J.D. Vance lashes out at Denmark: 'Not a good ally'

[hanrahan@slrpnk.net]

look down on bigotry.

Wot ? They're even more antiimmigrant and anti-muslim then the US. Look a ltttle deeper. They appear unified becase its basically the KKK, all agreeing on the same thing.

[hendrik@palaver.p3x.de]

I was more referring to religion, discrimination, being open toward sexuality, reproductive rights, gender equality... But yeah, you're right. Immigration is a bit of a strange one. I forgot about that. And I lack the background knowledge to understand what's going on with that.

[clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com]

"There are probably 330,000,000 people living in The United States who are not actually happy with the American government,” J.D. Vance fails to admit.

[corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca]

Sit down, Polievre.

[x00z@lemmy.world]

God, these fucking American politicians are the definition of vomit.

Fuckoff Vance.

[bitchkat@lemmy.world]

So, just because some residents aren't happy with Denmark, that means they would be happy with the USA? Lol.

[theacharnian@lemmy.ca]

Bro, in the US-Denmark relationship, you're saying WITH A STRAIGHT FACE that DENMARK is the problematic one? Bro.

[dancingbear@midwest.social]

Day one: Greenland loses universal healthcare and their entire social safety net.

You would have to be dumber than a republican to be a Greenlander who supports United States taking over.

[ghostwurm@lemmy.ca]

Annexing land for mineral interests, claimed as a security concern... I guess Putin is so far up Trump's ass we can hear him speaking now.

[nigelfrobisher@aussie.zone]

What does the bit about the sea lanes even mean? What does he think the Danish are supposed to be doing?

[evrala@lemmy.world]

As global warming increases the waters around Greenland will become more important strategically.

[drigo@sopuli.xyz]

I don't know what this other guy is talking about. Yeah Denmark have its problems like any other country. But straight up saying it's the kkk is just plain wrong.

[evilcartyen@feddit.dk]

They're not even profitable currently, given the arctic conditions. Greenland has been begging for outside investment for a decade, but it's just not viable.

Ironically, the Danish state might have wanted to invest, but are bound by a clause in out cooperation agreement (Selvstyreloven) which forbids Denmark from investing more in Greenland than they did when the agreement was signed in 2009. This clause was insisted on by the Greenlandic parliament, as they wanted to bind themselves to move more towards independence than cooperation with Denmark, but it's been a real problem when it comes to developing Greenland.

Like, the trouble Denmark had to go to in order to build an more modern airport on Greenland....

If we come away from this with our relationship intact (Greenland & Denmark), the Selvstyrelov needs to be renegotiated to allow more Danish investment into Greenlandic infrastructure and business.

[evotech@lemmy.world]

And all 55.000 are sent to the mines

[zip2@feddit.uk]

What happens if a NATO member invades another NATO members territory?

[kairubyte@lemmy.dbzer0.com]

Technically “an attack on one is an attack on all” would apply still, since the us would be attacking. Though I doubt the actual agreements are written so simply.

[obviouslynotbanana@lemmy.world]

I think the closest thing to an example we have is the direct conflict between Turkey and Greece, though that occured over Cyprus which isn't NATO territory.

[freeman@sh.itjust.works]

Violate UNCLOS obviously.

[booganiganie@lemmy.world]

Sorry who is this person?

[wrenfeathers@lemmy.world]

A weasel that likes hiding in couches.