| War with The USA. 02:35 - Jan 5 with 2881 views | Mercian |
It is unlikely to happen but is is possible. Trump is stepping up his veiled threats against Greenland for the sake of "Security and Freedom.". To put this into a historical context Russia took Crimea for the same reason and even more seriously Germany took The Sudetenland then part of Czechoslovakia for "Security and Freedom." and that ultimately cost the lives of 70 million people. Greenland is not part of The EU but it is part of NATO and if The USA attempts to take it against the will of Greenland and Denmark then Article 4 will be triggered and we be obliged to defend it. All for "Freedom."
There are many words that I would use to describe Trump that would get me banned from this forum so I will bite my tongue and just say that he is bad man. |  | | |  |
| War with The USA. on 09:17 - Jan 5 with 2418 views | HairBearBunch |
Oh well, at least they won't have far to fly to bomb us.
Perhaps best the home guard gets up Lakenheath viewing area with shotguns - there's decent burger bar there while they're waiting.... |  | | |
| War with The USA. on 10:56 - Jan 5 with 2146 views | TractorWood |
The Danes have massively under invested in Greenland for years. Trump's thinly veiled threats have been trying to get the Danes to step up their game to protect US infrastructure already there at a strategically important site for the US. The infrastructure there is between Nato allies to protect against Russian and China.
Denmark have now dropped a few billion Krone.
I'm not defending Trump's brinksmanship or diplomacy. Equally, given the tiny bit.
of context on this above, I'm not sure your other comparisons are appropriate. [Post edited 5 Jan 10:56]
|  |
| |
| War with The USA. on 11:37 - Jan 5 with 1996 views | redrickstuhaart |
| War with The USA. on 10:56 - Jan 5 by TractorWood |
The Danes have massively under invested in Greenland for years. Trump's thinly veiled threats have been trying to get the Danes to step up their game to protect US infrastructure already there at a strategically important site for the US. The infrastructure there is between Nato allies to protect against Russian and China.
Denmark have now dropped a few billion Krone.
I'm not defending Trump's brinksmanship or diplomacy. Equally, given the tiny bit.
of context on this above, I'm not sure your other comparisons are appropriate. [Post edited 5 Jan 10:56]
|
The Danes' level of investment in Greenland is their business. No one elses.
Threatening an ally is absolutely disgraceful. |  | | |
| War with The USA. on 12:17 - Jan 5 with 1912 views | TractorWood |
| War with The USA. on 11:37 - Jan 5 by redrickstuhaart |
The Danes' level of investment in Greenland is their business. No one elses.
Threatening an ally is absolutely disgraceful. |
Sorry but legally you are wrong. There was a bilateral agreement from the 50's that gives the US exclusive jurisdiction on defense areas on Greenland.
It marks the mid point between Washington and Moscow on the shorter polar route.
Post ww2 it was recognised Denmark just would not be able to defend a frozen tundra 50 times larger than itself.
Hence the pressure, hence the investment etc. [Post edited 5 Jan 12:20]
| |
| |
| War with The USA. on 12:21 - Jan 5 with 1875 views | redrickstuhaart |
| War with The USA. on 12:17 - Jan 5 by TractorWood |
Sorry but legally you are wrong. There was a bilateral agreement from the 50's that gives the US exclusive jurisdiction on defense areas on Greenland.
It marks the mid point between Washington and Moscow on the shorter polar route.
Post ww2 it was recognised Denmark just would not be able to defend a frozen tundra 50 times larger than itself.
Hence the pressure, hence the investment etc. [Post edited 5 Jan 12:20]
|
Then you speak to them in a civilised way. Not tweet a threat before even entering government.
The treaty, as I understand it, gave the US certain privileges within "the defence area" which they can action if they choose. Such areas to be agreed from time to time by the respective governments. | | | |
| War with The USA. on 12:31 - Jan 5 with 1786 views | TractorWood |
| War with The USA. on 12:21 - Jan 5 by redrickstuhaart |
Then you speak to them in a civilised way. Not tweet a threat before even entering government.
The treaty, as I understand it, gave the US certain privileges within "the defence area" which they can action if they choose. Such areas to be agreed from time to time by the respective governments. |
As above I wasn't advocating the diplomacy.
Just clarifying the context and history for those who perhaps don't appreciate the nuance.
Ie it is the US' business and war is not likely. [Post edited 5 Jan 12:32]
| |
| |
| War with The USA. on 12:33 - Jan 5 with 1772 views | redrickstuhaart |
| War with The USA. on 12:31 - Jan 5 by TractorWood |
As above I wasn't advocating the diplomacy.
Just clarifying the context and history for those who perhaps don't appreciate the nuance.
Ie it is the US' business and war is not likely. [Post edited 5 Jan 12:32]
|
Its not the US business. They can increase their spend within the defence area per the agreement.
Trump's comment was that ownership and control over Greenland was essential- essentially indicating he would make an offer they could not refuse. | | | |
| War with The USA. on 12:41 - Jan 5 with 1716 views | TractorWood |
| War with The USA. on 12:33 - Jan 5 by redrickstuhaart |
Its not the US business. They can increase their spend within the defence area per the agreement.
Trump's comment was that ownership and control over Greenland was essential- essentially indicating he would make an offer they could not refuse. |
The treaty gives far broader control of its defence. Namely due to Denmark's inability to defend Greenland (and itself) at the start of ww2.
The US have made numerous unsuccessful attempts to acquire Greenland, dating back to the 1860's. This really is nothing new in substance.
The only change is Trump's brazen tactics. Which I agree are pretty contemptuous and not the way to speak to a NATO ally. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| War with The USA. on 12:43 - Jan 5 with 1692 views | redrickstuhaart |
| War with The USA. on 12:41 - Jan 5 by TractorWood |
The treaty gives far broader control of its defence. Namely due to Denmark's inability to defend Greenland (and itself) at the start of ww2.
The US have made numerous unsuccessful attempts to acquire Greenland, dating back to the 1860's. This really is nothing new in substance.
The only change is Trump's brazen tactics. Which I agree are pretty contemptuous and not the way to speak to a NATO ally. |
More than tactics. The statement is different. It is no longer worded as an offer.
But the tactics are quite bad enough. | | | |
| War with The USA. on 12:46 - Jan 5 with 1662 views | leitrimblue |
I like to think Bruce Springsteen will sing the theme song.. |  | | |
| War with The USA. on 13:23 - Jan 5 with 1490 views | stonojnr |
| War with The USA. on 12:41 - Jan 5 by TractorWood |
The treaty gives far broader control of its defence. Namely due to Denmark's inability to defend Greenland (and itself) at the start of ww2.
The US have made numerous unsuccessful attempts to acquire Greenland, dating back to the 1860's. This really is nothing new in substance.
The only change is Trump's brazen tactics. Which I agree are pretty contemptuous and not the way to speak to a NATO ally. |
unfortunately its the only language some NATO allies post cold war understand thesedays, it might not be as diplomatic as some would like and other US presidents might have shied away from tackling it as head on as Trump has.
but thats what has got us into this situation in the first place where only 1/3rd of of the alliance members have been spending their agreed budgets on their defence.
for sure its only a voluntary guideline, but people cant sit there and complain about increasing Russian or Chinese military threats to them, cut their defence spending and just hope the Americans will bail them out because NATO. | | | |
| War with The USA. on 13:24 - Jan 5 with 1480 views | redrickstuhaart |
| War with The USA. on 13:23 - Jan 5 by stonojnr |
unfortunately its the only language some NATO allies post cold war understand thesedays, it might not be as diplomatic as some would like and other US presidents might have shied away from tackling it as head on as Trump has.
but thats what has got us into this situation in the first place where only 1/3rd of of the alliance members have been spending their agreed budgets on their defence.
for sure its only a voluntary guideline, but people cant sit there and complain about increasing Russian or Chinese military threats to them, cut their defence spending and just hope the Americans will bail them out because NATO. |
It is dangerous and utterly divisive. It is Putinesque. | | | |
| War with The USA. on 13:37 - Jan 5 with 1368 views | Oldsmoker |
Bad man or not - he's not the President - yet.
When he becomes President his statements will carry the full weight of the US nation.
The US nation isn't just him but a myriad of organisations that can thwart him if he doesn't keep them onside and he knows that. If he continues to bully other nations then an arms length suspicion of America will take hold.
America will lose the respect of its allies.
In 2016 he made all sorts of promises and threats and very few came to fruition.
He won't play as much golf as Obama. 428 rounds in 4 years. Obama 306 in 8
He didn't lock Hilary Clinton up.
He didn't replace Obamacare.
He built hardly any border wall and Mexico didn't pay for it.
All those 2024 threats and promises were to get elected. Job done.
Trump will be on the golf course more than he's in the White house. |  |
| |
| War with The USA. on 13:39 - Jan 5 with 1343 views | Swansea_Blue |
| War with The USA. on 13:23 - Jan 5 by stonojnr |
unfortunately its the only language some NATO allies post cold war understand thesedays, it might not be as diplomatic as some would like and other US presidents might have shied away from tackling it as head on as Trump has.
but thats what has got us into this situation in the first place where only 1/3rd of of the alliance members have been spending their agreed budgets on their defence.
for sure its only a voluntary guideline, but people cant sit there and complain about increasing Russian or Chinese military threats to them, cut their defence spending and just hope the Americans will bail them out because NATO. |
I thought Denmark had been sorting out the new funding package before trump got involved? Which seems likely given what would be needed to line it up before making the announcement. They wouldn't sort that in a matter of hours. So I doubt the language had anything to do with it. His earlier pressure in his first term may have concentrated some minds though (along with Putin's actions). |  |
| |
| War with The USA. on 13:44 - Jan 5 with 1315 views | TractorWood |
| War with The USA. on 13:37 - Jan 5 by Oldsmoker |
Bad man or not - he's not the President - yet.
When he becomes President his statements will carry the full weight of the US nation.
The US nation isn't just him but a myriad of organisations that can thwart him if he doesn't keep them onside and he knows that. If he continues to bully other nations then an arms length suspicion of America will take hold.
America will lose the respect of its allies.
In 2016 he made all sorts of promises and threats and very few came to fruition.
He won't play as much golf as Obama. 428 rounds in 4 years. Obama 306 in 8
He didn't lock Hilary Clinton up.
He didn't replace Obamacare.
He built hardly any border wall and Mexico didn't pay for it.
All those 2024 threats and promises were to get elected. Job done.
Trump will be on the golf course more than he's in the White house. |
Agree. The loss of the previous election and ridiculous insurrection was a really good showing from the US systems of Government. Trump does now know he has to operate within the broad parameters of government or he'll be torn down by hundreds of people looking at his every move.
The Musk de facto/shadow role should be of major concern given his wealth and power via Twitter. This feels a tremendously negative change to the status quo.
For what it's worth Britain really should benefit from its comparably (US, China and Europe) stable political environment. We need to get some IPOs happening, stop flogging the family silver to foreign investor, improve public service outcomes and ensure there is some controls to ensure people benefit equitably. | |
| |
| War with The USA. on 16:28 - Jan 5 with 1213 views | Mercian |
| War with The USA. on 13:44 - Jan 5 by TractorWood |
Agree. The loss of the previous election and ridiculous insurrection was a really good showing from the US systems of Government. Trump does now know he has to operate within the broad parameters of government or he'll be torn down by hundreds of people looking at his every move.
The Musk de facto/shadow role should be of major concern given his wealth and power via Twitter. This feels a tremendously negative change to the status quo.
For what it's worth Britain really should benefit from its comparably (US, China and Europe) stable political environment. We need to get some IPOs happening, stop flogging the family silver to foreign investor, improve public service outcomes and ensure there is some controls to ensure people benefit equitably. |
What you say is true but and it's a big but, MAGA now controls The White House, both Houses of Congress and the ridiculously powerful Supreme Court which in some ways is the most powerful of the 4 bodies. They will give Trump just what he wants. If he approaches them to over-turn the 2/3 majority to scrap a Constitutional Amendment they will do all they can to overturn it. | | | |
| War with The USA. on 18:34 - Jan 5 with 1060 views | NeedhamChris |
| War with The USA. on 11:37 - Jan 5 by redrickstuhaart |
The Danes' level of investment in Greenland is their business. No one elses.
Threatening an ally is absolutely disgraceful. |
Tell us you don't understand modern day geopolitics without saying you don't understand geopolitics | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
