Cable Forum - Trump cancels Denmark visit

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)

- Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - Trump cancels Denmark visit (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33708027)

Re: Trump cancels Denmark visit

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36006946)

He is the President of the United States though. We're slowly becoming used to it because, as you said, Trump but there is a limit here. This State Visit would have been planned months, maybe even a year, in advance and it's crazy to cancel it because they won't sell you Greenland! Think how crazy that sentence is.

There is a theory that after Obama announced he was visiting Denmark, two days later Trump started on about Greenland. Even then, Trump was unpopular but Obama popular there. Hating to look less popular than Obama, he concocted the Greenland issue as a reason to cancel.

Re: Trump cancels Denmark visit

Ah I hadn't realised Obama was going, makes more sense.

Re: Trump cancels Denmark visit

People’s disdain for Trump blinds then to the fact that Greenland is in a tug of war at moment between the Superpowers, US. China blah blah because of its richness in natural minerals and resources. Trump is also not the first U.S President to want to buy that Country.

As usual it’s TDS rearing it’s head again. :rolleyes:

Re: Trump cancels Denmark visit

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36007088)

So what? It's internationally recognised as a protectorate of Denmark. If China want to start a war for Greenland then they'll be taking on NATO as a result. Not to mention it's right in the middle of the Atlantic. If they want to access to Greenland then it's Denmark (and Greenland) who decide.

Quote:

Trump is also not the first U.S President to want to buy that Country.

It's stupid to cancel a state visit because they won't sell you Greenland.

Re: Trump cancels Denmark visit

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36007092)

Don't call Trump stupid Damien, he doesn't like it. Your CF history will be examined if you're daft enough to attempt entry to the US ;)

Anyway think I've found the real reason he wants Greenland...
https://www.golf.com/news/2019/08/17...-golf-courses/

Re: Trump cancels Denmark visit

Never mind Greenland, he'd had another stable genius idea.... At last he's tackling climate change.

Quote:

Trump suggests 'nuking hurricanes' to stop them hitting America

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...y_to_clipboard

Re: Trump cancels Denmark visit

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36007561)

Never mind Greenland, he'd had another stable genius idea.... At last he's tackling climate change.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...y_to_clipboard

More proof that that pathetic rag is in the same league as the Sport etc :rolleyes:

Re: Trump cancels Denmark visit

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian (Post 36007570)

More proof that that pathetic rag is in the same league as the Sport etc :rolleyes:

He said it though.

Re: Trump cancels Denmark visit

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36007561)

Never mind Greenland, he'd had another stable genius idea.... At last he's tackling climate change.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...y_to_clipboard

More TDS again from you Mr K. What's wrong with a carefully-targeted, precision-engineered nuclear missile? I can't envisage anything going wrong. ;)

Re: Trump cancels Denmark visit

Doesn't take long if people can actually be bothered to see past the fake news.
National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration

Quote:

During each hurricane season, there always appear suggestions that one should simply use nuclear weapons to try and destroy the storms. Apart from the fact that this might not even alter the storm, this approach neglects the problem that the released radioactive fallout would fairly quickly move with the tradewinds to affect land areas and cause devastating environmental problems. Needless to say, this is not a good idea.

Scientific American 2010.

Quote:

Despite a tech mogul’s proclivity to bet on a solution, we know very little about how to stop a hurricane, though there are many quirky options on the table. I’ll give you silver iodide, a supersonic jet, and raise you a nuclear warhead. You think I’m kidding.

Huffington Post 2011

Quote:

It’s never a good idea to drop a nuclear bomb, but that doesn’t mean it couldn’t stop a hurricane. A theory that suggests dropping a nuke into the eye of the storm would heat the cool air and disrupt the convection current, thus subsiding the storm.

LiveScience 2012

Quote:

One idea that rears its head almost every hurricane season recently is the notion of bombing a hurricane into submission. The theory goes that the energy released by a nuclear bomb detonated just above and ahead of the eye of a storm would heat the cooler air there, disrupting the storm's convection current.
Unfortunately, this idea, which has been around in some form since the 1960s, wouldn't work.

Link

Quote:

In the mid-1950s, Jack W. Reed, a meteorologist at Sandia Laboratory, was studying the atmospheric effects produced by America's first detonation of a hydrogen bomb, which had lofted a massive central column of air more than 20 miles into the sky.
And that's when he had the idea of using nuclear weapons to disrupt hurricanes.
At a 1959 symposium on the Plowshare Program, Reed presented a research paper, "Some Speculations on the Effects of Nuclear Explosions on Hurricanes."

Re: Trump cancels Denmark visit

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-49471093

Quote:

Nuclear weapons and hurricanes don't mix, NOAA advises

Using nuclear weapons to destroy hurricanes is not a good idea, a US scientific agency has said, following reports that President Donald Trump wanted to explore the option.
The Axios news website said Mr Trump had asked several national security officials about the possibility.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said the results would be "devastating"...

...The NOAA says that using nuclear weapons on a hurricane "might not even alter the storm" and the "radioactive fallout would fairly quickly move with the tradewinds to affect land areas"...

...George Washington University Professor Sharon Squassoni says the idea stems from the Plowshares Program of the 1950s when a "laundry list of different weird... fantastical, slightly crazy" uses for nuclear weapons was devised by government researchers.
In nearly 20 years, the US exploded 31 warheads in 27 tests in order to test whether America's nuclear arsenal could be used to excavate canals or mines, or create a harbour for ships.

As the dangers of radiation became more clear, the notion was dropped,

From your quotes

Quote:

Needless to say, this is not a good idea

Quote:

You think I’m kidding

Quote:

Unfortunately, this idea, which has been around in some form since the 1960s, wouldn't work.

Sounds fairly sub-optimal...

Re: Trump cancels Denmark visit

Quote:

Originally Posted by peanut (Post 36007573)

He said it though.

Did he?

Re: Trump cancels Denmark visit

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36007626)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-49471093

From your quotes

Sounds fairly sub-optimal...

If he did say it, then he was far from being the first. You don't know the answer until you've asked the question. He allegedly merely asked the question.

The problem is that people don't read the whole of any article. They just read the headline and make assumptions based upon that. They assume that Trump is the only person allegedly asking the question. Even if he did ask, the purpose of reporting it is to make him look bad, when many other scientists have raised the issue over the decades.

Re: Trump cancels Denmark visit

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian (Post 36007644)

Did he?

The problem is that Trump has denied many things he's actually said, so many take his denial here with a pinch of salt. It's a case of the boy who called wolf too many times.

Re: Trump cancels Denmark visit

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36007650)

If he did say it, then he was far from being the first. You don't know the answer until you've asked the question. He allegedly merely asked the question.

The problem is that people don't read the whole of any article. They just read the headline and make assumptions based upon that. They assume that Trump is the only person allegedly asking the question. Even if he did ask, the purpose of reporting it is to make him look bad, when many other scientists have raised the issue over the decades.

A number of times, each time being told it wasn't optimal...