4 ms·

Denmark uses Greenland for fishing, it is really important for them for eating. This is basic strategic decision. Food is a priority over anything else. To onl

Denmark uses Greenland for fishing, it is really important for them for eating. This is basic strategic decision. Food is a priority over anything else. To only talk in dollars is ridiculous. You know how much it cost food when you don't have it, like in a war? infinite. My grandfather paid a fortune in order to survive during the escape from a totalitarian country. What was portrayed in the West as "Arab Spring", "fighting for freedom" was in reality people that could not buy food because it became too expensive. Prices for food went to double or triple within months as some rich bastards had stockpiled all rice and cereal surplus in to world knowing well the situation in the north of Africa months before the conflict became visible. That is what happens when your country leaders could not warranty your basic needs. Another thing, Greenland is part of Europe, which is industrialized and needs raw materials. Selling to the US would have meant making Europe even smaller and weaker, and making the US even stronger. In Geoplolitics you don't want to make other countries so powerful that they could basically enslave you. It is called "Ballance of Power".

runesoerensen 9y ago
> Denmark uses Greenland for fishing, it is really important for them for eating. This is basic strategic decision. Food is a priority over anything else. No, the need to eat in no way represents the strategic importance of Greenland to Denmark. The article also makes this pretty clear: Greenland is a net cost to Denmark. Judging from your comment it sounds like people in Denmark are starving, and that's not the case at all. I doubt fishing in Greenland contributes in any significant way to Denmark's economy, but feel free to share any references to prove that point. I don't think any revenues generated by this activity would get close to Denmark's annual block grant to Greenland. > Another thing, Greenland is part of Europe, which is industrialized and needs raw materials. Selling to the US would have meant making Europe even smaller and weaker, and making the US even stronger. That might be true in the sense that there's a close cultural and political association between Europe and Greenland, but technically Greenland is part of the North American continent. In any case, the US <> Europe geopolitical consequences of such a transaction did not play a significant role in the decision not to sell.
- anigbrowl 9y ago
  Fishing in Greenland probably has little significance to Denmark's economy now, but in the event of some future political/economic crisis it's nice to have backup resources. Japanese militarism in the early 20th century was motivated by the fact the population there was growing faster than their rice production ability. Admittedly if Denmark was suffering from genuine food insecurity then convoys to and from Greenland would probably be under threat as well, but I agree with the G that when food runs short every other consideration becomes secondary.
  - runesoerensen 9y ago
    > I agree with the G that when food runs short every other consideration becomes secondary. I get it, humans need food. If that’s your point I agree. That doesn't mean Greenland is a giant fridge to Denmark though. Other natural resources may have been and continue to be of interest to Denmark, but I'm pretty sure that zero Danes consider Greenland a backup food supply (even in times of crisis, which have occurred numerous times)

runesoerensen 9y ago

> Denmark uses Greenland for fishing, it is really important for them for eating. This is basic strategic decision. Food is a priority over anything else. No, the need to eat in no way represents the strategic importance of Greenland to Denmark. The article also makes this pretty clear: Greenland is a net cost to Denmark. Judging from your comment it sounds like people in Denmark are starving, and that's not the case at all. I doubt fishing in Greenland contributes in any significant way to Denmark's economy, but feel free to share any references to prove that point. I don't think any revenues generated by this activity would get close to Denmark's annual block grant to Greenland. > Another thing, Greenland is part of Europe, which is industrialized and needs raw materials. Selling to the US would have meant making Europe even smaller and weaker, and making the US even stronger. That might be true in the sense that there's a close cultural and political association between Europe and Greenland, but technically Greenland is part of the North American continent. In any case, the US <> Europe geopolitical consequences of such a transaction did not play a significant role in the decision not to sell.

anigbrowl 9y ago
Fishing in Greenland probably has little significance to Denmark's economy now, but in the event of some future political/economic crisis it's nice to have backup resources. Japanese militarism in the early 20th century was motivated by the fact the population there was growing faster than their rice production ability. Admittedly if Denmark was suffering from genuine food insecurity then convoys to and from Greenland would probably be under threat as well, but I agree with the G that when food runs short every other consideration becomes secondary.
- runesoerensen 9y ago
  > I agree with the G that when food runs short every other consideration becomes secondary. I get it, humans need food. If that’s your point I agree. That doesn't mean Greenland is a giant fridge to Denmark though. Other natural resources may have been and continue to be of interest to Denmark, but I'm pretty sure that zero Danes consider Greenland a backup food supply (even in times of crisis, which have occurred numerous times)