Greendland - why not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

You could save yourself a lot of typing just by stating "might makes right".

Tell me again - how did Denmark come to "own" Greenland? Oh, right - the European colonial regimes just showed up and took it, without regard for the handful of Inuit people living there, then traded it around like a poker chip. Sounds a lot like "might make right" to me.

Denmark wouldn't even exist if not for America. Denmark was invaded by Germany during WW2 and we liberated it. The least they can do is not make a fuss about returning this chunk of ice in North America to its logical owners, when we have such a clear need of it for our national defense.

Not that it actually matters, but Denmark was largely liberated by the British, small parts were liberated by the Soviets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

You could save yourself a lot of typing just by stating "might makes right".

Tell me again - how did Denmark come to "own" Greenland? Oh, right - the European colonial regimes just showed up and took it, without regard for the handful of Inuit people living there, then traded it around like a poker chip. Sounds a lot like "might make right" to me.

Denmark wouldn't even exist if not for America. Denmark was invaded by Germany during WW2 and we liberated it. The least they can do is not make a fuss about returning this chunk of ice in North America to its logical owners, when we have such a clear need of it for our national defense.

Not that it actually matters, but Denmark was largely liberated by the British, small parts were liberated by the Soviets.

MAGA dont need no schoolin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

Wow, if Trump said it this way, it might go over better. I’ve thought from the beginning that some kind of deal gets done. This is just another trading opportunity for Wallstreet.

We don't need to own Greenland for the missile defense system. Nor do we need to own Canada or Mexico.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

Wow, if Trump said it this way, it might go over better. I’ve thought from the beginning that some kind of deal gets done. This is just another trading opportunity for Wallstreet.

We don't need to own Greenland for the missile defense system. Nor do we need to own Canada or Mexico.

Exactly. The same ridiculous logic would have us invade Japan so we can keep our base in Okinawa.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

You could save yourself a lot of typing just by stating "might makes right".

Tell me again - how did Denmark come to "own" Greenland? Oh, right - the European colonial regimes just showed up and took it, without regard for the handful of Inuit people living there, then traded it around like a poker chip. Sounds a lot like "might make right" to me.

Denmark wouldn't even exist if not for America. Denmark was invaded by Germany during WW2 and we liberated it. The least they can do is not make a fuss about returning this chunk of ice in North America to its logical owners, when we have such a clear need of it for our national defense.

Not that it actually matters, but Denmark was largely liberated by the British, small parts were liberated by the Soviets.

Nobody’s liberated if the US doesn’t “invade” (yes I said it) France on D-Day. Ungrateful MFers should go read some of their own history.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

You could save yourself a lot of typing just by stating "might makes right".

Tell me again - how did Denmark come to "own" Greenland? Oh, right - the European colonial regimes just showed up and took it, without regard for the handful of Inuit people living there, then traded it around like a poker chip. Sounds a lot like "might make right" to me.

Denmark wouldn't even exist if not for America. Denmark was invaded by Germany during WW2 and we liberated it. The least they can do is not make a fuss about returning this chunk of ice in North America to its logical owners, when we have such a clear need of it for our national defense.

Not that it actually matters, but Denmark was largely liberated by the British, small parts were liberated by the Soviets.

Nobody’s liberated if the US doesn’t “invade” (yes I said it) France on D-Day. Ungrateful MFers should go read some of their own history.

Sounds like you're an ungrateful MFer since you conveniently forget that were it not for the French, you would be hailing King Charles and not the Great Orange Blunder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

You could save yourself a lot of typing just by stating "might makes right".

Tell me again - how did Denmark come to "own" Greenland? Oh, right - the European colonial regimes just showed up and took it, without regard for the handful of Inuit people living there, then traded it around like a poker chip. Sounds a lot like "might make right" to me.

Denmark wouldn't even exist if not for America. Denmark was invaded by Germany during WW2 and we liberated it. The least they can do is not make a fuss about returning this chunk of ice in North America to its logical owners, when we have such a clear need of it for our national defense.

Not that it actually matters, but Denmark was largely liberated by the British, small parts were liberated by the Soviets.

Nobody’s liberated if the US doesn’t “invade” (yes I said it) France on D-Day. Ungrateful MFers should go read some of their own history.

Your point? US remains a British colony if France didn’t help them during the Revolution? All of it is stupid

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

Wow, if Trump said it this way, it might go over better. I’ve thought from the beginning that some kind of deal gets done. This is just another trading opportunity for Wallstreet.

Agreed. President Trump is not articulate about it (he just tweets out "WE NEED GREENLAND") but that doesn't mean he's wrong. It's very important for the USA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

Wow, if Trump said it this way, it might go over better. I’ve thought from the beginning that some kind of deal gets done. This is just another trading opportunity for Wallstreet.

Agreed. President Trump is not articulate about it (he just tweets out "WE NEED GREENLAND") but that doesn't mean he's wrong. It's very important for the USA.

We do not need to own Greenland for the missile defence system, just as we don't need to own Canada. Are you all just sheep? You just eat up his BS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

Wow, if Trump said it this way, it might go over better. I’ve thought from the beginning that some kind of deal gets done. This is just another trading opportunity for Wallstreet.

Agreed. President Trump is not articulate about it (he just tweets out "WE NEED GREENLAND") but that doesn't mean he's wrong. It's very important for the USA.

Then why wasn’t it mentioned in the Trump administration’s National Security Strategy released two months ago?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

You could save yourself a lot of typing just by stating "might makes right".

Tell me again - how did Denmark come to "own" Greenland? Oh, right - the European colonial regimes just showed up and took it, without regard for the handful of Inuit people living there, then traded it around like a poker chip. Sounds a lot like "might make right" to me.

Denmark wouldn't even exist if not for America. Denmark was invaded by Germany during WW2 and we liberated it. The least they can do is not make a fuss about returning this chunk of ice in North America to its logical owners, when we have such a clear need of it for our national defense.

Not that it actually matters, but Denmark was largely liberated by the British, small parts were liberated by the Soviets.

Nobody’s liberated if the US doesn’t “invade” (yes I said it) France on D-Day. Ungrateful MFers should go read some of their own history.

I'll preface this by saying that this entire conversation is silly. Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and the people of Greenland do not consent to governance by the United States.

That said, the argument that America liberated Europe in World War II and Europe is ungrateful is wrong on both counts.

D-Day doesn't happen without the British and Canadians. The fact that you said "the US" invaded is wrong. Over half of the troops who landed were non-American. It also doesn't happen without the Soviets, tying up 60% of the German Army on the Eastern Front. The Allies liberated Europe, not the US. The result was an international order that, for 80 years, was tilted to favor America. We got strong and rich and European countries went along with that, including by letting us put troops and bases in Greenland to defend our interests in the area. They've been grateful. For some reason, we're blowing that up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

Wow, if Trump said it this way, it might go over better. I’ve thought from the beginning that some kind of deal gets done. This is just another trading opportunity for Wallstreet.

Agreed. President Trump is not articulate about it (he just tweets out "WE NEED GREENLAND") but that doesn't mean he's wrong. It's very important for the USA.

Then why wasn’t it mentioned in the Trump administration’s National Security Strategy released two months ago?

Or what about his first term? Was Greenland not important then, or was Trump too dumb to care about it then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

You could save yourself a lot of typing just by stating "might makes right".

Tell me again - how did Denmark come to "own" Greenland? Oh, right - the European colonial regimes just showed up and took it, without regard for the handful of Inuit people living there, then traded it around like a poker chip. Sounds a lot like "might make right" to me.

Denmark wouldn't even exist if not for America. Denmark was invaded by Germany during WW2 and we liberated it. The least they can do is not make a fuss about returning this chunk of ice in North America to its logical owners, when we have such a clear need of it for our national defense.

Not that it actually matters, but Denmark was largely liberated by the British, small parts were liberated by the Soviets.

Nobody’s liberated if the US doesn’t “invade” (yes I said it) France on D-Day. Ungrateful MFers should go read some of their own history.

We didn't liberate Europe as much from the Nazis, as we preliberated the continent from a far more enduring threat: communism and the Soviets. We went in to save western Europe from domination by the Soviets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FAFO

*DANISH PENSION FUND AKADEMIKERPENSION TO EXIT US TREASURIES

Greenland has 56,000 total residents.

The NYPD could conquer Greenland with a few overtime shifts.

But they will not be fighting Greenlanders, so what then.

They won't be fighting anyone. Europe is not going to do anything. They will be completely wrecked if they attack any Americans sent to secure Greenland.

They are treaty bound to defend Greenland. What kind of a fantasy world do you live in? China is laughing.

oh, my bad. There's a treaty huh? Surely the EU will attempt to use military force against the U.S. because there's a treaty with some words on paper. lol. lmao even.

How old are you? Guessing that you had no relatives who fought and died in WWII. You may have no historical understanding of the world order, but Europeans do, even if their relatives who fought in that war are no longer with us.

Not sure what your point is in invoking WW2. The U.S. military stepped in an saved the UK/France/etc's bacon in WW1 and again in WW2. Do you actually think the EU is going to use military force against the U.S. when we secure Greenland as part of of America? If anything, they should be happy to give it to the United States to secure as a key strategic location in the accelerating geopolitical Arctic game.

Look at the ICBM path of potential missiles from Russia or China to the United States and you'll see why we need to control Greenland as a vital part of American security in the 21st Century.

We don't need to own it. They literally are happy for us to have bases there. Their people do not need to be US citizens and we don't need to make them, or acquire Greenland, to protect it, in turn protecting both our interests and theirs.

The argument that we must "own" it is twaddle.

The U.S. is about to embark on a major missile defense system (Golden Dome) to protect America from incoming missiles from the major geopolitical rivals Russia, China, and maybe others one day. Greenland is critical to the defense of America in that respect. We cannot be expected to rely on little Denmark to give us "permission" to protect the United States from missile attack by leveraging Greenland. We can't be expected to spend trillions of dollars on equipment and installations on land that Denmark will "own" and that is so critical for defending the USA.

Greenland is a big frozen rock on the North American continent with a "population" that could fit inside Dodger Stadium. Denmark has no claim to ownership of Greenland and no reason to deny the United States this critical island that we need to protect ourselves against incoming missiles. Denmark has no need for Greenland and no moral claim to why they should own a colony in the Americas. This has been basic U.S. foreign policy since the Monroe Doctrine.

You could save yourself a lot of typing just by stating "might makes right".

Tell me again - how did Denmark come to "own" Greenland? Oh, right - the European colonial regimes just showed up and took it, without regard for the handful of Inuit people living there, then traded it around like a poker chip. Sounds a lot like "might make right" to me.

Denmark wouldn't even exist if not for America. Denmark was invaded by Germany during WW2 and we liberated it. The least they can do is not make a fuss about returning this chunk of ice in North America to its logical owners, when we have such a clear need of it for our national defense.

Not that it actually matters, but Denmark was largely liberated by the British, small parts were liberated by the Soviets.

Nobody’s liberated if the US doesn’t “invade” (yes I said it) France on D-Day. Ungrateful MFers should go read some of their own history.

If D-day had never happened the Soviets would have over ran Germany by late 1945. While d day in France was going on the Soviets were conducting Operation Bagration (June 22 – August 19, 1944). This offensive was arguably the greatest military defeat in German history (surpassing Stalingrad in scale)with 28 of 34 divisions of the German Army Group Center destroyed.

Germany was beaten by early 1943. Learn your history.

[Anonymous]