flood the zone baby!
its the stuff we're not seeing, the boring conventional grift, that we're missing because "fuck me look what he's gone and done now" that will be the story in 20 years time.
The most consequential thing at the moment globally for the long term is Greenland.
These threats are basically the end of the alliance. He doesn't even have to invade now, he has effectively destroyed it.
It changes the fundamental relationship between Europe and the US, which has been the backbone of "the west". Together, Europe + the US have overwhelming military and economic power.
Separate, China isn't quite at parity but it's not a million miles off and will be if it maintains its growth rate in capabilities.
The Epstein stuff? Important but only if it takes down Trump, if not, it's a footnote.
Venezuela, Cuba, <other country>? Short term important, might be a quagmire but doesn't immediately change the entire geopolitics of the world.
But the Greenland threats (which obviously would never be acted upon in the depths of winter) are the final, definitive confirmation that NATO is no more. European leaders have been desperately working to keep Trump onside but it's clear it's not working.
Any defence plans that include the US are unworkable.
As most currently do include the US, that is a huge problem. They now also need to include the US being an active adversary, again, something we've been pretending on this side of the Atlantic isn't a realistic possibility, but it very much is now. It's naive not to plan for it.
A good example of just how hard adjusting to this new world will be is illustrated by the UK banned Huawei hardware equipment from telcos due to the risks it poses to national security.
4 years, about £2 billion and years of shit service result, report from 18 months ago, I understand costs have gone up:
Huawei's 5G equipment dots the land four years after the UK government decided on a ban, and the country's networks are among the worst in Europe.
www.lightreading.com
"The entire effort, including a switch from Huawei to Ericsson in the network core, will cost BT about £500 million (US$648 million), it has long maintained. Vodafone initially reckoned costs would be in the low single digit billions. Three says nearly all the £450 million ($583 million) it invested in capital expenditure last year, a 39% drop on the 2022 figure, went toward either replacing Huawei or the Shared Rural Network, an initiative with other telcos to improve coverage in sparsely populated areas.
Meanwhile, UK 5G services are lousy, according to numerous sources. In January, UK regulator Ofcom published figures for outdoor population coverage of 74% for BT, 67% for Three, 57% for Vodafone and 51% for VMO2. Three's coverage had fallen 11 percentage points since September 2023"
Now try that with Microsoft, AWS, Google, Salesforce, Oracle, IBM, ServiceNow, etc...
