zlacker

>>bwb+(OP)
I wish them luck, but while saying folks will drop the dominant apps seems all the rage at the moment people have been saying this for decades with almost no real progress at scale.

The only way to accomplish this at scale is to build something that is legit better and let the market decide. Anything else is just principled wishful thinking.

>>cmiles+Tf
It's only recently that the united states has become an enemy of the EU though. I'd say there's much more motivation to move to other software and platforms now.

>>i_love+Jh
I don’t think that’s accurate. These issues were always there, but “the sky is falling” rhetoric is all the rage at the moment (in both directions).

>>cmiles+sm
> “the sky is falling” rhetoric

It's hardly rhetoric, from the European perspective. The EU is already embroiled in a proxy war against a major power in Ukraine, and are now faced with the prospect of their strongest erstwhile ally moving to annex EU territory.

Simultaneous war on two fronts, where one opponent is deeply embedded in your supply chains, is an existential threat.

>>swiftc+pq
I’ll give you that the current US administration isn’t exactly scoring points for subtle diplomatic negotiation, but remember too that most of the United States was purchased from other countries.

It’s not a completely bonkers idea that the US could purchase all or some of Greenland. In the end, we’ll probably just see a strengthening or enforcement of the existing treaty for US military use of Greenland which is all the US wanted. Europe is still getting used to the president’s rather unique, and yes aggressive, negotiation style born out of his NYC real estate developer days.

>>cmiles+4J
Yes, but the difference is that Denmark has said it many, many times, that it Does Not want to sell Greenland. The discussion should have ended there. But Trump kept saying "We will get it one way or the other" and did not rule out the use of force, etc. This is just insane and will alienate any allies. The Greenlanders also have said that they do not want to be part of the US. Some americans have joked that you could pay 100k to every greenlander and they would accept you happily, which would be totally stupid. They would lose the free education and free healthcare that Denmark provides currently. Having to pay for medical insurance or to send your children to university from Greenland would wipe out any of the money the US would pay to bribe the greenlanders. It would be an unbelievably bad deal for them.

You did not need any more strengthening of any military treaties with Denmark, the US could already open as any military bases on Greenland, there was nothing stopping you from doing that, sending more of your army there to deter China or Russia, or whatever else. Here, https://people.com/donald-trump-wants-ownership-greenland-ps... He is saying he needs to own it to personally feel good. How does this make sense diplomatically?

Any excuses you make will not make him look better or make him look like he can be trusted. If you want to achieve something in international politics have to be made carefully, not by threatening to annex Canada or parts of your allied countries.

Your president is just destroying the good image and goodwill towards the US with his 'negotiation style'. His style is childish bullying and temper tantrums, he can not be taken seriously as a reliable partner when he can say one thing today, and tomorrow say something totally different, even if you think you have reached an agreement with him on something.