Reply to Greendland

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Greendland - why not? "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]If the US is serious about "taking over" Greenland, then it is at least as great as security threat to Western Europe as Russia is.

And should be treated accordingly.[/quote] Treated by who exactly, the vaunted Danish military ? Like it or not, Trump has the “cards” on this one.[/quote]

NATO[/quote]There is no NATO without the US. That’s a reality you can’t deny when you start analyzing the relative military capabilities. T of course knows this.[/quote]

You're thinking the US would commit to a full scale global conflict? No, they wouldn't. There are more than enough military resources to push back on Trump. And the global sanctions against the US would be crippling. The US would be descend into the relative dark ages for the sole purpose of entertaining the mad king.[/quote]WTF are you talking about ? If the US decided to put more installations there it, it would be up to whatever is left to stop them. The French have one aircraft carrier, the Germans have zero, the French carrier would never make it out of port. The rest of NATO is defensive, not offensive. They are deathly afraid of this country called Russia, ever heard of them ? They’re not moving any troops to defend Greenland against the US. That’s a joke. [/quote]

First of all, as an ALLY of DENMARK, the U.S. has already been welcome to put military installations there.  So there is nothing to gain by this hostile stance.

Secondly, on paper alone, by sheer superiority in numbers and everything else, Russia should have taken Ukraine within a month.  Nearly 3 years later, they are still entrenched where they were for the last two years, and they lost ONE MILLION MEN.   Warfare is not determined by what is on paper at the outset. [/quote] Ugh, Ukraine gets alot of help from the US, and Russia is holding back so they don’t just level the entire country.

What you don’t address is where is non-US NATO getting the offensive capabilities to kick the US out of an established position in Greenland. They don’t have it. There navies are putrid. They spent all their minimal funds to fight a land war with Russia, as they should since the US won’t be there to defend them per the logic of this thread.[/quote]

Russia is not holding back in the Ukraine. That is an idiotic statement. Russia has lost 3 armies against 1980’s technology against a country with a fourth of its population and a 10th of its GDP. NATO without the US would destroy Russia even with the US bricking the F35 and surveillance tech. NATO without the US has a population of 610 million and a GPD of 26 trillion vs Russia’s 144 million and GDP of 1.8 trillion. Who do you think would win?

If the US takes Greenland 7 European states will go nuclear within a month with missiles pointed at the US. Also NATO will be over and the US will lose all European bases(31 major bases and 50-80 shared access). The US military will not be allow to enter or refuel/resupply in European territory. They will sanction the US(and Israel). Israel’s survival depends on US pressure on Europe and would be crippled with European sanctions.

The US would lose Australia joint bases, British Indian Ocean Territory naval bases(Diego Garcia), Canadian air force bases, Singapore air force bases, Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia (United Kingdom) air force bases, Ascension Island (United Kingdom) space force bases, etc.  The logistics problem supplying the US fleet would be almost unworkable. Oh and Five Eyes and all intelligence sharing would be over.

Without NATO we would have to conservatively increase our defense spending by 3-4 times to maintain the same presence. Seems like a great trade for a place that will be cover with 2 miles of ice for 500-1,000 years, we can access any of their resources through the free market and we already have bases on.

You republicans have chosen Russia over Europe and NATO. It is utterly stupid(see above)
[/quote] Russia doesn’t use their heavy bombers/missiles on Ukraine, they could but don’t.

It sounds like you think Europe can defend itself w/o the US in NATO. I agree, fantastic, close the US bases in Europe and send all the troops/equipment home. WWll ended 75+years ago, why are still there given all their economic/military power that you cite ? The rest of the bases can be negotiated with the other countries. But, the more that are closed, the better. The US has been defending the world forever, let others step up. We’ll worry about the Western hemisphere, which includes Greenland.[/quote]

Russia probably uses WWI planes. All their equipment is crap.[/quote]

Russia used horse calvary against drones.

[quote] Russian horseback troops were wiped out by Ukrainian drones during a battlefield clash in a victory for modern warfare over centuries-old tactics.

Dramatic footage released by the Ukrainian military shows a remotely piloted first person view drone [FPV] swooping on one of Vladimir Putin's soldiers on horseback.

The troop tumbled off the horse, after which the explosives-packed drone struck him[/quote]
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15426521/Cavalry-meets-modern-warfare-Russian-horseback-troops-wiped-Ukrainian-drones.html[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics