Denmark is willing to discuss boosting security in Greenland with Trump

[Independent thinker]

"Scoop: Denmark sent Trump team private messages on Greenland​

Denmark sent private messages in recent days to President-elect Trump's team expressing willingness to discuss boosting security in Greenland or increasing the U.S. military presence on the island, two sources with knowledge of the issue tell Axios.

Why it matters: Trump's refusal to rule out military force to take control of Greenland was effectively a threat to invade a longstanding NATO ally. Those comments caught Copenhagen and many other European capitals off guard.

The big picture: Greenland (pop. 56,000) is largely autonomous, but Denmark maintains responsibility for defense.
Trump has repeatedly declared that controlling Greenland — the world's largest island — is necessary for U.S. national security vis-a-vis Russia and China. His son Don Jr. visited Greenland this week bearing MAGA hats."

https://archive.is/kBJXP#selection-659.0-702.0

Trump wins again. It's too much. I'm not sure if I can take anymore winning.

Seriously, Greenland needs to be secured as the Russians have become more active in the arctic.

A recent poll out from Greenland shows a big majority being OK with becoming a US state.

 

[konradv]

Yes and they want to keep it. So they aren't going to vote independence from Denmark without something to replace that guarantee, and they aren't going to try to replace it with some deal with a multi-national mining interest.

And if 2/3 of the population favors independence, Denmark may not be as popular there as you imagine. They have been taking Greenlanders for granted and underfunding them for decades. They also clobbered the fisheries with big Nordic factory trawlers, and that is something that was very unpopular with the locals.

The statements from the PM, Denmark's pledge for more funding, sounds like negotiations are already starting, and Trump isn't even sworn in yet...

Why wouldn’t they still be part of NATO? Who do they need protection from? Trump, it seems.

 

[para bellum]

Why wouldn’t they still be part of NATO?

Because Greenland is not a NATO member state, duh...

If they voted independence from Denmark, they would have to apply to join, and jump through all the hoops for NATO membership.

We're talking about an island with a population of about 50 thousand and no military...

Who do they need protection from? Trump, it seems.

What is the purpose of NATO? Who do the other member states need protection from?

 

[konradv]

Because Greenland is not a NATO member state, duh...

If they voted independence from Denmark, they would have to apply to join, and jump through all the hoops for NATO membership.

We're talking about an island with a population of about 50 thousand and no military...

What is the purpose of NATO? Who do the other member states need protection from?

No they wouldn’t. They’d be grandfathered in.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

A multi-national cannot offer Greenland security.

I have no reason to believe that you speak for Greenlanders.

Strawman #2...

You do not know what a strawman argument is then.

 

[para bellum]

No they wouldn’t. They’d be grandfathered in.

 

[konradv]

View attachment 1065674

Memes aren’t arguments; they’re actually an indication you’ve lost one.

 

[para bellum]

Memes aren’t arguments; they’re actually an indication you’ve lost one.

No, it's a waste of time to argue with you when you just make shit up.

There is no "grandfathering" in the Washington Treaty.

Denmark is responsible for Greenland's security (with US help). If the relationship between Denmark and Greenland changes, that would have to be addressed.

 

[Mac-7]

WINNING!

 

[konradv]

No, it's a waste of time to argue with you when you just make shit up.

There is no "grandfathering" in the Washington Treaty.

Denmark is responsible for Greenland's security (with US help). If the relationship between Denmark and Greenland changes, that would have to be addressed.

Denmark is responsible with NATO’s help. I doubt they’d leave Greenland out in the cold on a technicality, especially if it’s threatened by another country.

 

[22lcidw]

Why wouldn’t they still be part of NATO? Who do they need protection from? Trump, it seems.

Frankly, it is the Unted States protecting Greenland from foreign control as Denmark cannot do it.

 

[konradv]

Frankly, it is the Unted States protecting Greenland from foreign control as Denmark cannot do it.

There’s no one threatening Greenland, except Trump.

 

[22lcidw]

There’s no one threatening Greenland, except Trump.

Then let us remove anything militarily or in private ways currently in Greenland now. Let them take care of themselves with no chance if defense from us.

 

[konradv]

Then let us remove anything militarily or in private ways currently in Greenland now. Let them take care of themselves with no chance if defense from us.

That sounds like a “I’d hate to see something bad happen” scene from a bad mafia movie.

 

[struth]

Once again, Trump wins.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Only Trump threatens Denmark.

 

[para bellum]

Denmark is responsible with NATO’s help. I doubt they’d leave Greenland out in the cold on a technicality, especially if it’s threatened by another country.

There is no NATO force on Greenland. It is Americans and Danes. It is a bilateral relationship, not a NATO operation.

Yes, the US would step up- that is what this thread is about.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Denmark Boosts Greenland Defense After Trump Repeats Desire For U.S. Control.

I'm curious. If he's bullshitting, how does one separate Chump's various pronouncements into complete bullshit and utter bullshit? When you have a grasp of history, tactics, track record, M.O. you know what's going on. If you don't you are putty in his hands and he can wind you up and get you...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[konradv]

There is no NATO force on Greenland. It is Americans and Danes. It is a bilateral relationship, not a NATO operation.

Yes, the US would step up- that is what this thread is about.

Denmark is part of NATO. There’s no bi-lateral side deal.

 

[para bellum]

Denmark is part of NATO. There’s no bi-lateral side deal.

You are hopelessly clueless.