Why is Greenland Even a topic?

[Cat]

Greenland is a complex location..... mainly this subject is of strategic importance...early warning missile systems need that location due to the development of hypersonic Missiles, Chinese, Russian trade routes.....

Well, you already have radars up there.. So strong that they kill the birds that fly over.

You have all the opportunities to protect yourselves, and us - I am not naive, the deal is that you also have to protect us.

But the trade routes, and they are going to be a serious game changer, they are Greenland's.

Mærsk is already using them, saving so much time and money!

Greenland is fascinating on so many levels, and it is easy to forget their importance.

But, they are their own country. And they deserve to be respected.
They are a first nation people, proud, strong and resilient.
They do not deserve to be treated as a common product you can buy.

 

[Wilson23]

They are a first nation people, proud, strong and resilient.
They do not deserve to be treated as a common product you can buy.

OF COURSE they do, they're a First Nations people!

 

[Cat]

OF COURSE they do, they're a First Nations people!

Well.. I do know that the term First Nation people normally exclude the Inuits.

But, they are the original people.

 

[LordofDargaardkeep]

Well.. I do know that the term First Nation people normally exclude the Inuits.

But, they are the original people.

How about me and you just meet up there and we can conquer the place and rule it together?

 

[ll74]

Oh yeah.. but not if you gained control over the trade routes.
Not if you mined for uranium.
Not if you got your fingers in the oil..

We get our fingers in everything.

Or, wait: the US would still be in debt.

When has that mattered?

I would actually assume that it is only the friends of the president, who will gain the important deals, as private businessmen.

It's not about his friends.
It's about people who stroke his cock the best.

And not the US as a country.

No idea what that is right now

Some might get really, really rich.
The country might have to pay.

Not the main guys that pay.
The rest of us

I am not an oracle, but those are some of the likely scenarios I can come up with.

You're pretty damn smart.

/ Anything military related - since Denmark was occupied during the WW2, we may have been cheated into giving the US a forever carte blanche right to placing their military in Greenland.

Been watching a lot of Monarch movies......can we have a titan show up?

(Just no nuclear weapons!!)

I love every part of this.

 

[Wilson23]

How about me and you just meet up there and we can conquer the place and rule it together?

You DON'T wanna tangle with Santa's elves!

 

[Cat]

You DON'T wanna tangle with Santa's elves!

I have idea what you are talking about.. our elves are pretty cute.. we even call them frogs.. well, some might be Jægere.. others, they have dogsleds.

 

[LordofDargaardkeep]

they have dogsleds

I have the gear but I would have to get my dogs a coat taking them up there

 

[Cat]

Oh.. true, our king is a frog as well.

 

[Cat]

I have the gear but I would have to get my dogs a coat taking them up there

What.. you do not think they would thrive in the desert of Greenland, for half a year.. Surviving on whatever you shot for them.

The good thing about dogsleds, they do not demand a mechanics when they need repair, and they do not freeze over in the cold.

It is bloody cold up there, and dark 24/7 in the winter.
Maybe dogsleds are not such a bad idea.

 

[LeahWill]

We have full benefits of minerals and military positioning already why would we pay or fight for something that we already have access to?

An inflated ego.

 

[Rightguide]

We have full benefits of minerals and military positioning already why would we pay or fight for something that we already have access to?

Think sovereignty, geography, operational reach, and strategic proximity. Control of Greenland secures the Arctic flanks and approaches to North America. This isn’t some imperial fantasy; it’s simple map literacy.

 

[Rightguide]

Interesting note - the US would assume half a trillion dollars of debt by assuming ownership of Greenland.

Its natural resources would balance that debt and more.

 

[Wilson23]

Its natural resources would balance that debt and more.

I seem to recall similar promises made at the start of the Iraq War.

 

[Wilson23]

Think sovereignty, geography, operational reach, and strategic proximity. Control of Greenland secures the Arctic flanks and approaches to North America. This isn’t some imperial fantasy; it’s simple map literacy.

But we can have as much of all that as we want NOW, just by asking our loyal NATO ally Denmark, who has allowed us to maintain a military presence in Greenland since WWII.

 

[Cat]

But we can have as much of all that as we want NOW, just by asking our loyal NATO ally Denmark, who has allowed us to maintain a military presence in Greenland since WWII.

You do not even need to ask us... Carte blanche, remember?

You know, Denmark is a pretty darn cold county, for national security, aka our health and welfare, we might need Hawaii.

So.. you think they want a Danish passport?

 

[Cat]

Think sovereignty, geography, operational reach, and strategic proximity. Control of Greenland secures the Arctic flanks and approaches to North America. This isn’t some imperial fantasy; it’s simple map literacy.

You actually just made me speechless.

 

[Rightguide]

You actually just made me speechless.

I'm sorry. Did I offend you in some way?

 

[Rightguide]

But we can have as much of all that as we want NOW, just by asking our loyal NATO ally Denmark, who has allowed us to maintain a military presence in Greenland since WWII.

Yes, the U.S. has maintained a military presence in Greenland since WWII, at Thule (now Pituffik) Space Base, but that presence exists only by Danish permission, under narrowly defined agreements, and can be limited, renegotiated, or revoked. The U.S. does not have unrestricted access to Greenland’s territory, airspace, ports, infrastructure, or resources, nor do we have the authority to expand bases, deploy forces, build infrastructure, or exploit minerals “just by asking.” In short, access is conditional, partial, and political, not sovereign, guaranteed, or strategic control. Calling that “as much as we want” is simplistic fantasy.

 

[Cat]

I'm sorry. Did I offend you in some way?

Oh no. No offense taken.
You are just seeing the world from a perspective that is very, very far from where I am seeing it from.

That is all.

 

[Wilson23]

Jeez, Donald, Denmark ain't white enough for ya?! Remember, this is one of those countries you WANT immigrants to come from! Don't pick a fight with them!

 

[Cat]

Yes, the U.S. has maintained a military presence in Greenland since WWII, at Thule (now Pituffik) Space Base, but that presence exists only by Danish permission, under narrowly defined agreements, and can be limited, renegotiated, or revoked. The U.S. does not have unrestricted access to Greenland’s territory, airspace, ports, infrastructure, or resources, nor do we have the authority to expand bases, deploy forces, build infrastructure, or exploit minerals “just by asking.” In short, access is conditional, partial, and political, not sovereign, guaranteed, or strategic control. Calling that “as much as we want” is simplistic fantasy.

You closed all of your bases, by your own accord.

That the US decided to store nuclear weapon on Greenland might have been a mistake.

 

[Wilson23]

Yes, the U.S. has maintained a military presence in Greenland since WWII, at Thule (now Pituffik) Space Base, but that presence exists only by Danish permission, under narrowly defined agreements, and can be limited, renegotiated, or revoked. The U.S. does not have unrestricted access to Greenland’s territory, airspace, ports, infrastructure, or resources, nor do we have the authority to expand bases, deploy forces, build infrastructure, or exploit minerals “just by asking.” In short, access is conditional, partial, and political, not sovereign, guaranteed, or strategic control. Calling that “as much as we want” is simplistic fantasy.

It is as much as we want, because there are no conceivable circumstances where Denmark would say no -- so long as we are both NATO members.

 

[Cat]

It is as much as we want, because there are no conceivable circumstances where Denmark would say no -- so long as we are both NATO members.

We would probably welcome you.
Under the clear agreement - no nuclear weapons.

 

[OralAllOver]

Because Trump has no interest (negative interest?) in helping any country governed by decency or rule of law. Pay bribes or get fucked