Greendland - why not?

[Anonymous]

Freemark:

Greenland is an autonomous territory of Denmark 90% populated by Greenlandic Inuit people. Greenland's current coalition government, which manages domestic affairs, includes as major members the Inuit Ataqatigiit & Siumut parties, both dem socialist, pro-independence. It's not going to be "bought."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe Netherlands should invade the U.S. virgin Islands? I mean, they can provide better healthcare and public assistance. And the population of those islands is small. So why not? And while we are at it, why not have Belgium retake the Congo?

You mean, take them back? They belonged to the Netherlands once before.

I have a better idea -- what if Spain took back Florida?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Greenland has universal health care, they are EU citizens, and they are allowed to attend University in Denmark for free. Why would they want to leave?

If this were really to happen (and I don’t think it will), that could all be negotiated. You’re only talking about 58K people.

The US doesn’t really need to annex this. But there should some agreement/treaty whatever, to get some significant US bases there before the Chinese and Russians weasel their way in. Maybe, they can already do this under NATO. Presented properly, all would welcome. (I realize that’s not what’s happening right now.)

Denmark has repeatedly said they would allow the US to put more bases in Greenland. That offer is already on the table. This is not about national security. If this was about national security, why would the US destroy NATO to get Greenland? That doesn't make sense.

Yeh whatever, everybody has a price. There is no NATO w/o the US, you do realize that right ? What benefit does US get from being in NATO at this point, the obligation to defend Poland when the Russians show up ? Europe needs NATO, not US does not.

The US is an exporting nation. That is a big source of its wealth. About 20% of US exports go to Europe, and NATO keeps Europe stable. The US needs Europe and Europe needs the US. Without Europe, what rich countries will replace it as an export destination - Russia? Saudi Arabia? China?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Greenland has universal health care, they are EU citizens, and they are allowed to attend University in Denmark for free. Why would they want to leave?

If this were really to happen (and I don’t think it will), that could all be negotiated. You’re only talking about 58K people.

The US doesn’t really need to annex this. But there should some agreement/treaty whatever, to get some significant US bases there before the Chinese and Russians weasel their way in. Maybe, they can already do this under NATO. Presented properly, all would welcome. (I realize that’s not what’s happening right now.)

Denmark has repeatedly said they would allow the US to put more bases in Greenland. That offer is already on the table. This is not about national security. If this was about national security, why would the US destroy NATO to get Greenland? That doesn't make sense.

Yeh whatever, everybody has a price. There is no NATO w/o the US, you do realize that right ? What benefit does US get from being in NATO at this point, the obligation to defend Poland when the Russians show up ? Europe needs NATO, not US does not.

I guess you never studied history, but the US and its globalnational corporations have enjoyed ridiculous economic benefit for the relative nickles it spends on defense to the benefit of american workers the american research regime, american education systems and so on. The US Dollar being the global currency until this year has been a HUGE benefit to the US, but sure, let's blow it all up so we can have wars again and let the Cryptocurrencies controlled by the russian mob take over.

Because that is what's happening.

Your rant has nothing to do with the prior post, it’s useless. You must be a Chinese bot. Say hi to Xi for me, but tell him you need more training.

[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?

The Queen of Denmark alone has sole, sovereign, ownership of the subjects in Greenland.

[Anonymous]

Just as an aside, the Danish military has a grand total of 21,000 active duty, across all 3 services. WTF ?

They’re not going to war with anybody over anything, and are totally reliant on NATO to save their ass if something happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just as an aside, the Danish military has a grand total of 21,000 active duty, across all 3 services. WTF ?

They’re not going to war with anybody over anything, and are totally reliant on NATO to save their ass if something happens.

They are only have a population of 6,000,000. The military to civilian ratio is pretty similar to the US. That is literally the point of the NATO that they all help each other.

[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?

POTUS is suffering from dementia and is unable to craft policy. He belongs in an assisted living facility not on the global stage.

[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?

maybe China should just invade the US. There would be many benefits.

[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?

Why can’t it be negative?

[Anonymous]

They'll get bankrupted by healthcare costs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just as an aside, the Danish military has a grand total of 21,000 active duty, across all 3 services. WTF ?

They’re not going to war with anybody over anything, and are totally reliant on NATO to save their ass if something happens.

They are only have a population of 6,000,000. The military to civilian ratio is pretty similar to the US. That is literally the point of the NATO that they all help each other.

They’re a joke. The IDF has 600K all-in with 10 million pop. I was against Trump on this, but now can see his point. He just doesn’t present well. Denmark should make a deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Greenland has universal health care, they are EU citizens, and they are allowed to attend University in Denmark for free. Why would they want to leave?

If this were really to happen (and I don’t think it will), that could all be negotiated. You’re only talking about 58K people.

The US doesn’t really need to annex this. But there should some agreement/treaty whatever, to get some significant US bases there before the Chinese and Russians weasel their way in. Maybe, they can already do this under NATO. Presented properly, all would welcome. (I realize that’s not what’s happening right now.)

Denmark has repeatedly said they would allow the US to put more bases in Greenland. That offer is already on the table. This is not about national security. If this was about national security, why would the US destroy NATO to get Greenland? That doesn't make sense.

Yeh whatever, everybody has a price. There is no NATO w/o the US, you do realize that right ? What benefit does US get from being in NATO at this point, the obligation to defend Poland when the Russians show up ? Europe needs NATO, not US does not.

I guess you never studied history, but the US and its globalnational corporations have enjoyed ridiculous economic benefit for the relative nickles it spends on defense to the benefit of american workers the american research regime, american education systems and so on. The US Dollar being the global currency until this year has been a HUGE benefit to the US, but sure, let's blow it all up so we can have wars again and let the Cryptocurrencies controlled by the russian mob take over.

Because that is what's happening.

Your rant has nothing to do with the prior post, it’s useless. You must be a Chinese bot. Say hi to Xi for me, but tell him you need more training.

DP your maga post shows you are a Chinese bot. Let me guess you want to bailout US farmers again to get those US tax payer subsidies cheap soy beans? MAGA should be MCGA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just as an aside, the Danish military has a grand total of 21,000 active duty, across all 3 services. WTF ?

They’re not going to war with anybody over anything, and are totally reliant on NATO to save their ass if something happens.

They are only have a population of 6,000,000. The military to civilian ratio is pretty similar to the US. That is literally the point of the NATO that they all help each other.

China has a population of 1.4 billion. What’s America got? A few hundred mil? China should just invade the U.S. by your logic. Obviously no one, NATO or otherwise, would help us, since we don’t “need” them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just as an aside, the Danish military has a grand total of 21,000 active duty, across all 3 services. WTF ?

They’re not going to war with anybody over anything, and are totally reliant on NATO to save their ass if something happens.

They are only have a population of 6,000,000. The military to civilian ratio is pretty similar to the US. That is literally the point of the NATO that they all help each other.

They’re a joke. The IDF has 600K all-in with 10 million pop. I was against Trump on this, but now can see his point. He just doesn’t present well. Denmark should make a deal.

DP why would I want to spend my tax dollars for a place that will be under miles of ice for over 500 years? Wait aren’t you the same people talking us global climate change is not real?