Bullies ‘r Us (revised)

(Sorry for the double post. Substack and I don’t get along very well…and I can’t delete the previous! 😡)

Indiana’s third district Representative, Marlin Stutzman responded to my email about the President’s policy on Greenland. I told him that NATO would defend Greenland. It’s not necessary for us to own it.

In his response he hinted that the president raised the specter of taking over Greenland as “…spark[ing] a serious conversation about U.S. national security and long-term strategic interests, particularly in the Arctic.”

Does this mean that Trump isn’t really serious about “owning” Greenland, but brought it up simply to “spark” a discussion?

Not on your life. Stutzman admitted, though without mentioning NATO, that we already have the safety of Greenland and U.S. national security covered.

“Greenland occupies a uniquely strategic position between North America and Europe. The United States already plays a leading role in Greenland’s defense through Pituffik Space Base, which supports missile warning, space surveillance, and early defense capabilities essential to protecting the U.S. homeland. In many respects, the United States is already the primary security partner responsible for safeguarding Greenland against modern threats.” [emphasis added]

He went on with what’s a different, more likely reason for us to grab Greenland…

 

“In addition, Greenland possesses significant deposits of rare earth minerals and other strategic resources that are vital for defense systems, advanced manufacturing, and emerging technologies. Ensuring secure and reliable access to these materials strengthens American supply chains and reduces dependence on adversarial nations, benefiting workers, manufacturers, and consumers across the country, including in Indiana.”

If any country or territory has natural resources that we want we can just declare that we’re going to buy or take that country or territory. That is, after all, what we did in Venezuela!

How he would feel about China having the same sort of policy towards Taiwan? How would he feel about Russia having the same sort of policy towards Alaska? What if Japan decided that Hawaii was in its “sphere of influence?”

Stutzman is full MAGA. No matter what insane policy the administration comes up with, he defends it using the President’s talking points. Bullying is okay as long as it’s us doing the bullying.

If that means turning our allies against us and becoming the world’s bully, then so be it.

Maybe my next email to Stutzman should contain a roll of toilet paper so he can wipe his nose.

(By the way, if you think I quoted him out of context you can read the entire email from Stutzman here.)