@cjeam.bsky.social
As they should. And as others said if the USA takes Greenland by force the USA is the aggressor and they should be made to see the consequences for that aggression, through the deaths of those US service members in Greenland invading Greenland.
January 15, 2026 at 12:09 AM
As they should. And as others said if the USA takes Greenland by force the USA is the aggressor and they should be made to see the consequences for that aggression, through the deaths of those US service members in Greenland invading Greenland.
I trust the rest of NATO to carry out military action in Greenland to fight and kill US soldiers without escalating it beyond Greenland's borders. I do not trust the USA not to escalate it.
Sure the USA would have started it and escalated it.
Sure the USA would have started it and escalated it.
January 15, 2026 at 12:07 AM
I trust the rest of NATO to carry out military action in Greenland to fight and kill US soldiers without escalating it beyond Greenland's borders. I do not trust the USA not to escalate it.
Sure the USA would have started it and escalated it.
Sure the USA would have started it and escalated it.
Yes absolutely if the situation escalated to a war. If the US just takes Greenland by force I would still expect US service members to be killed, but the rest of NATO to try hard not to escalate to war.
January 14, 2026 at 2:32 AM
Yes absolutely if the situation escalated to a war. If the US just takes Greenland by force I would still expect US service members to be killed, but the rest of NATO to try hard not to escalate to war.
Yes, though I wouldn't expect NATO countries to perform attacks on USA home targets, as it would cause an escalation.
January 14, 2026 at 2:22 AM
Yes, though I wouldn't expect NATO countries to perform attacks on USA home targets, as it would cause an escalation.
Worth pointing out to them that if they invade Greenland they will end up facing the military capabilities of the rest of NATO. This will not be like the missions the US has been involved in while they have served. Lots more of them will die.
January 14, 2026 at 1:56 AM
Worth pointing out to them that if they invade Greenland they will end up facing the military capabilities of the rest of NATO. This will not be like the missions the US has been involved in while they have served. Lots more of them will die.
In the UK there would be some aspect of whether the officer held a "reasonable belief" or something similar that there was a threat. That video would make more confident of a prosecution. (But then it's a v different judicial environment.)
January 9, 2026 at 9:52 PM
In the UK there would be some aspect of whether the officer held a "reasonable belief" or something similar that there was a threat. That video would make more confident of a prosecution. (But then it's a v different judicial environment.)
There's no way AT ALL she was intentionally aiming at him. For a start her wheels are turned to the right, and she misses him. Second it's far more likely she's concentrating on the officer at her door trying to open it, not the one who has walked behind her vehicle and all the way around it.
January 9, 2026 at 9:05 AM
There's no way AT ALL she was intentionally aiming at him. For a start her wheels are turned to the right, and she misses him. Second it's far more likely she's concentrating on the officer at her door trying to open it, not the one who has walked behind her vehicle and all the way around it.
Your failure to understand and speculate on the harms of extreme pornography and extremes of sex working is your issue, not mine. This is like asking what the harms of alcohol are.
You could implement various methodology to determine a line, which is done on lots of somewhat subjective issues.
You could implement various methodology to determine a line, which is done on lots of somewhat subjective issues.
January 9, 2026 at 12:23 AM
Your failure to understand and speculate on the harms of extreme pornography and extremes of sex working is your issue, not mine. This is like asking what the harms of alcohol are.
You could implement various methodology to determine a line, which is done on lots of somewhat subjective issues.
You could implement various methodology to determine a line, which is done on lots of somewhat subjective issues.
Yup the fighting would mostly be in Greenland. But I wouldn't put it past the USA to perform airstrikes, for example, on the home soil of nations who participate in Greenland. So if that happens then what? You have to plan what you do in response to that. Do you escalate?
January 8, 2026 at 1:12 AM
Yup the fighting would mostly be in Greenland. But I wouldn't put it past the USA to perform airstrikes, for example, on the home soil of nations who participate in Greenland. So if that happens then what? You have to plan what you do in response to that. Do you escalate?
Russia would be unable to forcefully dominate Europe. China would be unable to forcefully dominate the combined strength of India, Pakistan (both nuclear) Indonesia, Australia etc. Not a good or possible plan. More local influence and dominance more likely.
January 7, 2026 at 10:12 AM
Russia would be unable to forcefully dominate Europe. China would be unable to forcefully dominate the combined strength of India, Pakistan (both nuclear) Indonesia, Australia etc. Not a good or possible plan. More local influence and dominance more likely.
I reckon that's one of the obvious ones where it's not true. Wires get caught on door handles and are along with connectors a common failure point.
January 7, 2026 at 8:48 AM
I reckon that's one of the obvious ones where it's not true. Wires get caught on door handles and are along with connectors a common failure point.
Yes.
And that's bad for the USA and catastrophic for Canada.
So Canada would presumably want to avoid any escalation towards actions outside of Greenland, which might limit how forceful they feel they can be in response to Greenland.
And that's bad for the USA and catastrophic for Canada.
So Canada would presumably want to avoid any escalation towards actions outside of Greenland, which might limit how forceful they feel they can be in response to Greenland.
January 7, 2026 at 8:42 AM
Yes.
And that's bad for the USA and catastrophic for Canada.
So Canada would presumably want to avoid any escalation towards actions outside of Greenland, which might limit how forceful they feel they can be in response to Greenland.
And that's bad for the USA and catastrophic for Canada.
So Canada would presumably want to avoid any escalation towards actions outside of Greenland, which might limit how forceful they feel they can be in response to Greenland.
Absolutely if Canada is involved in those strikes as well. But that makes US ground operations in Canada much more likely. That basically means Canada suffering a partial occupation and everything that goes with that. Cities destroyed, massive civilian deaths. Meanwhile the southern USA...unbothered
January 7, 2026 at 8:26 AM
Absolutely if Canada is involved in those strikes as well. But that makes US ground operations in Canada much more likely. That basically means Canada suffering a partial occupation and everything that goes with that. Cities destroyed, massive civilian deaths. Meanwhile the southern USA...unbothered
If the nations involved respond to strikes with counter-strikes we are looking at escalating to full-on war amongst the USA and the rest of NATO. Even assuming China and Russia didn't seize that opportunity, that would be a catastrophic mess and the USA might overall "win".
January 7, 2026 at 8:22 AM
If the nations involved respond to strikes with counter-strikes we are looking at escalating to full-on war amongst the USA and the rest of NATO. Even assuming China and Russia didn't seize that opportunity, that would be a catastrophic mess and the USA might overall "win".
Diesel has died astoundingly quickly. Hit 50% of new GB car sales in 2011, was still 47% in 2016. 2024 was 5.5%.
January 7, 2026 at 6:10 AM
Diesel has died astoundingly quickly. Hit 50% of new GB car sales in 2011, was still 47% in 2016. 2024 was 5.5%.
If the US invades Greenland, US military should take casualties to do so.
But then what. If the US gov had done that I wouldn't put it past them to perform strikes on the home-soil of nations contributing to those casualties. So then those nations would have to accept the cost of those strikes.
But then what. If the US gov had done that I wouldn't put it past them to perform strikes on the home-soil of nations contributing to those casualties. So then those nations would have to accept the cost of those strikes.
January 6, 2026 at 11:33 PM
If the US invades Greenland, US military should take casualties to do so.
But then what. If the US gov had done that I wouldn't put it past them to perform strikes on the home-soil of nations contributing to those casualties. So then those nations would have to accept the cost of those strikes.
But then what. If the US gov had done that I wouldn't put it past them to perform strikes on the home-soil of nations contributing to those casualties. So then those nations would have to accept the cost of those strikes.
Many of the harms that restrictions on civil liberties seek to mitigate are objective and difficult to measure. That is not an argument that they aren't real, damaging and worth restricting. That legislation is difficult isn't a reason not to do it.
January 6, 2026 at 10:09 PM
Many of the harms that restrictions on civil liberties seek to mitigate are objective and difficult to measure. That is not an argument that they aren't real, damaging and worth restricting. That legislation is difficult isn't a reason not to do it.
It's not a complicated problem for X, they should turn it off until it doesn't do that.
It's not a complicated problem for prosecutors either, who can charge X with publishing CSAM.
It's not a complicated problem for prosecutors either, who can charge X with publishing CSAM.
January 6, 2026 at 7:17 AM
It's not a complicated problem for X, they should turn it off until it doesn't do that.
It's not a complicated problem for prosecutors either, who can charge X with publishing CSAM.
It's not a complicated problem for prosecutors either, who can charge X with publishing CSAM.
Because it causes harm. The state involves itself in things that can cause harm. This is the principle behind most restriction on individual choice and liberties that the state implements.
January 6, 2026 at 2:39 AM
Because it causes harm. The state involves itself in things that can cause harm. This is the principle behind most restriction on individual choice and liberties that the state implements.
I am generally reluctant to hold platforms responsible for what their users publish, but Grok is the platform. It's creating and distributing CSAM.
January 6, 2026 at 12:30 AM
I am generally reluctant to hold platforms responsible for what their users publish, but Grok is the platform. It's creating and distributing CSAM.
Somewhere behind what Bonnie Blue is doing now.
January 6, 2026 at 12:04 AM
Somewhere behind what Bonnie Blue is doing now.
Yes and yes.
And like with all things, including free speech, there's a line where you don't get support anymore.
And like with all things, including free speech, there's a line where you don't get support anymore.
January 5, 2026 at 2:42 PM
Yes and yes.
And like with all things, including free speech, there's a line where you don't get support anymore.
And like with all things, including free speech, there's a line where you don't get support anymore.
I finally left twitter today because of this and him laughing at the harassment and abusive material of kids his AI is creating. He's a misogynist and probably a paedophile.
January 5, 2026 at 12:33 PM
I finally left twitter today because of this and him laughing at the harassment and abusive material of kids his AI is creating. He's a misogynist and probably a paedophile.
I think 🤔. Afaik the creation of imagery of underaged people for the purposes of sexual gratification is an offence in the UK. Iirc? So kids in bikinis is CSAM and an offence.
January 5, 2026 at 12:31 PM
I think 🤔. Afaik the creation of imagery of underaged people for the purposes of sexual gratification is an offence in the UK. Iirc? So kids in bikinis is CSAM and an offence.
Yeah it's happily creating and publishing CSAM.
January 5, 2026 at 12:29 PM
Yeah it's happily creating and publishing CSAM.