4 ms·

I wonder how likely Trumps assumption, that Russia or China will take it if he doesn't, is..

by apples_oranges 9mo ago

sorokod 9mo ago
Take it? You mean go to war with NATO over Greenland?
- skirge 9mo ago
  impossible, like war for Cyprus
  - actionfromafar 9mo ago
    I wonder if that was a joke or not. :) If serious: agree, Russia or China won't take Greenland.
  - sorokod 9mo ago
    A bit different, nether Russia nor China are NATO members like Turkey and Greece
i80and 9mo ago
About 0%. China really has no serious interest in Greenland, and Russia isn't going to trigger direct confrontation with NATO. At least, unless NATO splinters, which is looking somewhat likely now with this foolish US administration. Russia and China are just made-up excuses for Trump to do what he wants to do: steal territory, at gunpoint if needed.
fsh 9mo ago
Zero. Denmark belongs to the EU and NATO, and Greenland has always had a significant NATO military presence to deter any possible threat.
hypeatei 9mo ago
We already have military bases there and I'm sure Greenland wouldn't have cared if we asked for a few more. This is all to stroke someone's ego and get their name in a history book.
V__ 9mo ago
1. The U.S. has multiple bases in Greenland. Denmark, and NATO are also present. 2. Russia can't even expand their presence to Ukraine (not a NATO memeber). 3. China has no access. So, 0%.
- ochrist 9mo ago
  Currently USA only has one base left: Pituffik Space Base (previously called Thule Air Base). They used to have about 17 bases and several thousand military personnel, but now it's down to about 200. If USA wanted it, they could establish all the bases they wanted and send more people, but they chose to cut down on military presence over the past years. Source: Have worked on that last base several years ago. Also check wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pituffik_Space_Base https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pituffik_Space_Base
  - actionfromafar 9mo ago
    The real problem is so many in the Trump base thinks "America Bigger? Trump good."
iamcalledrob 9mo ago
Today, the US can defend Greenland as part of NATO, and would have the support of the other NATO nations.
mindcrash 9mo ago
They do not really care until the United States takes Greenland. Or NATO outright attacks Russia. Then they do care. Because controlling Greenland means whoever has it gets excessive control over the Arctic Sea. And both parties, but especially Russia, do not want a party like the United States to have this amount of control given the Arctic is in their backyard.
- actionfromafar 9mo ago
  That sounds reasonable but it's not IMHO. What kind of control is that? The US had military bases in Greenland when Soviet nukes had to be delivered with bombers flying over Greenland. When ICBMs became a thing, those bases weren't as important anymore.
  - mindcrash 9mo ago
    I'm not talking about military strength, I am talking about shipping lanes. Something you can already see in Venezuela as we speak: The Trump Administration has essentially blocked countries like Russia and Iran to ship oil from Venezuela. If they capture Greenland and can build a big Naval presence there they are in a great position to confiscate every cargo ship destined to Russian harbors in the north, and close off China's trading route in the Arctic aswell.
    - actionfromafar 9mo ago
      Right. A phone call to Denmark => big Naval presence. What's the problem? Denmark would have welcomed a big Naval presence in Greenland. It benefits them too. It should have been: America: can we have a big Naval base in Greenland? Denmark: sure. 100 year agreement? It could have been: America: give us big Naval base in Greenland or we will annex you! Denmark: Eh... sure, are you alright? We got: America: we will annex you.
scotty79 9mo ago
In modern world if you want to estimate validity of the message it's a better heuristic to consider the source than the message itself.
AnimalMuppet 9mo ago
Lets just say that Russia or China does some surprise attack and lands a bunch of troops in Greenland. OK, great, they've got troops in Greenland. Now they have to keep them supplied. How are they going to do that? Well, either through the air or by sea. Does either have a navy that can do that? No. Does either have an air force that can do that against US opposition? No. So it's really unlikely. Even if China or Russia were stupid enough to do that, they could never hold it. Now, perhaps the more interesting question: How likely does Trump think it is? Does he think it's real, despite the absurd impossibility of it? Or is he just saying fact-free stuff that he hopes some people will believe?

I wonder how likely Trumps assumption, that Russia or China will take it if he doesn't, is..

sorokod 9mo ago

Take it? You mean go to war with NATO over Greenland?

skirge 9mo ago
impossible, like war for Cyprus
- actionfromafar 9mo ago
  I wonder if that was a joke or not. :) If serious: agree, Russia or China won't take Greenland.
- sorokod 9mo ago
  A bit different, nether Russia nor China are NATO members like Turkey and Greece

i80and 9mo ago

About 0%. China really has no serious interest in Greenland, and Russia isn't going to trigger direct confrontation with NATO. At least, unless NATO splinters, which is looking somewhat likely now with this foolish US administration. Russia and China are just made-up excuses for Trump to do what he wants to do: steal territory, at gunpoint if needed.

fsh 9mo ago

Zero. Denmark belongs to the EU and NATO, and Greenland has always had a significant NATO military presence to deter any possible threat.

hypeatei 9mo ago

We already have military bases there and I'm sure Greenland wouldn't have cared if we asked for a few more. This is all to stroke someone's ego and get their name in a history book.

V__ 9mo ago

1. The U.S. has multiple bases in Greenland. Denmark, and NATO are also present. 2. Russia can't even expand their presence to Ukraine (not a NATO memeber). 3. China has no access. So, 0%.

ochrist 9mo ago
Currently USA only has one base left: Pituffik Space Base (previously called Thule Air Base). They used to have about 17 bases and several thousand military personnel, but now it's down to about 200. If USA wanted it, they could establish all the bases they wanted and send more people, but they chose to cut down on military presence over the past years. Source: Have worked on that last base several years ago. Also check wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pituffik_Space_Base https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pituffik_Space_Base
- actionfromafar 9mo ago
  The real problem is so many in the Trump base thinks "America Bigger? Trump good."

iamcalledrob 9mo ago

Today, the US can defend Greenland as part of NATO, and would have the support of the other NATO nations.

mindcrash 9mo ago

They do not really care until the United States takes Greenland. Or NATO outright attacks Russia. Then they do care. Because controlling Greenland means whoever has it gets excessive control over the Arctic Sea. And both parties, but especially Russia, do not want a party like the United States to have this amount of control given the Arctic is in their backyard.

actionfromafar 9mo ago
That sounds reasonable but it's not IMHO. What kind of control is that? The US had military bases in Greenland when Soviet nukes had to be delivered with bombers flying over Greenland. When ICBMs became a thing, those bases weren't as important anymore.
- mindcrash 9mo ago
  I'm not talking about military strength, I am talking about shipping lanes. Something you can already see in Venezuela as we speak: The Trump Administration has essentially blocked countries like Russia and Iran to ship oil from Venezuela. If they capture Greenland and can build a big Naval presence there they are in a great position to confiscate every cargo ship destined to Russian harbors in the north, and close off China's trading route in the Arctic aswell.
  - actionfromafar 9mo ago
    Right. A phone call to Denmark => big Naval presence. What's the problem? Denmark would have welcomed a big Naval presence in Greenland. It benefits them too. It should have been: America: can we have a big Naval base in Greenland? Denmark: sure. 100 year agreement? It could have been: America: give us big Naval base in Greenland or we will annex you! Denmark: Eh... sure, are you alright? We got: America: we will annex you.

scotty79 9mo ago

In modern world if you want to estimate validity of the message it's a better heuristic to consider the source than the message itself.

AnimalMuppet 9mo ago

Lets just say that Russia or China does some surprise attack and lands a bunch of troops in Greenland. OK, great, they've got troops in Greenland. Now they have to keep them supplied. How are they going to do that? Well, either through the air or by sea. Does either have a navy that can do that? No. Does either have an air force that can do that against US opposition? No. So it's really unlikely. Even if China or Russia were stupid enough to do that, they could never hold it. Now, perhaps the more interesting question: How likely does Trump think it is? Does he think it's real, despite the absurd impossibility of it? Or is he just saying fact-free stuff that he hopes some people will believe?