Zone1 Should Greenland be under the administrative control of the United States?

[byapollo]

What air bases are you referring to? The article mentions Thule AB, now renamed to Pituffik Space Base but it ain't in Russia.

Does Greenland fall under NATO's protection? I don't see the Russians or Chinese able to install anything on Greenland, certainly without us knowing about it and destroying whatever they do. So, what is the status quo? Why does Greenland need additional protection?

There's no permanent naval presence, no base on the eastern coast, and merely 600 men defending it. What we have there is good no doubt, but in an all out WW3 scenario it would be insufficient against a Russian or Chinese attack. We need to fully protect Greenland which we can't do unless we have full rights to it.

 

[byapollo]

The Russians invaded well before we began pouring billions into Ukraine and they were stopped by the Ukrainians. Their military is a paper tiger, the only reason they are still fighting in Ukraine is that they are willing to lose a million men and a lot of their hardware rather than admit defeat.

We didn't pour in billions immediately but substantial military aid to Ukraine began immediately after the february '22 invasion. It's increase over time but it's always been present. For me to say they wouldn't last a week was hyperbole I'll concede on that, but it wouldn't have been a slow victory for Russia either.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I believe it absolutely should, this article sums it up quite well.

But in short, we're seeing a race for the Arctic on the global stage between America, Russia, and China. A country as defenseless as Denmark has zero business administering what might be the single most important territory in or around the Arctic circle. If the U.S./NATO got into a full scale conflict with Russia, Greenland would be invaded by them immediately, and they'd do it with ease. On top of that, Denmark does not have the economic mobility to extract and profit off of Greenland's natural resources, the result of this is that despite standing over a $4.4T reserve of rare earth oxides, Greenland has a GDP of $3B and the entire economy is based on fish. No matter how you twist it, Greenland benefits zero from being a part of the Kingdom of Denmark, and their continued administration is a multi-continental security threat.

I think the US should be placed under the control of Denmark, seeing as the US President is clearly incapable of being a decent human being.

 

[Captain Caveman]

I wasn't asking you, redcoat We stopped asking you for permission 250 years ago

Yes, but it was the French and Dutch that saved the British colonies ass -

https://www.usmessageboard.com/threads/list-of-cliches-used-by-yanks.1127830/

90% of the colonies were British, the US uses a butchered version of the English language, you use the temperature scale inherited off the British, plus the weights and measures, the US constitution was written by a Brit, and you have ..........

(Zone 1)

 

[Mr. Friscus]

It's a population of 57,000 people. Denmark is incapable of securing Greenland the way it needs to be and Greenland would be even more vulnerable as an independent nation. This may sound imperialist, but when we're a nation of 300 million potentially looking at a conflict with another world superpower, there comes a point where it doesn't matter what 57,000 people want. We need to look out for American interests over anything, and securing the Arctic is absolutely in our interest.

Hey now, I'm sure China and Russia will completely respect and support the interests of people who reside on Greenland!

If history tells us anything, there'd be 57,000 corpses.. and something tells me that'd actually be more acceptable to the American left than having a Trump-led American government buy it and support it.

 

[TheInfiniteSadness]

What air bases are you referring to? The article mentions Thule AB, now renamed to Pituffik Space Base but it ain't in Russia.

Does Greenland fall under NATO's protection? I don't see the Russians or Chinese able to install anything on Greenland, certainly without us knowing about it and destroying whatever they do. So, what is the status quo? Why does Greenland need additional protection?

I think I was quoting someone or the story that said there was one Russian base in our Arctic. Yes Greenland as part of Denmark is under NATO. Of course neither Russia nor China would be able to land on Greenland. It's unbelievable how many people on here think that could happen. I get the idea they think the "Red Dawn" movies were documentaries

 

[Mr. Friscus]

I think the US should be placed under the control of Denmark, seeing as the US President is clearly incapable of being a decent human being.

It sounds like you need a safe space to hang out in.

 

[byapollo]

I think the US should be placed under the control of Denmark, seeing as the US President is clearly incapable of being a decent human being.

Boohoo

 

[frigidweirdo]

Boohoo

What?

 

[byapollo]

What?

What do you want me to say to "drumpf is a hecking bad person" like ok? Boohoo. He's still going to take Greenland and he should, and Denmark is perpetually incapable of stopping it.

 

[frigidweirdo]

What do you want me to say to "drumpf is a hecking bad person" like ok? Boohoo. He's still going to take Greenland and he should, and Denmark is perpetually incapable of stopping it.

You're a ******* dictator supporter.

 

[byapollo]

You're a ******* dictator supporter.

Oooh, scary.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Oooh, scary.

Do you have anything to say other than "I would blow Trump for free"?

 

[byapollo]

Do you have anything to say other than "I would blow Trump for free"?

I wouldn't and I don't even support the current administration.

- He's too kind to Israel as they commit a genocide, I'd like him to disavow Netenyahu and pull all Israeli aid, or even better, use the foreign aid as leverage to make him stop the war, or even better, Maduro him.

- The "largest mass deportation operation in history" was promised, and he hasn't even deported more than 500,000 illegals this year, when 10 million came in in the last 5 years and there are 50 million in total. He's doing less daily deportations than Obama.

- He's positioning himself currently as an immigration restrictionist, but he goes back on this principle when it benefits the economy (and therefore his donors). He'll talk bad about Somalians but he'll approve hundreds of thousands of Chinese students and Indians on H-1B's with no real threshold.

- His law enforcement is mediocre. He's done a solid job in D.C. but we need that all over the country. The national guard should be deployed to every major city in the country to quell organized crime.

The only policy I support of his is his Monroe-esque foreign policy for the western hemisphere.

You dislike him because he's a dictator. I dislike him because he isn't one.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I wouldn't and I don't even support the current administration.

- He's too kind to Israel as they commit a genocide, I'd like him to disavow Netenyahu and pull all Israeli aid, or even better, use the foreign aid as leverage to make him stop the war, or even better, Maduro him.

- The "largest mass deportation operation in history" was promised, and he hasn't even deported more than 500,000 illegals this year, when 10 million came in in the last 5 years and there are 50 million in total. He's doing less daily deportations than Obama.

- He's positioning himself currently as an immigration restrictionist, but he goes back on this principle when it benefits the economy (and therefore his donors). He'll talk bad about Somalians but he'll approve hundreds of thousands of Chinese students and Indians on H-1B's with no real threshold.

- His law enforcement is mediocre. He's done a solid job in D.C. but we need that all over the country. The national guard should be deployed to every major city in the country to quell organized crime.

The only policy I support of his is his Monroe-esque foreign policy for the western hemisphere.

You dislike him because he's a dictator. I dislike him because he isn't one.

His DC policy was temporary, which makes it bad. He removes the National Guard, it goes back to how it was.

And I don't hate him because he IS a dictator, but because he acts like one, and Congress is allowing it to happen. He's doing a lot of dangerous stuff, he doesn't know, or care, how fragile US "democracy" is.

 

[byapollo]

His DC policy was temporary, which makes it bad. He removes the National Guard, it goes back to how it was.

National Guard is still in DC. He withdrew troops from Chicago, LA, and Portland.

 

[frigidweirdo]

National Guard is still in DC. He withdrew troops from Chicago, LA, and Portland.

The point I'm making is, in order to make cities SAFE, because I think all but three large cities in the US have a crime rate higher than London's in the UK. (based on old research I did), you need to implement something that WORKS. Policing tactics that WORK, social policies that WORK.

In London they did this. Or I should say the left wing Labour Party did this

Homicide in England and Wales 1898 to 2024 - murdermap

Analysis of the number of homicides in England and Wales since 1898, according to official figures from the Office for National Statistics

www.murdermap.co.uk

Labour got elected in 1997, implemented policies that saw murder hit a high in 2002/2003, and then drop by 50%. Then the right wing came in and then crime rose by nearly 50%.

There are ways of doing this, Labour didn't just go after crime, they went after the kids who get into crime, giving them better schooling, opportunities. The London Olympics was a huge part of that, they spent money on sports for kids. And the Tories got rid of it because they felt the money was better off in their own pockets.

Which is seemingly how the US works too. Especially under Trump.

 

[byapollo]

The point I'm making is, in order to make cities SAFE, because I think all but three large cities in the US have a crime rate higher than London's in the UK. (based on old research I did), you need to implement something that WORKS. Policing tactics that WORK, social policies that WORK.

In London they did this. Or I should say the left wing Labour Party did this

Homicide in England and Wales 1898 to 2024 - murdermap

Analysis of the number of homicides in England and Wales since 1898, according to official figures from the Office for National Statistics

www.murdermap.co.uk

Labour got elected in 1997, implemented policies that saw murder hit a high in 2002/2003, and then drop by 50%. Then the right wing came in and then crime rose by nearly 50%.

There are ways of doing this, Labour didn't just go after crime, they went after the kids who get into crime, giving them better schooling, opportunities. The London Olympics was a huge part of that, they spent money on sports for kids. And the Tories got rid of it because they felt the money was better off in their own pockets.

Which is seemingly how the US works too. Especially under Trump.

These are good policies but in my opinion they need to be combined with lots of policing. We have gangs in the country that operate like militias, taking over entire neighborhoods, killing and robbing people. These gangs need to be countered with military level force, and eviscerated if they fight back with fire power.

 

[toobfreak]

On top of that, Denmark does not have the economic mobility to extract and profit off of Greenland's natural resources, the result of this is that despite standing over a $4.4T reserve of rare earth oxides, Greenland has a GDP of $3B and the entire economy is based on fish.

Thing is, Greenland seems content just as they are as a sleepy, little fishing village and either just do not care about, or realize, their economic or strategic value. They just want to stay out of the limelight and let the rest of us forget they are up there.

The other possibility is that Greenland is balking on talks with Trump because while Hapless Joe slept his term away, China or Russia had already moved in and swung a deal with Greenland.

By the time Trump got back in office, he was too late.

Either way, like it or not, Greenland just might end up the juicy little mouse between three big cats and there ain't a damned thing that Denmark or the EU do about it.

 

[frigidweirdo]

These are good policies but in my opinion they need to be combined with lots of policing. We have gangs in the country that operate like militias, taking over entire neighborhoods, killing and robbing people. These gangs need to be countered with military level force, and eviscerated if they fight back with fire power.

Maybe, but it requires more than dealing with one city.

Feels to me like Xi trying to reduce the pollution in Beijing because he lives there, and not caring about any other city.