Faulty reasoning signals

• Confirmation Bias - 9.5% (86 hits)
• Anchoring Bias - 0%
• Availability Heuristic - 20.9% (189 hits)
• Representativeness Heuristic - 9.3% (84 hits)
• Hindsight Bias - 2.9% (26 hits)
• Overconfidence Bias - 26.5% (239 hits)
• Framing Effect - 9.2% (83 hits)
• Loss Aversion - 6.9% (62 hits)
• Status Quo Bias - 6.9% (62 hits)
• Sunk Cost Effect - 0%
• Optimism Bias - 8.4% (76 hits)
• Pessimism Bias - 13.8% (125 hits)

Article text

Trump SOUNDS OFF during tense NATO meeting: 'I'M NOT HAPPY'

I'm not happy with NATO because of what they did with Greenland.

And I'm not happy with NATO because of the fact that they didn't want to help us with the number one state sponsor of terror, that's Iran.

They were unwilling to help us.

Now, in all fairness, I didn't speak to Mark about it.

I think if I did, it might have been different, but we didn't need help.

But I was really testing. I wanted to see whether or not they'd be there.

>> Oh boy, President Trump just moments ago sharing his list of grievances with NATO ahead of the family photo set to take place moments from now, which should be very interesting to watch the interactions between President Trump and the other NATO leaders, and we will bring you those images when we see them.

But in the meantime, joining us now is the director of the American Military Project at Claremont and former Army veteran Will Thibeau.

Will, great to see you this morning.

Thank you for joining us.

So, what's your reaction to what you just heard from the president?

I think you can file all of his comments under the word frustration.

>> To say the least, Carly, I think President Trump is acknowledging the bizarre dynamic that exists with NATO.

You know, Greenland will become US territory in the event of a conflict.

The United States will be the only country that can ever actually defend Greenland's sovereignty.

And I think President Trump is calling for some honesty.

He also wants to remove ambiguity as it relates to Greenland so we don't have another Ukraine so much closer to our territory.

It's a key overflight path for potential ballistic missiles for Arctic naval traffic from China and Russia.

President Trump is seeking a degree of honesty to candidly do Europe and NATO a favor.

If there's no ambiguity about who owns Greenland, that sends a much clearer signal about the sovereignty and the security of Greenland to China and Russia.

That will ensure the United States buys in to the security of the continent, to the legitimacy and the power of NATO and so we don't enter a scenario like we did in Ukraine where there is ambiguity about the alliance and who who is obligated to defend whom and you know we've seen now a four-year war unfold at disastrous consequences.

>> You know there was this very interesting piece in the Wall Street Journal yesterday about this meeting that took place in January between 30 European leaders who were horrified over President Trump's comments about wanting to acquire Greenland so much so that some of those European leaders, prime ministers, and presidents became emotional over the notion.

So what do you think their reaction is right now at this very moment hearing the president say what he just said?

I'm sure they will be even more emotional Carly but

again I would ask them to remove kind of the pretense and get down to the brass tacks of how will NATO defend Europe?

How will NATO defend the United States of America? As the Arctic becomes a flash point for potential conflict

>> with Russia and China. The future of peace is undisputed US control over Greenland and therefore the allocation of military and economic resources to ensure that it can't be used to exploit divisions in NATO and to ensure that the United States again is the one that can call the shots over its defense.

If such ambiguity didn't exist with Ukraine, you know with other parts of the world I think we'd be in a much you know better sense.

President Trump is calling for honesty and candor about who's going to actually put resources and men and women on the line to defend it.

>> Well you mentioned Ukraine so I want to get one in on that because the president is going to be meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy later today and this appears to be a pretty good time for Zelenskyy to meet with President Trump because they are doing well in this war right now when it comes to attacking

>> is they are doing well in this war right now when it comes to attacking some oil refineries and making the gas squeeze in Russia something that they've never seen before.

Uh so, how do you think that conversation will go and could it potentially lead to anything significant?

>> I think it could. It's as to your point, it's a crucial time in the war between Russia and Ukraine because Ukraine is clearly you know, has the ability to sustain the defensive. You know, Russia has a really hard time maintaining any offensive gains in Ukraine.

It's creating this this meat grinder candidly of immense casualties and a lot of violence that you know, perhaps is putting us into a quagmire.

President Trump clearly does want to end this war.

And so, I think he and President Zelensky will establish some sort of security arrangement that allows this war to end, that allows Europe to move on to bolstering its defense for the future, but also doesn't, you know, completely sell the plot to Vladimir Putin and Russia.

It's it's an understanding again of the reality of what what is happening