Anonymous
01/20/2026 14:21
Subject: Greendland - why not?
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 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.
Anonymous
01/20/2026 14:18
Subject: Greendland - why not?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.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.
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
01/20/2026 14:15
Subject: Greendland - why not?
Anonymous wrote: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.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.
We don't need to own Greenland for the missile defense system. Nor do we need to own Canada or Mexico.
Anonymous
01/20/2026 14:08
Subject: Greendland - why not?
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
01/20/2026 14:07
Subject: Greendland - why not?
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
01/20/2026 14:06
Subject: Greendland - why not?
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.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.
Anonymous
01/20/2026 14:04
Subject: Greendland - why not?
Anonymous wrote:This is inane. Every day the rationale changes and the real reason is Trump wants a Noble peace prize.
They literally just follow whatever he says like unquestioning sheep.
Anonymous
01/20/2026 14:00
Subject: Greendland - why not?
This is inane. Every day the rationale changes and the real reason is Trump wants a Noble peace prize.
Anonymous
01/20/2026 14:00
Subject: Greendland - why not?
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.
Why is the US the logical owner? I suppose you’d advocate turning Guam over to Japan?
Your posts demonstrate a terrible weakness to MAGA thinking about the world. While there’s nothing wrong with a dose of Realpolitik, you guys see the world as “us against everyone else”. In your world view there is only space for confrontation and domination, never collaboration and alliance. You think that makes you tough and smart, but it’s actually quite stupid and simple minded. As a previous poster noted, the US owes its privileged position in the world to both strength AND collaboration. A previous Republican characterized this as “walk softly but carry a big stick”. You’ll never grasp the wisdom of that philosophy.
This.
Also there is power in economic warfare. Europe can destroy us, like it or not. Making enemies of our allies, resulting in trade partners completely leaving us out, boycotting of our products, etc. Trump has already started to destroy our economy (only idiots think the economy is the stock market - look at our shrinking manufacturing every month since he took office, our rising unemployment and layoffs, my own spouse was just laid off from his private sector job). Now we want to make it even worse??
Anonymous
01/20/2026 13:58
Subject: Greendland - why not?
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.
I don't think anyone who would type such an idiotic statement is an American.
Anonymous
01/20/2026 13:49
Subject: Greendland - why not?
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.
Why is the US the logical owner? I suppose you’d advocate turning Guam over to Japan?
Your posts demonstrate a terrible weakness to MAGA thinking about the world. While there’s nothing wrong with a dose of Realpolitik, you guys see the world as “us against everyone else”. In your world view there is only space for confrontation and domination, never collaboration and alliance. You think that makes you tough and smart, but it’s actually quite stupid and simple minded. As a previous poster noted, the US owes its privileged position in the world to both strength AND collaboration. A previous Republican characterized this as “walk softly but carry a big stick”. You’ll never grasp the wisdom of that philosophy.
Anonymous
01/20/2026 13:40
Subject: Greendland - why not?
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.
A golden dome?
To protect against Russia? Russia is Trump’s ally and master. The protect against China? China has bought Trump.
Anonymous
01/20/2026 13:39
Subject: Greendland - why not?
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.
Anonymous
01/20/2026 13:31
Subject: Greendland - why not?
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".
Anonymous
01/20/2026 13:29
Subject: Greendland - why not?
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.