401–410 of 604 posts
If the EU is good at one thing, its definitely putting out statements.
This isn’t really about Greenland’s strategic value; it’s about the category error. You can trade goods, sign treaties, and negotiate basing rights. You can’t “buy” a people or their sovereignty especially when they don’t consent. That’s why Europe responds with process and principle: normalize coercion-as-bargaining among allies and you’re reviving a pre-1945 model of politics Europe built institutions to prevent. I…
[flagged]
> The decision on Greenland's independence is made by the Greenlandic people.
Technically, the Danish government has to OK the decision, but this is largely viewed as a formality by Danish politicians, should Greenland choose to move forward with independence.
This isn’t really about Greenland’s strategic value; it’s about the category error. You can trade goods, sign treaties, and negotiate basing rights. You can’t “buy” a people or their sovereignty especially when they don’t consent. That’s why Europe responds with process and principle: normalize coercion-as-bargaining among allies and you’re reviving a pre-1945 model of politics Europe built institutions to prevent. I…
> It’s also lose-lose for the US. Yes. Ian Bremmer keeps pointing out that if the "law of the jungle" becomes the norm for relations between countries, the USA will not benefit as much as autocracies like China and Russia. See https://www.youtube.com/shorts/TLhz6ZbrMuI for a more full-throated explanation from Ian.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what context? Personally? In rebuilding the Soviet Union? Or in the war?
Not the parent, but getting US to quit NATO won't help his European ambitions. Russia is weak now, and has solidified the European hostility for years to come.
UPD: If you don't believe me, look at the European right-wing leaders (including a sitting head of state, Meloni) currently banding up behind Orban, a widely known Putin's shill in Europe.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I fail to see what is damning here. What would you even hold a referendum on? Independence? Replacing the arrangement with Denmark with whatever unclear arrangement the US is proposing? If you trust independent polls, you can get a pretty clear picture of where Greenlanders stood as of Feb. 2025: [0] https://www.statista.com/chart/34174/greenlanders-who-would-... [1] https://www.veriangroup.com/news-and-insights/opin…
This isn’t really about Greenland’s strategic value; it’s about the category error. You can trade goods, sign treaties, and negotiate basing rights. You can’t “buy” a people or their sovereignty especially when they don’t consent. That’s why Europe responds with process and principle: normalize coercion-as-bargaining among allies and you’re reviving a pre-1945 model of politics Europe built institutions to prevent. I…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> an f35 takes them out from 300 miles away. Ah yes, and if I recall, that is how the US won in Vietnam ... oh wait. Your comment is a perfect example of the very problem I described.
Yes, that is exactly how the US "lost" in Vietnam: Not having air power take them out from 300 miles away. I put "lost" in scare quotes because that "loss" is debatable, but that's a debate for another time. The broader context was that the Indochina War was partially concurrent with, and the bulk of the combat only a little more than a decade after, Chinese intervention in the Korean War. The White House was simply…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
To people here just a week ago saying it was just insane joking and even MAGA didn't support it, something I pointed out didn't matter, we have moved from 'it's meme'ing' to 'here's why it's good' 'here's why it's needed' 'it's 4d chess' in less than a week. Please NEVER give an inch to this trash that will justify anything. Don't accept 'meme'ing' from an American President by saying 'it's Trump being Trump'. Push b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same, American. I don’t know why we got to be assholes. I prefer speaking softly and carrying a big stick.
Annexing territory was actually way more common back then. US bought the US Virgin Islands from Denmark at around that time.
I'm not opposed to changes in territory in principle... but there's no principles involved in the current US administration acting out like a fragile child.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US has some grace here as most of the negative feelings towards it dies with it's government. You're going to pick better next time, right?
Picking better next time won't be enough unless a lot of work is done to put in place safeguards to make it impossible for a future government to act the same way.