Trump administration using Fox News to spread Greenland annexation propaganda | Possibly getting MAGA public ready to approve of it
-
Armchair general indeed. I can 100% guarantee you that all other NATO members wouldn’t enter a war against the US, at least not with the current state of the European military. I’m not even convinced Denmark would, tbh.
Don’t take this as a defense of US fascist imperialism but Europe isn’t going to effectively suicide over Greenland. And you should actually read what article 5 says, because it’s not this automatic switch that’s flicked and everyone is suddenly at war. People are generally very misinformed about that. It says that if article 5 is invoked, all NATO members need to do what they deem necessary to help. This could of course mean entering the war or it could mean sending 500 first aid kits.
-
Canada is likely the distraction (for now). Greenland and Panama are likely serious, as these are US geostrategic greeds.
Canada is serious as well. But they know they’d have to fight a bloody war over it.
-
Not going to say Luigi should pay that fox cunt a visit, but the question has to be asked, what would the world look like if he did?
Just asking questions.
It's ok I'll say it: I wish every fucking fox propagandist would get executed. They're a cancer on society and there's only one way to deal with a malignant cancer. I'm so fucking sick of them.... Decades of their putridity have rotted the brains of at least 30% of the US population...
-
So Trump is openly threatening with WW3, because Denmark would certainly invoke article 5 if attacked. Must suck for the MAGA voters who thought Trump wouldn't start any wars...
I don’t think the situation is that clear. Entering a war against the US would mean destruction for Denmark (and any country that joins via Article 5). I’m not convinced they would do that.
The way things are currently moving, I think it will be more like the following: there’s probably going to be an independence voting in Greenland - this has been in the works for a while now and every major party there is pro-independence. It will be a terrible idea to move forward with it under a Trump presidency but they will. After the ties with Denmark are severed, the US will immediately swoop in and occupy the now entirely defenseless land.
-
Your interests do align you dumb fucks
They very clearly do not.
-
"And being friendly to the world is what got us in this mess. We're not in high school. We don't need friends. Every country puts their interest first. And when our interests align, we can do business. And when they don't, that's life. If we have to burn down a few bridges with Denmark to take Greenland, we're big boys. We dropped A-bombs on Japan, and now they're our top ally in the Pacific. We may have to burn a bridge to build a big beautiful new one to the next generation. America's not handcuffed by history. Trump knows what we need."
Treacherous bastard. I will take pleasure in the day he and his kind are led to the guillotine.
-
Um....there was a reason why we did what we did to Japan. It helped to stop WWII. Oh and Pearl Harbor was a thing too.
Greenland has done nothing other than exist and have some rare earth materials on it. How do these Fox News hosts even sleep at night spouting this nonsense?
I'm pretty sure everyone working at fox news is Russian.
-
I don’t think the situation is that clear. Entering a war against the US would mean destruction for Denmark (and any country that joins via Article 5). I’m not convinced they would do that.
The way things are currently moving, I think it will be more like the following: there’s probably going to be an independence voting in Greenland - this has been in the works for a while now and every major party there is pro-independence. It will be a terrible idea to move forward with it under a Trump presidency but they will. After the ties with Denmark are severed, the US will immediately swoop in and occupy the now entirely defenseless land.
The USA does not has the capacity to win a war against the rest of NATO. The other EU countries will defend Denmark.
-
Armchair general indeed. I can 100% guarantee you that all other NATO members wouldn’t enter a war against the US, at least not with the current state of the European military. I’m not even convinced Denmark would, tbh.
Don’t take this as a defense of US fascist imperialism but Europe isn’t going to effectively suicide over Greenland. And you should actually read what article 5 says, because it’s not this automatic switch that’s flicked and everyone is suddenly at war. People are generally very misinformed about that. It says that if article 5 is invoked, all NATO members need to do what they deem necessary to help. This could of course mean entering the war or it could mean sending 500 first aid kits.
The USA military does not have the capacity to fight the whole EU.
Also the EU membership means they are all in a defense pact (separate from NATO). See Article 42.7 in the Treaty of Lisbon.
The question isn't if the European countries want to fight the USA. The question is if the USA wants to fight the European countries.
-
Why doesn’t Trump and investors pay Greenland 56 billion to be a territory of the US? It’s literary a million dollars for each Greenlander?
Denmark doesn't want to sell their citizens.
-
Armchair general indeed. I can 100% guarantee you that all other NATO members wouldn’t enter a war against the US, at least not with the current state of the European military. I’m not even convinced Denmark would, tbh.
Don’t take this as a defense of US fascist imperialism but Europe isn’t going to effectively suicide over Greenland. And you should actually read what article 5 says, because it’s not this automatic switch that’s flicked and everyone is suddenly at war. People are generally very misinformed about that. It says that if article 5 is invoked, all NATO members need to do what they deem necessary to help. This could of course mean entering the war or it could mean sending 500 first aid kits.
You are quite right. There is no guarantee that other NATO powers would fight for Greenland.
-
I would assume so as well
They'd probably side with Denmark, but what that would amount to in practice is quite uncertain. They would be under a good deal of pressure not to further aggravate the situation and to let it go while making token gestures of solidarity. I don't share people's faith here that they'd fight the USA.
-
I guess that's new, I just reached the age where a political video can make me gag. That line about Japan was foul as fuck. That's disgusting. The whole thing is pure garbage but claiming you can nuclear bomb countries into making best friend is some of the most abhorrent shit I've ever heard.
I got into a fight today with my dad about annexing Greenland. Complete and utter horse shit. Was the first time in a while I didn't back down from a screaming match. It's utterly deranged to want to conquer/annex/invade/occupy another country for no reason.
-
Canada is serious as well. But they know they’d have to fight a bloody war over it.
They would do Greenland first, probably, because then they'd have Canada surrounded entirely by the USA and Russia.
-
You are quite right. There is no guarantee that other NATO powers would fight for Greenland.
Yeah, people downvoting me are just proving my point that there’s a lot of confusion about what Article 5 actually is.
-
I don’t think the situation is that clear. Entering a war against the US would mean destruction for Denmark (and any country that joins via Article 5). I’m not convinced they would do that.
The way things are currently moving, I think it will be more like the following: there’s probably going to be an independence voting in Greenland - this has been in the works for a while now and every major party there is pro-independence. It will be a terrible idea to move forward with it under a Trump presidency but they will. After the ties with Denmark are severed, the US will immediately swoop in and occupy the now entirely defenseless land.
Stipulation for Greenland independence? Immediate entrance to NATO.
-
The USA military does not have the capacity to fight the whole EU.
Also the EU membership means they are all in a defense pact (separate from NATO). See Article 42.7 in the Treaty of Lisbon.
The question isn't if the European countries want to fight the USA. The question is if the USA wants to fight the European countries.
Yeah, the EU mutual defense clause is in fact slightly more binding but if you’re actually reading it (which I’m assuming you did since you posted it), it still only says that member states are required to give aid and assistance. I hope we are all aware how much diplomatic wiggle room this wording allows for.
-
The USA does not has the capacity to win a war against the rest of NATO. The other EU countries will defend Denmark.
Are we talking about the same European states that ran out of ammunition during a 5-day air campaign against Libya and hat to borrow ammunition from the USAF? My brother in Christ, here in Germany the latest wargames the Bundeswehr did have concluded that our army can’t stay in a prolonged fight for more than a week.
-
Stipulation for Greenland independence? Immediate entrance to NATO.
Oh of course, I’m sure the US wouldn’t veto that. Good idea!
Everyone in this thread is so confidently incorrect.
-
So Trump is openly threatening with WW3, because Denmark would certainly invoke article 5 if attacked. Must suck for the MAGA voters who thought Trump wouldn't start any wars...
the MAGA voters who thought
There's a small issue with that statement...
