• The Danish minister of foreign affairs thought it was really important that Trump said in his idiotic speech that he recognised the self-determination of the Greenlanders: ‘(Trump) said (they) respect the right to Greenlandic self-determination, and that I think was the most important part of that speech, …’

    Like anything that Trump says matters (besides, if it did matter, being the bare minimum anyway).

    The butt-licking is quite offensive.

    • naeap ( naeap@sopuli.xyz ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 years ago

      I’m not sure, that this is buttlucking, but much more of showing publicly what the people actually want, because Trump would describe his possible invasion as liberation of those poor people - put maybe he still will do that, as there are seemingly 6% idiots

  • Amanduh ( Amanduh@lemm.ee ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 years ago

    Someone i know is adamant that only an official referendum can show that greenland doesn’t want to join the us because all media is fake news.

    • NeuronautML ( NeuronautML@lemmy.ml ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Only with guerrilla tactics against the US army, like Vietnam or the Taliban. They would still be occupied. No army in the world can stop a US offensive. They invested a lot in order to make it so. Fighting the US on a conventional war style is suicide.

      The real pain to the US would come in the form of trade sanctions and loss of military allies in the EU and elsewhere in the democratic world. It would take a few years, because the EU and the US are pretty interconnected. Nato would probably be dead in the water.

      After that it’s speculation that US enemies would seize the opportunity of their isolation. The lack of trade would severely impact revenues and Americans would be in for the wildest depression of US history, with a likely forecast of IRA style civil war between Democrats and Republicans. If Greenlanders kept at it, they would eventually take the region back.

      The US isn’t a dictatorship, it’s a democracy. Democracies don’t usually fare well on offensive land grab wars for very long. So the US would either let go of Greenland with a new, sane president or become a dictatorship eventually. Lots of ifs in this scenario but taking Greenland would cause a lot of hurt for the US undoubtedly.

    • Tiptopit ( Tiptopit@feddit.org ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      They are part of Denmark and they could think about joining the EU.

      I’m not quite sure if they are as a part of Denmark protected by the EU defense clause, but NATO article 5 should work for them.

        • Tiptopit ( Tiptopit@feddit.org ) 
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Yes and per article 5 the US would have to act as if they attacked themselves. Since this is quite silly, an attack of the US against Greenland would most probably either lead to the US having to leave NATO (I don’t know, if there is a way to expel a country from NATO) or NATO dissolving completely.

          • ☂️- ( umbrella@lemmy.ml ) 
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            I don’t think they plan on following the rules for this one though. Dissolving NATO aligns with Trumps interests so I can see that happening.

            Although they would probably find a diplomatic way of taking control of their minerals, similar to what they just did in Panama.