Minneapolis, MN

Context

CNN is airing its breaking news videos of events in Minneapolis. What can be seen should be deemed unacceptable in civil society. In a larger sense, is our country tearing itself apart - because of one man?

President Trump

If I understand the federal government's position clearly, it is this. Specific responsibilities have been entrusted to the federal government by the US Constitution; among these are immigration, border control, and customs enforcement. Congress has delegated these to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The individual states and their cities are required to enforce the laws and regulations. However, if they fail to do so, then DHS and its agencies will.

The US Congress

The US Congress is the legislative arm of the government, responsible for enacting laws governing the constraints (term, cost, purview) of DSH. Hearings are planned on the matter.

Minnesota

Law enforcement is the responsibility of city, county, and state authorities, police, and sheriff's departments. There is no need for armed and masked federal storm troopers here.

The people

The people support the state's position, although they think that if an illegal commits a crime, then (s)he should be arrested and deported in a peaceful and orderly manner.

The US Supreme Court

The US Supreme Court will have to eventually decide this constitutional tug-of-war between the federal government and the individual states. They will probably limit the reach and authority of the feds.

Greenland

Noble intent, horrible packaging

Background

Greenland is a sovereign, autonomous territory of the kingdom of Denmark. Under the auspices of NATO membership, The US is free to build military bases on Greenland. It has made offers to buy the island from Denmark, all of them have been rebuffed with "Greenland is not for sale."

The Arctic Ocean is dominated by Russia and exploited by China for shorter delivery routes between Asia and Europe. Therefore, it is of strategic importance for the US to have defensive installations around Greenland, especially along its northern coastline. The US calls it the "Iron Dome".

Messaging

The strategic intent is clear. The messaging was horrible and inexcusable. One does not threaten one's allies with military force and punitive tariffs, TACO (Trump Always Chickens Out) or not.

Had Mr. Trump described his vision for Greenland more accurately, detailing the changes that he envisioned, perhaps the resistance from Europe would have been less. Greenland, just like Puerto Rico, is an autonomous territory with local government, flag and legislature. I doubt that this would change under US ownership. Perhaps the money would become the US dollar instead of the Danish krone. There would be an influx of investment in the form of academic research institutions, education and healthcare organizations and various commercial enterprises creating many jobs. Maybe the US would even pay big money to Greenlanders for their vote to join the US and similarly compensate Denmark for their territory. Maybe the US would build up the infrastructure of Greenland — roads, bridges, airports, ports and alike.

Would this be so bad for Greenland, Europe, US, NATO, and the world?