USA Issues Threat To Greenland

Thank you Daisy for typing this up. I was rather confused the other day because I haven't been keeping up with Trump's daily crap, so I had no idea what was going on!

I see that Finland also seized a ship since then as well.

I am mostly shocked at Putin not mounting much of a response that I can see. I don't know enough about anything happening to have an educated discussion.

Maremia

Fessing up. Probs my spelling error.
Mea culpa.

Probably not.
Facebook abounds with spelling errors.

(Is that grammatically correct? 🤔)

I wonder what plans Mr Putin might have for Greenland given its strateguc value. Or President Xi.

Regarding NATO it's worth remenbering that Art. 5 has to be invoked by a member. It doesn't automatically come into force after an attack. I doubt Denmark wd invoke Art, 5 if Mr Trump invaded Greenland as no other NATO country wd be willing to fire on US troops.

Other Nato countries talk to each other all the time, so Denmark would doubtless know whether they were likely to get support before they decided to invoke Article 5.

If Putin invaded Greenland then the US would be there like a shot as part of NATO and we would be at war with Russia.

Global warming. Who would have predicted?

David49

Rosie51

Nobody has said anything about Canada coming to Greenland's aid, I said it would be a more logical alliance than with the USA. What do you mean there has to be an agreement with Denmark.? Are you saying they should give in to Trump's demands? That would only feed the bully, he'd not stop there, bullies never do.

As you introduced Canada into the debate what did you mean by association.

I believe it was I who introduced Canada into the debate, David49. last post on page 3.

AGAA4

If Putin invaded Greenland then the US would be there like a shot as part of NATO and we would be at war with Russia.

I am not sure that you are right. He might appoint himself chief negotiator with Putin over the ceasefire and peace, and somehow end up becoming responsible for "rebuilding Greenland" with Trump winnng all the lucrative contracts, and Trump hotels and golf courses blossoming all over the country.

Elegran

AGAA4

If Putin invaded Greenland then the US would be there like a shot as part of NATO and we would be at war with Russia.

I am not sure that you are right. He might appoint himself chief negotiator with Putin over the ceasefire and peace, and somehow end up becoming responsible for "rebuilding Greenland" with Trump winnng all the lucrative contracts, and Trump hotels and golf courses blossoming all over the country.

Agreed. Hotels and tourism.

Lots of eco-tourism in Iceland. We love Iceland for Holidays.

Jason Crow (Democratic Congress Member) a veteran, former special forces has said in a speech:

"I bristle when a five-time draft dodger like Donald Trump bags the war drums in Washington DC."

Now as the daughter of a career serviceman, in the RAF before WW2, the sister of another career serviceman, and someone who is old enough to have been told the feelings of those who fought in WW2 towards those who got out of fighting but where somehow very wealthy when their peers came home.

And I am not the only one. People in America, who have not lost the ability to process their thinking, noticed the Trump MAGA warmongers, as part of their propoganda, lack of due diligence in the same characteristic way as the Trump regime always does. This even when it comes to the music they choose to walk on stage to. Their most recent fiasco is when Donald Trump shared a video of the attacks on Venezuela with the song "Fortunate Son" (Credence Clearwater Revival) playing underneath it. These are the lyrics. I'll leave you to process the thinking of the people wanting war:

Some folks are born made to wave the flag
Hoo, they're red, white and blue
And when the band plays "Hail to the chief"
Ooh, they point the cannon at you, Lord

It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no senator's son, son
It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no furtunate one, no

Some folks are born silver spoon in hand
Lord, don't they help themselves, Lord?
But when the taxman come to the door
Lord, the house lookin' like a rummage sale, yeah

It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no millionaire's son, no, no
It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no fortunate one, no

Yeah-yeah, some folks inherit star-spangled eyes
Hoo, they send you down to war, Lord
And when you ask 'em, "How much should we give?"
Hoo, they only answer, "More, more, more, more"

It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no military son, son, Lord
It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no fortunate one, one
It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no fortunate one, no, no, no
It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no fortunate son, no, no, no
It ain't me, it ain't me...

"when their peers came home" should end with "I can inly agree".

Only!!! I give up!

I think the Greenland issue is about the USA having some power and influence, with the help/agreement of Denmark and other NATO countries, in the Arctic Ocean because of access to vast oil resources.

At the moment I'd rather the US controlled vital routes up there than Russia or China.

Trump being such a rumbustious individual doesn't help people understand what it's ultimately all about.

Ultimately I think Greenland will be controlled by China, Russia or the USA.
As Baggs has said the USA would be preferable to the other two.

It isn’t about security.

It is entirely about rare minerals, and enriching Trump.

I think the Greenland issue is about the USA having some power and influence, with the help/agreement of Denmark and other NATO countries, in the Arctic Ocean because of access to vast oil resources. (*Baggs*)

The U.S. used to have a much larger military footprint in Greenland during the Cold War, with several bases and facilities. Today only Pituffik Space Base remains, with roughly 150 personnel under a defence agreement with Denmark; far smaller than in the past. This was a U.S. decision and, in principle, could be changed, though most other sites are no longer active.

Greenland itself controls licensing for mining and (previously) oil exploration. These agreements are often seen as generous by international standards, with long-term licences and Greenlandic stakes so revenue stays local. So far, however, no country has moved to large-scale exploitation, mainly because the technical, logistical and investment challenges in Greenland remain very high.

Whitewavemark2

It isn’t about security.

It is entirely about rare minerals, and enriching Trump.

So you keep saying, but the minerals are in the long term, the security from China and Russia is needed in the short term.

Oreo

Whitewavemark2

It isn’t about security.

It is entirely about rare minerals, and enriching Trump.

So you keep saying, but the minerals are in the long term, the security from China and Russia is needed in the short term.

And I repeat, short or long term, there is no existential threat from either one.

It is all about minerals and wealth.

If you choose to believe Trump over this ——

Nothing more to say tbh.

He’s even gone to the trouble of learning the language 😂

www.facebook.com/reel/1278019817575196

You are wicked!!!

It is all about minerals and wealth.

Access to minerals and wealth (and territory) helps with security because better defence systems can be developed.

"a Greenland acquisition greenlights Russia’s quest to acquire not only a large chunk of Ukraine but also the Norwegian territory of Svalbard. Russia wants the northern archipelago as part of its naval defence. The idea is that a nuclear deterrent around the Kola peninsula in the northwest of Russia is safer if the country has this piece of real estate – a gateway, as it is, to both the North Atlantic and Arctic"

Klaus Dodds in Spectator

"Trump also understands that other countries are engaging in their own form of resource grabbing against a backdrop of a world that is shrinking ecologically. He understands that the demand on resources will grow and that minerals from copper to lithium will be in high demand. Breaking China’s stranglehold is an existential matter. Critical minerals are the appeal in Greenland’s case, oil in Venezuela."

More from the same article.

None of what you have posted takes into account that it is a sovereign country with a population that rejects any form of annexation.

That is true, wwm2, but it does seem to show that Trump is at least, by his "geo-politicking", trying to stop Russian incursions and it is a very interesting article nonetheless and worth a read I think.

The parts I quoted are only small. I like the author's assessment of Trump's actions as "playing geo-political monopoly". That is, I like the expression as it seems apt. I don't think Dodds is defending Trump, just describing what he sees as the real deal. Only time will tell what next.

Nowt wrong, in my view, in looking at things from as many angles as possible.

Absolutely, and I like the term “geo-political monopoly” which I would like a lot more if I could be confident that those taking part had the best interests of the population at heart, but they don’t do they?

A tragedy.