5 ms·

It seems weird for Denmark to be defending Greenland from US threats while also leasing land on Greenland to the US for Pituffik Space Force Base. European stat

by cjs_ac 9mo ago

It seems weird for Denmark to be defending Greenland from US threats while also leasing land on Greenland to the US for Pituffik Space Force Base. European states seem to be doing everything by half measures in the hope that Trump loses interest in Greenland.

RankingMember 9mo ago
I see it as one of those inertial things initiated many administrations ago, e.g. Guantanamo Bay's lease from Cuba.
icegreentea2 9mo ago
If they rescinded that lease, then Trump's so called reasoning actually becomes valid. The US does actually have a geopolitical/strategic/military interest in being able to operate from and around Greenland. The reason this entire activity is a farce is because the US can already do that. It's clear that Trump acts alone in foreign policy - formal channels and structures can barely check him. However, informal resistance still appears to exist. Trump apparently still takes into account the vibes of the people he surrounds himself with into account. In a haphazard way yes, but it's clear that Trump can be swayed to some degree by those around him. The Trump administration is not a unified bloc, and there are likely many elements that see annexing Greenland as ridiculous. However, if they lost access, then they would be forced to concede that there was something actually valuable to gain.
- cjs_ac 9mo ago
  This is a good point - thanks!
palata 9mo ago
Can you explain to me how it is weird? Months ago, the US was an ally of Denmark and Greenland. Greenland allowed an ally to have their military stationed there, because it served both (through NATO). From one day to the other, the US behave like an enemy. And the US behave erratically. So NATO still exists on the paper because the US haven't invaded anyone yet, but the US are behaving like enemies and threaten to invade. Seems more than rational, from the point of view of the rest of NATO, to prepare for an invasion, but at the same time hope that NATO still exists and that the US are not actually an enemy (probably not an ally anymore, but "partner" is better than "enemy"). Or am I missing something?
- aebtebeten 9mo ago
  That indeed seems to be what is happening. Here are the pledges of support which I have seen so far: DE ES FI FR IS IT NO PO SE UK, and I have heard of at least two countries with concrete plans to second troops for a NATO Greenland force.

by cjs_ac 9mo ago

RankingMember 9mo ago

I see it as one of those inertial things initiated many administrations ago, e.g. Guantanamo Bay's lease from Cuba.

icegreentea2 9mo ago

If they rescinded that lease, then Trump's so called reasoning actually becomes valid. The US does actually have a geopolitical/strategic/military interest in being able to operate from and around Greenland. The reason this entire activity is a farce is because the US can already do that. It's clear that Trump acts alone in foreign policy - formal channels and structures can barely check him. However, informal resistance still appears to exist. Trump apparently still takes into account the vibes of the people he surrounds himself with into account. In a haphazard way yes, but it's clear that Trump can be swayed to some degree by those around him. The Trump administration is not a unified bloc, and there are likely many elements that see annexing Greenland as ridiculous. However, if they lost access, then they would be forced to concede that there was something actually valuable to gain.

cjs_ac 9mo ago
This is a good point - thanks!

palata 9mo ago

Can you explain to me how it is weird? Months ago, the US was an ally of Denmark and Greenland. Greenland allowed an ally to have their military stationed there, because it served both (through NATO). From one day to the other, the US behave like an enemy. And the US behave erratically. So NATO still exists on the paper because the US haven't invaded anyone yet, but the US are behaving like enemies and threaten to invade. Seems more than rational, from the point of view of the rest of NATO, to prepare for an invasion, but at the same time hope that NATO still exists and that the US are not actually an enemy (probably not an ally anymore, but "partner" is better than "enemy"). Or am I missing something?

aebtebeten 9mo ago
That indeed seems to be what is happening. Here are the pledges of support which I have seen so far: DE ES FI FR IS IT NO PO SE UK, and I have heard of at least two countries with concrete plans to second troops for a NATO Greenland force.