Going after Greenland

  • Thread starter Thread starter dukeman92
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 476
  • Views: 17K
  • Politics 
p5mmr9 said:
No one is claiming Greenland is not of strategic importance to the United States.
Click to expand...
Right. Greenland is strategically important to the US. Which does not mean we have to literally own it. We are close allies with the country that does control it. We have wide access to the country for own own use. It's a great situation, except for the part where our leaders are needlessly and intentionally destroying the alliance.
 
Enigma94 said:
The logic here is crazy. We don't want to become Russia and have to rely on the use of our military to get what we want, so we should be open to using our military preemptively to get what we want. So in order to avoid becoming like Russia, we should act like Russia.
Click to expand...
Yeah - I was working on trying to figure out that pretzel of a claim, but couldn't figure out how to word the response. You nailed it.
 
Paine said:
I think that Calla’s argument here isn’t really about Trump’s tone. Strip that away and the claim is pretty straightforward: if Greenland is vital to U.S. national security, then the U.S. should have it, one way or another.

I don’t accept that premise. No country gets to decide that another people’s land is too strategically important for them to control themselves. Once you grant that, the logic shifts from security to entitlement. If that logic applies to us, it applies to everyone else too, which most people only realize once it’s flipped around.

Pointing to China or Russia in the Arctic doesn’t resolve that. Rival presence ≠ imminent threat. Just because there is competition, that doesn’t justify imperial possession. Redefining “national security” to mean exclusive control, or preventing others from having influence anywhere we care about, turns it into a blank check. We’ve seen that movie before.

Moreover, the term “national security” has really just become a catch-all that no longer explains much. It’s been invoked for decades to justify coups, occupations, sanctions, and proxy wars. None of that has made Americans meaningfully safer. What it has reliably produced is instability abroad and blowback at home.

Greenland being strategically useful doesn’t mean the U.S. is entitled to it. National security can’t function as a permission slip to override sovereignty.
Click to expand...
Bingo. This is the exact point I've been making to calla in the Venezuela thread that he refuses to acknowledge.
 
Callatoroy said:
At some point, if you aren't willing to do what's necessary to protect your economic power, you do become like russia. It's not what I'm advocating, but some have said might never equals right.
Click to expand...
Here are some things we could do to protect our economic power that have been proven to work for damn near a(n American) century:

1) Encourage/promote global free trade with minimal barriers/tariffs.
2) Invest in and encourage higher education, as a huge (and growing) % of our wealth is derived from the 'knowledge economy'.
3) Enforce international law so that 'might makes right' doesn't become the de facto rule and balkanizes the world.
4) Reduce corruption and the influence the government has over picking winners and losers in the economy.

Unfortunately, the fucktard-in-chief has decided to ignore all these successful strategies because he is a shit businessman and economic thinker and prefers theft, bribery and extortion as the key tenets of building wealth. Thus, we are left with imperialistic stealing, because it's all his lizard brain is capable of understanding.

Fuck him, his sycophantic host and all those that made this shitshow of a regime feasible.
 
ChileG said:
Pretty telling which threads the MAGAs and MAGA apologists flock to and which ones they collectively avoid like the plague.
Click to expand...
All you want to do is argue. I have no desire to engage anyone on this board about any issue that is going to just turn into insults, attacks, and pissing contests driven by the collective trump hatred. If you want to ask my opinion on a topic then ask. I have never been hesitant about providing that. Your comment above isn't intended to engage anyone other than as an insult. Don't know about any other conservative poster on here and what threads they participate in or comment on but in my opinion there aren't many threads / topics where the actual issue is discussed. To consumed with wanting to insult and express your trump obsession.

The issue of Greenland interested me from the perspective of national security and how others with different views that I don't encounter on a daily basis felt about it. that is what I asked about. I'm trying to avoid talking about trump as much as I can to avoid the inevitable. There are more aspects to this topic and the Ven. topic than trump.
 
While we're at it, can we go after France too? Not much oil or natural resources, but it has some nice museums and restaurants.
 
Bro, you literally just said that there is value in becoming Russia.
Callatoroy said:
All you want to do is argue. I have no desire to engage anyone on this board about any issue that is going to just turn into insults, attacks, and pissing contests driven by the collective trump hatred. If you want to ask my opinion on a topic then ask. I have never been hesitant about providing that. Your comment above isn't intended to engage anyone other than as an insult. Don't know about any other conservative poster on here and what threads they participate in or comment on but in my opinion there aren't many threads / topics where the actual issue is discussed. To consumed with wanting to insult and express your trump obsession.

The issue of Greenland interested me from the perspective of national security and how others with different views that I don't encounter on a daily basis felt about it. that is what I asked about. I'm trying to avoid talking about trump as much as I can to avoid the inevitable. There are more aspects to this topic and the Ven. topic than trump.
Click to expand...
Bro. You literally just said that there is value in becoming Russia. C'mon.
 
Callatoroy said:
All you want to do is argue. I have no desire to engage anyone on this board about any issue that is going to just turn into insults, attacks, and pissing contests driven by the collective trump hatred. If you want to ask my opinion on a topic then ask. I have never been hesitant about providing that. Your comment above isn't intended to engage anyone other than as an insult. Don't know about any other conservative poster on here and what threads they participate in or comment on but in my opinion there aren't many threads / topics where the actual issue is discussed. To consumed with wanting to insult and express your trump obsession.

The issue of Greenland interested me from the perspective of national security and how others with different views that I don't encounter on a daily basis felt about it. that is what I asked about. I'm trying to avoid talking about trump as much as I can to avoid the inevitable. There are more aspects to this topic and the Ven. topic than trump.
Click to expand...
Yes, I do intend to insult MAGA and MAGA apologists. They deserve it.
And you do, too, by the way. If my posts to you are intended to insult, you can just look back to the time when I used to try to engage you thoughtfully and you responded with insults. So, that is what you get from me now.
 
Enigma94 said:
There is no scenario where the US would have to take Greenland by force or face economic collapse. That is a completely false dichotomy.
Click to expand...
I agree. My comment wasn't limited to Greenland. It was philosophical.
sringwal said:
We had this conversation regarding Venezuela. Whether or not you feel like it was a "war," (I agree that it probably was not), or an attack (I believe it was), or an invasion, or something more benign, there is no doubt that American military force was used on Venezuela. I still doubt that we would use force with regards to Greenland, but the choices made in Venezuela, followed immediately by Trump pivoting to Greenland, is a cause for concern.
Click to expand...
I think it was calculated to cause concern to incentivize Greenland / Denmark to be more open to some deal. I don't see any situation where we would use force (I admit that may be naive). I also see it as completely unnecessary and counterproductive. I think Greenland has always been open to working together beyond what they currently do. All we have done now is make that harder.
 
ChileG said:
Yes, I do intend to insult MAGA and MAGA apologists. They deserve it.
And you do, too, by the way. If my posts to you are intended to insult, you can just look back to the time when I used to try to engage you thoughtfully and you responded with insults. So, that is what you get from me now.
Click to expand...
You are correct. I did. I also apologized on this board for that behavior and for my role in the incivility. Since that time I have been completely nonconfrontational in the small amount of time I spend on here. So you can reply with insults to any comment I make but I won't be responding to them.
 
Callatoroy said:
You are correct. I did. I also apologized on this board for that behavior and for my role in the incivility. Since that time I have been completely nonconfrontational in the small amount of time I spend on here. So you can reply with insults to any comment I make but I won't be responding to them.
Click to expand...
Awesome. But me making an obvious observation isn’t an insult.
 
rodoheel said:
Right. Greenland is strategically important to the US. Which does not mean we have to literally own it. We are close allies with the country that does control it. We have wide access to the country for own own use. It's a great situation, except for the part where our leaders are needlessly and intentionally destroying the alliance.
Click to expand...
On the other hand, our close alliances are becoming moot as our allies are no longer trusting us enough to share intelligence and we are doing other things to piss them off and destroy our alliances.
 
sringwal said:
Yeah - I was working on trying to figure out that pretzel of a claim, but couldn't figure out how to word the response. You nailed it.
Click to expand...
If you believe our superpower status is driven by both economic strength and military strength. Then protecting the long term health of the economic strength is equally as important as protecting the military strength. If you allow your enemies to act in a manner that strengthens them in a manner that creates dependency or leverage you slowly lose your economic advantage and rely solely on your military strength for security. Russia's security lies solely in their military strength. There is little geopolitical influence russia's economy creates. Covid should have been a wake up call given the amount of goods we are dependent on China providing. It was to a degree, but not at the level it needed to be imo. I'm not implying any of that is a justification for attacking greenland, but it sure is justification for keeping china / russia out of latin america and greenland.
 
S

Politics Thread 'Rare Earth elements'

There are a lot of misconceptions about the rare earth elements we supposedly need so badly. Let's go through the science:

1. Rare earth elements are not actually rare. There's plenty of them, and what's more, they are everywhere. I mean, not every acre of rock, but there are plenty of rare earth deposits all over the globe. Greenland's rare earth elements are small compared to the global supply.

2. The problem with rare earths is separating them from other elements in the rock. That's a refining issue, not a mining issue. And no matter where the stuff is located, the refining...
  • Like

Some good information here for those interested.
 
Callatoroy said:
If you believe our superpower status is driven by both economic strength and military strength. Then protecting the long term health of the economic strength is equally as important as protecting the military strength. If you allow your enemies to act in a manner that strengthens them in a manner that creates dependency or leverage you slowly lose your economic advantage and rely solely on your military strength for security. Russia's security lies solely in their military strength. There is little geopolitical influence russia's economy creates. Covid should have been a wake up call given the amount of goods we are dependent on China providing. It was to a degree, but not at the level it needed to be imo. I'm not implying any of that is a justification for attacking greenland, but it sure is justification for keeping china / russia out of latin america and greenland.
Click to expand...
Having productive conversations with you is difficult when you say shit like we need to keep China and Russia out of Greenland. They aren't in Greenland and have no ability to go into Greenland. They were active in Venezuela, but all they have is oil and do you really think China and/or Russia will have problems procuring oil without Venezuela? This whole idea that we need to bully our neighbors because we are being threatened by China and Russia is straight out of the Putin playbook in Ukraine. It's all bullshit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top