Greenland

If it's going to get the Bored heated, then take it here PLEASE.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Bob Juch
Posts: 26985
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Contact:

Greenland

#1 Post by Bob Juch » Thu Mar 27, 2025 5:41 pm

The Orange One wants us to take our minds off Signal, so today he says:

"We need Greenland for national security and international security. So we'll, I think, we'll go as far as we have to go. We need Greenland. And the world needs us to have Greenland, including Denmark. Denmark has to have us have Greenland. And, you know, we'll see what happens. But if we don't have Greenland, we can't have great international security. I view it from a security standpoint. We have to be there."

Hard to argue with such incisive logic.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.

User avatar
Weyoun
Posts: 3086
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:36 pm

Re: Greenland

#2 Post by Weyoun » Fri Mar 28, 2025 7:36 am

I’m still confused about this. Why can’t we just have military bases there? Oh wait, we already do.

So we’re gonna take them over, we’d have to have more military basis. But maybe we could just arrange for more military bases anyway, since this is actually an ally, instead of wrecking the international order.

Does that make sense to anyone here?

User avatar
BackInTex
Posts: 13428
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Location: In Texas of course!

Re: Greenland

#3 Post by BackInTex » Fri Mar 28, 2025 7:48 am

Weyoun wrote:
Fri Mar 28, 2025 7:36 am
I’m still confused about this. Why can’t we just have military bases there? Oh wait, we already do.

So we’re gonna take them over, we’d have to have more military basis. But maybe we could just arrange for more military bases anyway, since this is actually an ally, instead of wrecking the international order.

Does that make sense to anyone here?
Probably not. Not even to me. I'm not sure where Trump is going with this.

Do I think it would be strategically better for Greenland to be a US territory? Sure, but if that were my end game, I'd have gone about it differently. But then again, Trump has only 3 1/2 year to accomplish what he wants to accomplish. Whatever that is.
..what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? let them take arms.
~~ Thomas Jefferson

War is where the government tells you who the bad guy is.
Revolution is when you decide that for yourself.
-- Benjamin Franklin (maybe)

User avatar
jarnon
Posts: 6749
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:52 pm
Location: Merion, Pa.

Re: Greenland

#4 Post by jarnon » Fri Mar 28, 2025 9:28 am

As I see it, Trump doesn’t care about transatlantic partnership. North America, including Canada and Greenland, are his concern, and Europe can go do their own thing.

Also, Canada and Greenland are directly between the U.S. and Russia. They’re strategically more important to us than to Europe.

Finally, Trump envisions a wealth of natural resources in Greenland that the Europeans won’t exploit because of silly environmental concerns.
Слава Україні!
עם ישראל חי

User avatar
Weyoun
Posts: 3086
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:36 pm

Re: Greenland

#5 Post by Weyoun » Fri Mar 28, 2025 9:57 am

jarnon wrote:
Fri Mar 28, 2025 9:28 am
As I see it, Trump doesn’t care about transatlantic partnership. North America, including Canada and Greenland, are his concern, and Europe can go do their own thing.

Also, Canada and Greenland are directly between the U.S. and Russia. They’re strategically more important to us than to Europe.

Finally, Trump envisions a wealth of natural resources in Greenland that the Europeans won’t exploit because of silly environmental concerns.
I’m sure he thinks that, but since about 3/4 of the island is above the Arctic Circle, it’s awful hard to get to some of that stuff.

I also think he under sells how much Europe is willing to mine things. Specially, if he decides to cut ties with them and forces them to ramp up their own military production

It’s wild. All this implicitly acknowledges that global warming is happening, even though he denies it. At the same time, he encourages reckless pollution, and no measures to deal with the environmental impact it would have on the United States. And getting rid of FEMA!

This will end badly.

Post Reply