Why is Greenland Even a topic?

[ll74]

We have full benefits of minerals and military positioning already why would we pay or fight for something that we already have access to?

 

[Cat]

Well, things that no one got access to, because the Greenlanders have made it illegal:

No oil drillings.

No uranium mining, not even as a side product.

And lots and lots of laws that protects their nature, making a lot of traditional industry difficult.

The sailing routes to Asia, as the ice is melting it is becoming easier to transport goods to Asia (the sail routes may become up to 30% shorter)
- it got the potential to be a new Panama canal. "Owning" that could make someone rich.

(Greenland does not believe in owning that or exploiting others)

Also:
The "honour" of being the one that expands ones country.

Seen from a businessman's perspective, Greenland is a golden goose, and not a country to be respected.

So, the US wants to offer Greenland a deal, better than the one they have with Denmark.. (?)

Being a part of Rigsfællesskabet gives Greenland:

Free education.
Free healthcare.
Pension.
SU (the payment you receive when you study! Yes, we are paid to study!)

We pay for the police force, military, the law people... And so on.

Greenland got their own passport, their language is an official language in our Kingdom, they can vote down here in Denmark when they live or study here - they are fully and completely members of Rigsfællesskabet.

And they make their own laws.

Denmark needs to follow their laws, no exceptions.

What they cannot do, not without having a Danish colleague with them, not without the Danish government and the Faroese government agrees:

Foreign policy that will affect Rigsfællesskabet, that is something that needs to be decided together with Denmark and the Faroe Islands.
Rigsfællesskabet needs to agree.

Which is why The US cannot have a meeting with Greenland without Denmark.

Can we do it better?

Of course!!! We are not a perfect partner, we have been colonising them, we have been unfair.
I am not going to pretend the bad things never happened.

I only hope that we are able to move forward together.

 

[ll74]

Well, things that no one got access to, because the Greenlanders have made it illegal:

No oil drillings.

No uranium mining, not even as a side product.

And lots and lots of laws that protects their nature, making a lot of traditional industry difficult.

The sailing routes to Asia, as the ice is melting it is becoming easier to transport goods to Asia (the sail routes may become up to 30% shorter)
- it got the potential to be a new Panama canal. "Owning" that could make someone rich.

(Greenland does not believe in owning that or exploiting others)

Also:
The "honour" of being the one that expands ones country.

Seen from a businessman's perspective, Greenland is a golden goose, and not a country to be respected.

So, the US wants to offer Greenland a deal, better than the one they have with Denmark.. (?)

Being a part of Rigsfællesskabet gives Greenland:

Free education.
Free healthcare.
Pension.
SU (the payment you receive when you study! Yes, we are paid to study!)

We pay for the police force, military, the law people... And so on.

Greenland got their own passport, their language is an official language in our Kingdom, they can vote down here in Denmark when they live or study here - they are fully and completely members of Rigsfællesskabet.

And they make their own laws.

Denmark needs to follow their laws, no exceptions.

What they cannot do, not without having a Danish colleague with them, not without the Danish government and the Faroese government agrees:

Foreign policy that will affect Rigsfællesskabet, that is something that needs to be decided together with Denmark and the Faroe Islands.
Rigsfællesskabet needs to agree.

Which is why The US cannot have a meeting with Greenland without Denmark.

Can we do it better?

Of course!!! We are not a perfect partner, we have been colonising them, we have been unfair.
I am not going to pretend the bad things never happened.

I only hope that we are able to move forward together.

Thank you for this. You've broken down the important things for me to understand very well. In this forum, providing information without being snide is rare and I really love this

I still wonder though why the US needs to take such a harsh stance without negotiating in good faith, which seems like we don't want to do.

 

[deft]

I still wonder though why the US needs to take such a harsh stance without negotiating in good faith, which seems like we don't want to do.

"He", not "we".

 

[ll74]

"He", not "we".

He is we.

 

[DeluxAuto]

"He", not "we".

Yep. "This is what I voted for!" They got swindled again.

 

[DeluxAuto]

He is we.

Nope. It's all on him.

 

[ll74]

Interesting note - the US would assume half a trillion dollars of debt by assuming ownership of Greenland.

 

[ll74]

Nope. It's all on him.

Our government is led by the President.

You not wanting him to be President is irrelevant

 

[deft]

Interesting note - the US would assume half a trillion dollars of debt by assuming ownership of Greenland.

"Assuming ownership of Greenland"

 

[saintcero]

There was something I was supposed to remember. “Ep” something. Epsom? No. Epicac? That not it either. It’s right on the tip of my tongue. So frustrating.

 

[DeluxAuto]

Our government is led by the President.

You not wanting him to be President is irrelevant

You said we want and that's not the case. It's that simple. Don't try to pretzel logic it.

 

[ll74]

"Assuming ownership of Greenland"

Probably elaborate on your comment.

 

[ll74]

There was something I was supposed to remember. “Ep” something. Epsom? No. Epicac? That not it either. It’s right on the tip of my tongue. So frustrating.

Wrong thread

 

[deft]

Probably elaborate on your comment.

Pretty sure it speaks for itself, dude.

 

[ll74]

Pretty sure it speaks for itself, dude.

It doesn't.
So you're probably incorrect.

Add more or stfu

 

[Cogan]

Thank you for this. You've broken down the important things for me to understand very well. In this forum, providing information without being snide is rare and I really love this

I still wonder though why the US needs to take such a harsh stance without negotiating in good faith, which seems like we don't want to do.

Your guess is as good as mine. Sometimes I wonder if it’s just that he wants the land and don’t want to share the profit. Sometimes when he use derogatory expressions I just think he is a bad looser.

Bud he sure is dangerous and has scared us all on the nordic side.

 

[ll74]

Your guess is as good as mine. Sometimes I wonder if it’s just that he wants the land and don’t want to share the profit. Sometimes when he use derogatory expressions I just think he is a bad looser.

Bud he sure is dangerous and has scared us all on the nordic side.

I worry about NATO.

 

[Cat]

Thank you for this. You've broken down the important things for me to understand very well. In this forum, providing information without being snide is rare and I really love this

I still wonder though why the US needs to take such a harsh stance without negotiating in good faith, which seems like we don't want to do.

Strategy.

Rigsfællesskabet used to be:
Denmark
The Faroe Islands
Greenland
And Iceland.

But Iceland decided for independence 1944.
During the WW2 it became crucial to have access to Rigsfællesskabet.
The airplanes could not fly very far back then.. So they needed to land.
Where did they land?

Greenland
Iceland
And the Faroe Islands.

Also, knowing about the weather on Greenland, you will be able to know about the weather in Europe.
- That was the most important factor during D-day.

There are a lot of reasons why Greenland is interesting.

But, I do get it though, the strategy of the American government:

This is not the first time, nor the last time that an American president tries to "get Greenland".
- What have been stopping the annexation so far, has been the impossible tight bonds in Rigsfællesskabet.

It is easy to see us as a bunch of small counties.

But we are rather tightly knitted.

So right now, it seems that the strategy is:
Divide and conquer.

Trying the best to sow strife and unhappiness between the countries of Rigsfællesskabet, and thereby break us apart.

Because honestly, I do not think that the US government is interested in offering better terms that those Greenland already have.
The US would like to be paid for their "inconvenience", and Greenland should pay for themselves.. maybe not in taxes, but oil.. uranium.. toll on the new sailing route.. the possibilities are many.

 

[Cat]

I worry about NATO.

If The US succeeds in taking Greenland.
(No matter what reason)

What should stop Putin from expanding?
For national security.

There are quite a few Russians living in the Baltic countries.
Putin could easily claim that he needs to protect them.
It is national security after all.

And with what right would NATO be able to stop him?

If the US takes Greenland.
Then NATO will be obsolete.

 

[saintcero]

Wrong thread

Greenland is a forced topic to be a distraction

 

[Cat]

Also.. if The US takes Greenland, then Russia might feel even more isolated and trapped.

The US would de facto control the sea routes in the Arctic region.

Then Russia will be even more dependent on sailing through the Baltic sea.

Oooooooh... There is a country there...

 

[Buffalogurl]

We have full benefits of minerals and military positioning already why would we pay or fight for something that we already have access to?

Greenland is a complex location..... mainly this subject is of strategic importance...early warning missile systems need that location due to the development of hypersonic Missiles, Chinese, Russian trade routes.....

 

[Wilson23]

We have full benefits of minerals and military positioning already why would we pay or fight for something that we already have access to?

Because Trump wants to be first president since 1898 to expand the American territory.

That's pretty much it.

 

[Cat]

Interesting note - the US would assume half a trillion dollars of debt by assuming ownership of Greenland.

Oh yeah.. but not if you gained control over the trade routes.
Not if you mined for uranium.
Not if you got your fingers in the oil..

Or, wait: the US would still be in debt.

I would actually assume that it is only the friends of the president, who will gain the important deals, as private businessmen.

And not the US as a country.

Some might get really, really rich.
The country might have to pay.

I am not an oracle, but those are some of the likely scenarios I can come up with.

/ Anything military related - since Denmark was occupied during the WW2, we may have been cheated into giving the US a forever carte blanche right to placing their military in Greenland.

(Just no nuclear weapons!!)