support of millions of homicides of helpless children (because you don't like a guy who is mean in public like you are)...what does that say about you? Again, you brought up the sinning thing, not me.

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

You have a weird way of looking at things. Perhaps you get a little too invested in politics.

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

In fact, you are kind of Trumplike here in the Open. You post like I imagine Trump would post if he were a member here...usually with unnecessary insults. Perhaps that is a reason you dislike him so much...you and he are so similar.

(no message)

Off of the US and calling them freeloaders. Talk about heavy handed moderation.

"What’s at stake is not only Greenland’s sovereignty, but also trust. Alliances rest on predictability and on the expectation that power, especially allied power, remains bound by law. If international law can be set aside when it becomes inconvenient, trust is gone. If strategic calculations lead to a disregard for sovereignty in Greenland, how will Europe continue to believe in U.S. commitments elsewhere?"

Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/19/opinion/greenland-trump-europe.html

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

big during the midterms. Plus, if Vance takes over now, he can only serve one additional term. Better to wait a year.

in the context of DJT being removed for several months...I agree that he would benefit from a post Midterm transition by being able to serve two more terms, but his chances of winning any election after his over-the-top association with Trump, and his basic lack of appeal to the general public as demonstrated in several polls, should lead the GOP to make a Hard Turn Away from the MAGA path...hopefully returning to rational Conservatism. Again, we need TWO stable and rational parties...Liberal and Conservative...committed to the Constitution and Rule of Law. What we have now is an aberration...it can be repaired, so let's get started.

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

Above you stated that this dumb ass move is counterproductive and here you stare that the message has some value. WTF

It is counterproductive if the audience is Danes and Greenlanders, and the goal is to get them to negotiate for Greenland.

But ELP had a good point. If you assume the audience is Russia and China (which is why, perhaps, his statements to Denmark are public), then the statements could have value to deter Russia and China.

Both country’s global reach is limited compared to our global reach. Russia may be close by, but not only would they have to deal with us, they’d also have to deal with NATO. Only one of the many reasons that NATO is so important. You’d admit this if you weren’t a Trumper.

... it is that Russia is not as powerful as we thought. And China is indeed remote, so you have good points in that regard.

(no message)

(no message)

Link: https://youtu.be/__0Qubv3Dn8?si=bSzathNBwM_YUsof

Great show, by the way.

(no message)

...being defenseless itself and not having to worry about it.

(no message)

the U.S. annex Scotland. Getting back to our situation, Denmark...and the Greenlanders have a Long History of hosting U.S. Military bases on that island (17 at last count) and have clearly expressed their willingness to continue such cooperation. You know the right answer to all of this...Remove Trump...ASAP.

(no message)

President threatening military intervention against an ally.

Although, we would do it in 2 seconds if war broke out with Russia, just like the UK invaded Iceland at the beginning of WWII.

Trump just seems to think it is unfair for us to be the sole de facto protector of Greenland in war time with no upside in peacetime. And, he certainly has a point. But, boy is he navigating this like a bull in a china closet.

The safety and protection of our country is at stake so if any of this bothers NATO and anti-Trumpers, let them cry on each others shoulders. Russia and China are both digging the resistance from squishy Americans and NATO.

Threatening to annex an allied territory wouldn’t solve shit. Wake the fuck up and quit being so damn stupid. Senility is definitely setting in, huh?

To the point: Deploying to attack is different than deploying to defend before an attack.

Imagine if our troops had been in the Aleutions when Japan showed up in 1941 ... we wouldn't have had to retake the islands (while allowing Japan to retain possession of other territories as we geared up for the fight).

Imagine if German troops were already deployed to Iceland when the UK arrived in 1940 ... it would have been a fight, and Germany would have had an advantage.

And, this may not be just about land... we are talking control/tracking of sea, air and near space.

The above aren't perfect analogies to the present strategic situation, but they demonstrate the point. And I'm just being devil's advocate here, since I don't have all the facts. I guess we will find out together if any of this is beneficial or stupid.

And here’s why…

We are the only country that can deploy a full capable fighting force within 18 hours. No one else can do this. That’s our main advantage. We can effectively fight in multiple theaters at one time. Russian and Chinese movements are tracked. If they intended to occupy Greenland, we’d get there with overwhelming force that they couldn’t handle.

It is more challenging that way, though, which is what the point of the analogies was.

But given that we can and would occupy Greenland, then the only reason I can think of for Trump to make this a big deal is that he must think if we are the only country who successfully defend Greenland in wartime, then why not have the peacetime benefits. Right now, Denmark is relying on us to protect/save Greenland free of charge.

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

A bunch of old grandmas.

Now what’s your excuse for supporting everything Trump does and says? I have my theory, but I’d rather hear your reasons.

(no message)

(no message)

Beginning. And because it’s out of the norm, it drives everyone crazy. I’m sorry, but the norm may need to change. Business as usually has only gotten politicians richer. I love rocking the boat. Sometimes, it needs to be done.

That is why I usually remain quiet when he says something that seems crazy. He is usually setting the table for the next round.

I have no issue with him being politically incorrect. I prefer things that way. I love he rubs people the wrong and does things differently. Status quo got us to this position with debt and being a welfare program to the world.