Greendland - why not?

[Anonymous]

Fetterman is onboard with the US buying Greenland per tweet. Notes the massive strategic benefit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: The main reason Trump wants Greenland is it’s vast untapped natural resources. They have rare earth minerals which are vital to defense technologies, batteries, smartphones, AI. These things are critical to our national defense. Less important, it is strategically positioned.

People know why. The question is it ok for the US to go around invading countries for their natural resources?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: The main reason Trump wants Greenland is it’s vast untapped natural resources. They have rare earth minerals which are vital to defense technologies, batteries, smartphones, AI. These things are critical to our national defense. Less important, it is strategically positioned.

People know why. The question is it ok for the US to go around invading countries for their natural resources?

Invasion is too strong a word b/c it suggests some physical resistance, but there is no resistance available . There will be an agreement, it may not be 100% arms length, but an agreement none the less.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The people who live there are not in favor and would be hostile.

Denmark offers better opportunity and access than the US, honestly. They would he giving up universal healthcare for our sh*t show for starters. It isn't some third world country - we would be a step down for them.

You mean the same healthcare system which forcibly inserted IUDs in Greenlandic woman, many of whom wound up sterilized?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Fetterman is onboard with the US buying Greenland per tweet. Notes the massive strategic benefit.

Once again, he disappoints. It’s time to retire.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fetterman is onboard with the US buying Greenland per tweet. Notes the massive strategic benefit.

Once again, he disappoints. It’s time to retire.

This is selective. He was clear he was completely against a military intervention. You can’t buy something if no one is selling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm OP. Boy, folks over here can be quite hostile for asking exchange of ideas.

Anyway, after 13 pages I think I found a handful of reasonable exchanges. A lot of the other responses were emotional visceral reactions. Calling the US as s*itshow and claiming Denmark/Europe as paradise redefined is stretching truth far out. Denmark is not in great shape, yeah maybe slightly better than France or Germany as they didn't take in as many immigrants as these others did, and so they may still be able to afford their energy and healthcare. Taking of Universal healthcare system, I shudder hearing of the horror stories coming out of Canada. It wasn't too long ago that Canada was the shining example of healthcare system that US can aspire to be.

Today I am thankful I am not at the mercy of this horror show called Canadian universal health care. I don't know about Denmark, but I hear from other friends who have family or friends in Europe elsewhere saying things aren't looking good, that the entitlements are breaking down the systems, and the flow of immigrants have caused a strain.

Anyhow, my purpose was not to go into all that, but to just discuss the merits of Greenland as a US territory from an American POV. I didn't say I support a hostile takeover or try and force US interests on Greenland. The idea is a good one, although to get there a different approach could be used, one that takes a longer timeframe and some long term strategic partnership. One that do not give away the advantages to rivals such as China. The sledgehammer approach used is a hallmark of orangaman which I believe is bound to fail. I do not think it is his original idea, as he doesn't read or can think properly, instead it was told to him and he immediately went to town with it. If we separate out this bull in china shop approach then we can see the merits of it and a way to achieve this.

If you shudder to think of Canada’s healthcare horror stories, wait til you hear about US healthcare horror stories! Let’s start with the guy who just died from an asthma attack because he couldn’t afford his inhaler, which suddenly jumped from $70 to $500.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people who live there are not in favor and would be hostile.

Denmark offers better opportunity and access than the US, honestly. They would he giving up universal healthcare for our sh*t show for starters. It isn't some third world country - we would be a step down for them.

You mean the same healthcare system which forcibly inserted IUDs in Greenlandic woman, many of whom wound up sterilized?

Would you be interested in a discussion of how the United States has treated Native American women in the healthcare realm?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people who live there are not in favor and would be hostile.

Denmark offers better opportunity and access than the US, honestly. They would he giving up universal healthcare for our sh*t show for starters. It isn't some third world country - we would be a step down for them.

You mean the same healthcare system which forcibly inserted IUDs in Greenlandic woman, many of whom wound up sterilized?

Would you be interested in a discussion of how the United States has treated Native American women in the healthcare realm?

+1 and and black men?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Setting aside how he has gone about it, what's wrong with the idea of Greenland joining the US. It cannot be negative for the very small population over there, and could be positive for them. As for the US many many benefits. So, setting aside the rhetoric, what's wrong?

What's wrong is it belongs to another sovereign nation that is -was- our ally.
This is not toddlers playing with toys. You don't just go into another country and take it just because. Are you familiar with how WW2 started?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people who live there are not in favor and would be hostile.

Denmark offers better opportunity and access than the US, honestly. They would he giving up universal healthcare for our sh*t show for starters. It isn't some third world country - we would be a step down for them.

You mean the same healthcare system which forcibly inserted IUDs in Greenlandic woman, many of whom wound up sterilized?

LOL. And you know what, 10 years ago Virginia wanted forced vaginal ultrasounds before a woman can get an abortion.

And as others pointed out, a little review of how the US treated blacks, women, gays, indigenous people, the "insane", and the list goes on and one. So sit down with your silly little argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Fetterman is onboard with the US buying Greenland per tweet. Notes the massive strategic benefit.

Denmark isn’t selling. Fetterman is a moron. Antagonizing our NATO allies is not good for America.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Setting aside how he has gone about it, what's wrong with the idea of Greenland joining the US. It cannot be negative for the very small population over there, and could be positive for them. As for the US many many benefits. So, setting aside the rhetoric, what's wrong?

As a Canadian, I can tell you that nobody living in a rich country wants to be part of the sh$tshow called the US.

Who would want to be governed by a narcissistic psychopath with dementia?

Who would want to live is a country where brown people are grabbed off the street by masked ICE with no due process?

Who would want to live in a country where measles and whopping cough are making a comeback?

Who would want to live in a country where kindergartners must do active shooter drills?

Do you really think that is what Greenlanders want?

Another Canadian here. The audacity and sheer stupidity of "what's wrong with it"?

OP what is wrong with you??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: The main reason Trump wants Greenland is it’s vast untapped natural resources. They have rare earth minerals which are vital to defense technologies, batteries, smartphones, AI. These things are critical to our national defense. Less important, it is strategically positioned.

People know why. The question is it ok for the US to go around invading countries for their natural resources?

Invasion is too strong a word b/c it suggests some physical resistance, but there is no resistance available . There will be an agreement, it may not be 100% arms length, but an agreement none the less.

Hey kid, give me your lunch money or I'll beat your ass.

No resistance there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fetterman is onboard with the US buying Greenland per tweet. Notes the massive strategic benefit.

Denmark isn’t selling. Fetterman is a moron. Antagonizing our NATO allies is not good for America.

Denmark asked for a meeting, and supposedly Rubio will meet them next week. That suggests Denmark is open to something, otherwise why ask for the in-person meeting ? They could say buzz off w/o a meeting.

Fetterman is a free thinker, not hemmed in by party politics. I don’t like some of his positions, but I wish there were more like him in general.