Up next in 10
Join this channel to get access to perks:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsMSFwBF-4SWD5msARwYkdw/join
Show More Show Less View Video Transcript
0:00
hey ladies and gentlemen this is Carmine
0:01
Saia 4 explain America and Marco Rubio
0:04
has some very frightening
0:07
news and well one country better wake up
0:12
and pay attention before we get started
0:14
please make sure you like comment share
0:16
and subscribe those little things really
0:18
help us out and they help our Channel
0:21
continue to grow and if you're not
0:22
watching us on YouTube please check that
0:24
address in the lower right hand corner
0:26
it's
0:27
youtube.com explain amera and hit
0:30
subscribe absolutely free it really
0:32
helps us out Secretary of State Marco
0:35
Rubio was interviewed by Megan Kelly
0:37
When the subject of Greenland came
0:40
up and what Marco Ru Rubio said is
0:43
Donald Trump is not joking this is not a
0:45
joke he would
0:47
prefer to purchase
0:49
Greenland but Denmark is incapable of
0:52
protecting it from China and we're not
0:55
just going to protect it for free so we
0:58
have a stalemate we need to protect it
1:01
because China needs an Arctic presence
1:03
they're looking at Greenland so while
1:05
the media tells you that it's silly it's
1:07
not silly I'm not going to Bally who the
1:11
point I want you to actually listen to
1:12
the Secretary of State Marco Rubio and
1:15
let him explain it to you and then
1:17
you'll understand it and you can tell
1:18
your friends and they'll understand it
1:21
cuz it actually makes sense it takes
1:22
just a few minutes to listen to him he
1:25
lays out the case and he does say no
1:28
military force is not off the the table
1:31
take a listen and let me know what you
1:32
think in the comments how does Greenland
1:34
fit into all of this well the Arctic
1:37
which has gotten very little attention
1:38
but the Arctic Circle on the Arctic
1:40
region is going to become critical for
1:42
shipping lanes for how do you get some
1:43
of this energy that's going to be uh
1:45
produced under President Trump these
1:47
energies rely on shipping lanes the
1:49
Arctic is some of the most valuable
1:51
shipping lanes in the world as some of
1:53
the ice is melting that's become more
1:54
and more navigable we need to be able to
1:57
defend that so if you project what the
1:58
Chinese have done it is just a matter of
2:00
time before cuz they are not an Arctic
2:02
power they do not have an Arctic
2:04
presence so they need to be able to have
2:05
somewhere that they can stage from and
2:08
it is completely realistic to believe
2:10
that the Chinese will eventually maybe
2:12
in the short term try to do in Greenland
2:14
what they have done at the Panama Canal
2:16
and in other places and that is install
2:19
facilities that give them access to the
2:20
Arctic with the cover of a Chinese
2:22
company but that in reality serve a dual
2:25
purpose that in a moment of conflict
2:27
they could send Naval vessels to that
2:29
facility
2:30
and operate from there and that is
2:32
completely unacceptable to the National
2:34
Security of the world and to the United
2:36
the security of the world and the
2:37
National Security of the United States
2:39
so the question becomes if the Chinese
2:41
begin to threaten Greenland do we really
2:42
trust that that is not a place where
2:44
those deals are going to be made do we
2:46
really trust that that is not a place
2:47
where they would not
2:49
intervene you think Denmark would stop
2:51
them I think that's been the president's
2:53
point and that is that Denmark can't
2:55
stop them they would rely on the United
2:57
States to do so and so his point is if
2:59
the United States is on the hook to
3:01
provide as we are now we have a defense
3:03
agreement with them to protect Greenland
3:05
if it comes under assault if we're
3:06
already on the hook for having to do
3:08
that then what we might as well have
3:10
more control over what happens there and
3:12
so I know it's a delicate top topic for
3:14
for Denmark but it's again a national
3:17
interest item for the United States so
3:18
there was a con a conference call
3:20
between President Trump and the Danish
3:23
Prime Minister apparently didn't go very
3:25
well um reportedly involved some sort of
3:29
a meltdown on uh the prime minister's
3:31
part they don't want to give it up so
3:34
what does that what options does that
3:36
leave us because president Trump did not
3:38
rule out economic or potentially
3:41
military use well I think president
3:44
Trump what he has said publicly is he
3:45
wants to buy it he wants to pay for it
3:48
and um how we worked on something like
3:51
that how something like that is
3:52
approached obviously is probably done
3:54
better in the appropriate forums as a a
3:56
lot of the stuff is done publicly and
3:57
it's not helpful because it puts the
3:59
other side a tough spot domestically so
4:01
those conversations are going to happen
4:03
but uh this is not a joke like what he
4:05
is saying is is pretty ACC people W talk
4:07
about it for years we do have this is
4:09
not about acquiring land for the purpose
4:10
of acquiring land this is in our
4:12
national interest and it needs to be
4:14
solved president Trump's put out there
4:16
what he intends to do which is to
4:17
purchase it I wasn't privy to that phone
4:20
call but I imagine the phone call went
4:21
the way a lot of these phone calls go
4:23
and that is he just speaks bluntly and
4:25
frankly with people and and ultimately I
4:27
think diplomacy in many cases works
4:29
better when you're straightforward as
4:31
opposed to using platitudes and and
4:33
language that translates to nothing so
4:35
when President Trump said he might use
4:37
economic or military coercion what does
4:40
that mean what is I don't remember him
4:42
saying military coercion I think what he
4:44
was asked you know what would you rule
4:46
out would you rule it out right I don't
4:48
think he's in the he listen he also
4:50
brings to this he said no I won't rule
4:52
it out because he brings to this this is
4:55
a businessman Who's involved in politics
4:58
not a politician inv in politics so he
5:01
approaches these issues from a
5:03
transactional business point of view so
5:05
he is not going to begin what he views
5:06
as a negotiation or a conversation by
5:09
taking leverage off the table and that's
5:12
a that's a tactic that's used all the
5:14
time in business it's being applied uh
5:16
to foreign policy and I think to great
5:18
effect in in the first ter you look at
5:19
the Abraham Accords and the Democrats
5:21
mocked the Abraham Accords when they
5:23
were made and then by the end of the
5:25
Biden Administration they became the
5:27
Lynch pin of a lot of what we're hoping
5:28
to build on that never would have
5:30
happened had there not been a
5:31
transactional approach you look at what
5:32
his Envoy to the Middle East Steve
5:34
witkoff has achieved that that the Biden
5:36
Administration asked witkoff they asked
5:38
for him to be involved in these
5:39
conversations he has brought a
5:41
businessman's approach to a very
5:44
delicate and intractable foreign policy
5:46
Challenge and delivered a ceasefire that
5:48
obviously is tenuous and has long-term
5:50
challenges to it but there are hostages
5:52
being released every day that didn't
5:54
happen for over a year and a half until
5:55
he became involved and that's the
5:57
president's Envoy and very close friend
5:58
who's brought the same kind of business
6:00
approach to to some of these challenges
6:02
so let's look forward four years does
6:04
the US own
6:06
Greenland we'll see I mean obviously
6:08
that's the president's priority he has
6:10
made that point I think that what I can
6:12
tell you about four years without
6:13
getting into specifics because I don't
6:15
you know I'm not we're not in a position
6:16
yet to discuss exactly how we'll proceed
6:19
tactically what I think you can rest
6:21
assured of is that four years from now
6:23
our interest in the Arctic will be more
6:25
secure our interest in the Panama Canal
6:27
will be more secure our Partnerships in
6:29
the Western Hemisphere will be stronger
6:31
will be stronger we need to understand a
6:33
lot of these countries in Central
6:34
America they're not destination sites
6:37
they are countries that migrants come
6:38
through and that and that these human
6:40
trafficking Rings run people run people
6:42
through it creates tremendous
6:44
instability for these countries at a
6:45
tremendous cost as well they would
6:48
welcome help in stopping that migration
6:50
corridor from continuing because it's
6:52
destabilizing their countries so I think
6:53
we're going to have a western hemisphere
6:55
that's more secure and our national
6:56
interests in all parts of the world
6:58
that's the goal are going to be more
6:59
secure from the Arctic to Central
7:01
America to even Africa and certainly the
7:03
Endo Pacific
7:09
[Music]
Military
News
Politics
World News