4 ms·
Statement by Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, UK
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- United857 8mo agoDuplicate: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46669025 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46669025
- wrxd 8mo agoHas that one been kicked out from the homepage?
- rpiguy 8mo agoIt’s a pure political discussion. It will get flagged by enough people who don’t want to see politics to remove it from the page.
- onetokeoverthe 8mo ago[dead]
- bicx 8mo agoAs a U.S. citizen, I’m beginning to ask myself how to take more meaningful measures to help bring an end to this behavior. I’m not a political activist and generally try to mind my own business, but that mindset only worked when I felt I could trust the system to self-correct. It seems our judicial system can barely keep up, and Congress is doing next to nothing.
- jleyank 8mo agoAs in any region's system: pay attention, vote, donate, organize even protest. Not voting votes for the winner, which might not be what you want.
- Jensson 8mo agoDepending on your state you vote for the winner regardless who you vote for since its winner takes all.
- TurdF3rguson 8mo agoOh you didn't hear? They're also cancelling the midterms.
- Insanity 8mo agoAnd when this happens, about half the country still will support this demagogue.
- DustinEchoes 8mo agoWe are rapidly approaching the point where that isn’t enough.
- jleyank 8mo agoProtest is ill-defined and open-ended. The other alternative I didn't mention the first time is to get outta Dodge.
- aebtebeten 8mo agoHave you called your members of congress yet?
- cdrnsf 8mo agoGetting involved at the local level is a good place to start. Local governing bodies, city councils and other civic organizations represent meaningful opportunities for change. Congress is too beholden and scared of Trump on the GOP side to do anything meaningful. The democrats are generally spineless. The federalist society and GOP have created a severe ideological imbalance on the supreme court that will have serious ramifications for years to come unless there's a serious effort to pack or reform the institution.
- kurtis_reed 8mo agoProtest
- kcplate 8mo agoTo what end? I think this has become the “feel good that I am doing something about it” approach but it literally has almost zero effect beyond creating rhetoric from the politicians. You need to hold your political leaders responsible with your vote. Don’t just automatically vote for the politicians that are “saying” the right things. Find out what your representatives are “doing” and hold them responsible for their actions or more importantly, inactions.
- morkalork 8mo agoCall your senator and congressman /s
- Avicebron 8mo agoI think we have to acknowledge the grievances of people who got us into this position in the first place and don't stop making those grievances and the tangible steps being taken to solve them known on every public platform available.
- A_D_E_P_T 8mo agoWhat does Greenland have to do with anybody's grievances? That's a serious and non-rhetorical question.
- donkeybeer 8mo agoSome people are just so stupid they are beyond all help. They are eternally offended and will always have made up "grievances". For example one really funny "grievance" is that intermarriage is equal to violent murderous genocide. Its best to laugh these "grievances" out the room.
- lostmsu 8mo agoMove to a swing state and vote.
- tzs 8mo agoOne thing that could help would be for Democrats who live in congressional districts where there is no way a Democrat will ever get elected because there are too many people there who just vote for the candidate with the 'R' by their name on the ballot without actually looking into either candidate's positions to switch their registration to Republican. That way they could vote in Republican primaries. Many if not most of those districts actually have Republican candidates in the primaries who are center right but they lose because primary turnout is very low, largely consisting of just the most extreme voters. For example consider Marjorie Taylor Green (MTG). In the primary the first time she ran against a perfectly normal Republican. I don't remember all the details, but I believe he was a decorated military officer who after the military was a successful businessman and who had server in state offices. MTG was a full on QAnon and other conspiracy theorist believer. But it is mostly the fringe that votes in primaries so she won. And it is a heavily Republican district with many people who don't really follow politics so she got their vote in the general election because they always vote R. Register as a Republican if you are in such a district and vote in the primaries and then maybe we can get back to having sane Republicans winning those districts. For safe Republican districts where they do elect sane Republicans, it is still worth switching registration. Let the current representative from that district know that you are doing this, and promise that if Trump gets upset at their vote on something and bankrolls a primary challenge, you will vote for them in the primary.
- JeremyNT 8mo agoI live in a district like this and the primary is determined by who is endorsed by the President. Also these voters are dumb but they aren't that dumb. Unless you know a person who actually has presented as a Trump supporting republican for the last decade and is secretly willing to switch sides after the election, you're not going to trick them.
- tzs 8mo agoThe point is not to trick anyone. The point is that center right Republicans (the kind that used to win most Republican districts before 2012) could still win if they could make it to the general election. They often can't because most Republican voters, like most Democrat voters, aren't into party politics enough to bother voting in the primaries. It is the voters who are most likely to be to be farthest from the center who vote in the primaries, and these are the ones who don't want a normal center right representative. If Democrats switched parties and voted in the primaries they might be able to counter the usual extreme primary voters so a center right Republican could win.
- afterburner 8mo agoDon't let the people in your life casually get away with promoting fascism. Punish them socially.
- rpiguy 8mo ago[flagged]
- ben_w 8mo agoThey didn't say "think differently", they said "promoting fascism". If you look at J6 attempted self-coup where people were chanting death threats agaisnt the vice president and had a hangman's noose ready and pipe bombs were found and say "that was a peaceful protest", while also looking at the woman who was shot dead through the side window of her car while departing from a group of ICE officers and call that "self defence againsy attempted vehicular manslaughter", you may have a problem. If your reaction to "Punish them socially" is to claim "That’s the most facist thing I’ve ever heard." of the person who essentially just said "stop talking to these people, stop inviting them to parties and stuff", when your fellow citizens are dying at the hands of federal officers who are being given defacto immunity, you may have a problem. The current administration already punishes people for thinking differently with a lot worse than not inviting them to dinner; is the kind of regime that creates refugees and asylum seekers out of its own citizens, who flee from it.
- jimmydddd 8mo agoThe problem is that after years of people crying "facism" for mean tweets, lowering coprorate taxes and eforcing a national border, the term has lost any meaning. Maybe we need a new term?
- croon 8mo agoThe people crying fascism years ago were right, and now it's here. It hasn't lost meaning, too many people just liked the fascism.
- 8mo ago
- kcplate 8mo agoStart holding the opposing party responsible to run good candidates for office and adopt a platform that can appeal to independents. The knee jerk reaction is to run your party’s candidates and platform to the opposite extreme. Instead you should move towards the center. I really hope the democrats realize this (some do and are speaking out) soon.
- lifetimerubyist 8mo agoCanadian Prime Minister recently said that he stands by Canada’s NATO Article 2 and 5 obligations with our Eureopean allies. A subtle signal that war with United States is a possibility. Trump will use this as a pretext to not only take Greenland but to invade Canada as well. He has gone utterly mad. Congress needs to act. Yesterday.
- cdrnsf 8mo agoThe GOP controls congress and will do nothing. They've already caved and prevented any effort at restraint with respect to the Venezuela debacle.
- bediger4000 8mo agoHow would a standard invasion work? The news about DoD preparing invasion plans for Greenland have an invasion done by Special Operations, not the infantry, armor and air. Special operations probably wouldn't work for the population of Canada. After a short time, and some casualties, I think the US military would have real problems internally, not counting that popular support would disappear.
- orwin 8mo agoWhat are the US ground capabilities in extreme weather? Because from where I stand, I'm under the impression a Greenland invasion is off limit 8 months out of 12, and realistically the window is quite short, no? Also if any french military asset is present when the US attack, we will see how determined the french military is following it's own doctrine (which dictates a 'warning shot' 24 hours before sending the tactical nukes).
- Flundstrom2 8mo agoFor Canada and the Nordic countries, the weather on Greenland is business as usual, for all branches of the military. My guess is as yours - the US military's focus on middle east and east Asia is of great disadvantage for them. Do they even get below -20 C for any longer periods at any base located on US mainland? Alaska, and some regions close to Canada, perhaps, leaving them with only some 10.000 personnel having anything near arctic experience, majority of which are based at the bases, not trained for front-action in artic climate. For some real-life insides: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Msfrit12u0M&lc=UgwDlvf-UEzzhBzZJq94AaABAg&si=ra0hWGe_wpXR83Sq https://youtube.com/watch?v=Msfrit12u0M&lc=UgwDlvf-UEzzhBzZJ... https://youtu.be/DygiGQPGDPY?si=qxE5-7X8PC2eIeZS https://youtu.be/DygiGQPGDPY?si=qxE5-7X8PC2eIeZS https://youtu.be/3pwcZx1_KTA?si=d92vf4kqdDow0a-m https://youtu.be/3pwcZx1_KTA?si=d92vf4kqdDow0a-m
- OrvalWintermute 8mo ago[flagged]
- kermitdekikker 8mo agoIf the US feels practices are unfair they can go to the Dispute Settlement Body of the World Trade Organisation, or they could do whatever this madness is
- bitshiftfaced 8mo agoAnd you could say the same about the tariffs mentioned in the article.
- number6 8mo agoDid any of the taxes came to fruition? Weren't they cancelled by the US high courts?
- surgical_fire 8mo agoApplying extra tariffs on the US is still the correct path forward.
- Flundstrom2 8mo agoFact: European VAT (20-25% depending on country) is same for all companies; domestic, EU, US and Asians alike, added to end customers. It's not EU's fault US manufacturers can't keep manufacturing costs down. Neither is it EU's fault Trump believes slapping tariffs hurting US consumers will improve US standing in the world.
- bitshiftfaced 8mo agoThe imbalance comes from how VAT and US taxes work differently. A European car comes to the show floor free of VAT. A US car likely has sales tax still embedded into the costs, and tariffs get multiplied on top of it. I'm not saying that it's anyone's "fault", but it is an advantage for countries that have VAT.
- rpiguy 8mo ago[flagged]
- Simulacra 8mo agoI am .... optimistic that something can be arranged. I believe that Greenland is extremely important to arctic security, and America is the best country to defend that zone. At the same time I do not support the aggressive tactics by this administration. Since this was first proposed I still hold the position that it is up to the people of Greenland - not Denmark - to decide their path. I hope they will hold a referendum.
- water-data-dude 8mo agoThe people of Greenland overwhelmingly don't want this to happen: https://www.reuters.com/world/poll-shows-85-greenlanders-do-not-want-be-part-us-2025-01-29/ https://www.reuters.com/world/poll-shows-85-greenlanders-do-...
- orwin 8mo agoThe US has less arctic capability than just the Nordics, not including the Baltic States, Germany, France, Italy and the UK who also all have arctic specialists. How is the US the best country to defend that zone? Less usable equipment, less personnel, less spec ops? Clearly not the planes, f35 can't operate 8 out of 12 months in arctic conditions, unlike the grippen (at least they won overheat). The only part where you need the US is the Navy, because it allows you to project your power, but how does it help against an invasion, where the logistics are on your side anyway? That's pure cope.
- throwaway89201 8mo agoI don't particularly care for your explanation, but if you do want to post these kind of comments at least explain yourself a bit so potentially a curious conversation can follow. Not doing so is arguably against this site's guidelines.
- rpiguy 8mo ago
- Simulacra 8mo agoThat's as diplomatic as it gets
- Chance-Device 8mo agoI’ll put myself in the minority here by saying that I think Trump is probably right. Greenland can’t be credibly defended by Denmark, the EU or even NATO. Article 5 is an untested foundation myth. Greenland is far away. Political will matters. We might be heading towards an independent Greenland if we continue following the status quo, which would be influenced strongly by adversaries and would be a US security nightmare. I’d say that I prefer him to go about it a different way, except that I can’t see what that different way looks like when you want territory from another country that doesn’t want to give it to you. And I say this as a European. Europe is not credible from a defense perspective and lacks the will to do very much of anything quickly or effectively. The best you can expect is a series of talking shops and some policy documents to be drawn up while the ice continues to melt.
- Incipient 8mo agoIf trump is actually deranged enough to use military force against Greenland we'll see how capable the EU is of defending it - and I suspect they'll put on a good show. What the EU wouldn't be able to handle, I suspect, is would be a full ground invasion by China, not that China would/needs to do that. If the US was genuinely concerned about the security of Greenland they should have discussed this with the EU and encouraged them to reinforce the island, and/or offered a joint base.
- optionalsquid 8mo ago> If the US was genuinely concerned about the security of Greenland they should have discussed this with the EU and encouraged them to reinforce the island, and/or offered a joint base. This is where it gets stupid... well, stupider. The US already has a base on Greenland, namely the Pituffik Space Base / Thule Air Base [1]. The US used to have a larger military presence in Greenland, including other bases, but choose to downscale their presence following the end of the cold war [2]. This presence was predicated on the 1951 Defense of Greenland agreement between Denmark (and later the autonomous government of Greenland) and the US, which allowed the US great freedom in establishing their military presence in Greenland [3]. If Trump had just wanted a stronger military presence in Greenland, then all he would have had to do was ask, and Denmark and Greenland would most likely have agreed. Denmark, in particular, has done its best to align itself with the US, and Greenland, prior to Trump, was also interested in a closer relationship with the US as part of their move towards greater independence from Denmark. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pituffik_Space_Base https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pituffik_Space_Base [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland#United_States_and_the_Cold_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland#United_States_and_th... [3] https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/den001.asp https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/den001.asp
- windowpains 8mo agoThe best thing these countries could do would be to increase military spending to protect against Trump (and actual enemies like Putin whom they’ve enabled by their idiotic energy deals and “not my problem” approach to defense spending). I doubt they will, so US will get Greenland ceteris paribus.
- Aqua0 8mo agoThe importance of military development in sovereign states with reference to China.