@ it’s a shame they can’t get better sponsors. UA-cam has no problem getting all the big conpanies to work for them and they run porn ads and all sorts of disgusting shit too. I wish people who make things in UA-cam (I find the term ‘content creator’ disgusting) had better options but at the same time idk how you can endorse this garbage. It’s so bad I use sponsorskip for the worst offenders.
* Russia seizes Crimea * * Next President says NATO needs to step up military spending * * some do some don't * * Russia invades Ukraine * NATO: * surprised Pikachu face *
Let's be honest - when it comes to military presence, the U.S. can build all the bases then want in Greenland even now. But Russia is too weak, the U.S. want Greenland's resources. Military bases are secondary.
That’s such a childish argument. I don’t think the US is resource deprived, or that there aren’t free capital flows between Denmark and the US where deep pocketed investors can’t already invest in resource extraction if it’s profitable. The Us doesn’t have any SOEs that would benefit either, and commodities markets, especially between the US and EU/Denmark/Greenland, are fungible(there isn’t a restriction on price/flow of the resource)
I don’t think US is needing that much of resources from there, they have rare earth minerals in their own country and even if they ran low on it they can just use Canada
I think you are right. Look at Alaska, it was the best purchase US ever made. Paid little, reaped in huge amounts of gold and oil. Russia must be swallowing huge amounts of regret pills for selling it to the US. 😅
America doesn't need to literally acquire Greenland to use the island for military purposes, they already have a military base there and more could be negotiated with Denmark and Greenland if needed. It's about natural resources. "Defense" concerns is a pretext.
US does not need to own it for defense. There's already US military bases there, so negotiate another base. It's not security it's about resources for billionaires.
There are none besides expense. Europe will be pretentious and have a supremacist view toward Americans until they need us. Intuit of Greenland should reunite with Canadian and Alaskan brothers and sisters.
@@sdagoth3037 what cons do you see? what do you think does this would mean for other countries beside the usa for example, what do you think will this mean for greenland and its inhabitants etc. i think its impossible to just see the pros
@@Psychonau Greenland has about 40k inhabitants, an insignificant number even compared to the medium sized US state I live in. I don't think it matters much, but it's not like they will suffer some terrible fate. Denmark can't utilize Greenland to the fullest or keep the Chinese out of Greenland, so why not sell?
@@sdagoth3037 you are wrong: greenland has 56,583 inhabitants, that is about 1/3 higher. Greenland has a lot of autonomy and they decide how they utilize themselve. The chinese investment into the usa is higher on percentage then in greenland, i think the usa cant keep the chinese out, so why not sell yourself to denmark? its only about 300 milllion people so only half of the eu. They will probably not suffer a terrible fate, instead they will probably really profit from some more european regulation and social systems... Anyway, how do you think would any chinese Freighter go if it wants to visit greenland? Do you remember that alaska is part of the USA? the usa can pretty much controll all direct traffic from china to greenland, if this route is ice free.
Taking by force whatever they want is what criminals, murderers, thieves and rapists do. Still there are people who defend it. I wonder what kind of country they want.
@@timothy6672 in the past lots of countries had lived with the pillage and plunder like a way of living, but not today. Don't try to normalize something that most countries don't do nowadays. Still, the question remains. This is the country you want to be?
i'm a dane. the 1951 defense deal with USA gives practically unlimited rights to build military bases as they please. when it comes to ressources, there are some, however, it is doubtful wether mining them would be economically viable. i suppose they could be considered a strategic ressource... greenland is not economically viable and denmark sends about 5-600 mio dollars in support each year. if i was to speculate as to why trump wants greenland, it's because it's big. it's spectacular. he doesn't care about the inuits. he doesn't care if he is destroying an alliance with a people who have always stood by the USA and have send troops to fight and be killed in a war based on lies about wmd's.
the reason is more rather more insidious. He has a friendship with a wealthy sponsor called Dryden Brown who wishes to set up a libertarian nation called Praxis outside of the US legislative purview. He would rather give territory to Brown from another country (In this case Greenland's) rather than cede US territory for the same purpose.
No, the world would be a fucking terrible place if that happened, especially with who's in power right now. Also nobody wants that except idiots Also, learn to spell
This makes no sense. America already has access to Greenland...It has a huge base there and it's the territory of arguably the US' biggest Nordic ally (highest casualty rate per capita during the war in Afghanistan, part of the Coalition of the Willing, and that's not even mentioning that it's a NATO member). Now America is throwing that friendship away and for what?
It's not the military aspect that is important for Trump, Greenland is NATO already territory. It's the blue polar ocean in the coming decades that is important. Denmark (and Canada) has potential economic privileges over a vast portion of the polar ocean that are closest to the land, extending from the shoreline to the continental shelf. There are hot disputes about the borders in the polar continental shelf between the Asian (Russia) and the North-American (US, Canada, Greenland) continents.
Do you know how many Thaad battery/system the US has? Seven with an eight on order. Each Thaad battery/system consists of six trucks with eight launch tubes for a total throw weight of 48 missiles per battery.....its easily swamped especially when it takes 30 minutes per launcher to reload it so do the math. And while capable of bringing down a ballistic missile and some hypesonic ballistic missile, it though to be unable to intercept the new hypersonic glide weapon that can manouver and dodge it.
People take too much at face value. Sometimes things are said to produce a desired effect. Sometimes the threat of something precludes the need to actually follow through.
Trump has won. Greenland gains much independent status to favor the US and maybe Trump never wanna use force to take Greenland from the very beginning. Denmark government is the one menaced and conceded.
Let's be real. The US can already build all of bases they want in Greenland. Nothing special required. Just some negotiations on the fine print with rent and environmental laws needs to be hammered out.
You already have permission to build bases over there. Why the greed? You wanna conquer some land? Get bigger? This BS about security is just that.. BS. If it could remain danish during the height of the cold war, why do you need it now?
@@val566 Nazis in Ukraine... Nazis in Greenland next?!? The only surprising thing is that Germany isn't part of the band wagon this time around, at least not yet
People are speaking here in the comments "US could..." or "For resources" but as in the video, and in the comments, people are missing the important part. The people living there.
@@ommsterlitz1805 well we see how USA treat other countries they have bought like Virgin Isle, they have zero rights. Greenlands citizens would most likely be deported to Denmark to make american great again.
@Mexican_America Well 🇺🇸 doesn’t need there fishing resources and 🇺🇸 would give them way more than the 500 million Netherlands currently give. But We will not invade Greenland that’s just stupid liberal thinking. Trump will one push of a button can make the 52 F35s they just got operational in Oct worthless. The F35’ 😊will never fly again until he tells pentagon to turn em back on. Think I’m BS you look it up. And since 80 of there weapons are USA they would screwed.
😂 1 is an illegal armed invasion and one will be negotiated for a price... russia has paid 800,000 lives so for for the little bit of Ukraine they have been able to take or hold on to... I think you are too bias to make an informed perspective.
@@th3merper190maior reserva de lítio da Ucrânia foi tomada a menos de um mês , reservas de minério de ferro, campos férteis do segundo maior produtor agrícola da Europa, a Ucrânia não e só uma posição defensiva mas um grande campo agrícola, e exatamente a mesma posição da Groelândia, os mísseis Europeus terão que passar por cima da Ucrânia
@jevgenijliogkij7849 because 800,000 russians have been killed or wounded by the most "reliable" reaources...that's why. I'm not a leftist democrat so I cant rely on feelings or emotions, I need to rely on what passes for the closest thing to facts.
@@owenbelezos8369That would be against The greenlandic goverments enviromental laws. Especially if bi-produce is radioactive, why they are in an legal fight with an Australian mining company.
From the American point of view, occupying Greenland is a very good idea. If Democrats believe in climate change, this could end up being an oasis. Previously, the US was ridiculed for buying land in Alaska and Louisiana, and now Trump wants Greenland to be ridiculed by many. If the US doesn't take it now, Russia and China will have more and more influence here.
I remember as a kid China was a nation of mostly peasants on bikes. I watched production outsourced around the world to make a quick buck for elite investors while the western world's working class has turned into the working poor, renters needing things like "Give a little" site for basic medical help as profit outweighs humanity.
Not really about security because Denmark gives them a free reign. May be about resources but Denmark gives them a free reign and they would exploit it already if there were good prospects. Might be a pressure tactic for the EU to foot the bill for the Ukraine. Might be an implicit acknowledgement that the Denmark and hence Europe will become subservient to some other power center (perhaps within Europe, stranger things did happen).
It's not a terrible idea for the very long term. But.... there's a reason the resources aren't accessed already. It'll take insane investment to reach them. They're not really economically accessible. They don't have a major port to export them. But worse of all, it shatters our illusion of being a relatively peaceful hegemonic power. In that, we only invade dictators and destabilizers. If we start invading allied territory for economic advantage (any military or national security advantage for missile defense could be obtained peacefully) we really mess our public image up. Which is how we get most things done. Through influential soft power, not hard, military power.
A country of 50k would be easy to elevate, that's litteraly less people then a mid size suburb. A major port would be easy to make, build a major roadway connecting Nuuk and all the "cities" on the west coast. Start minning and off shore oil production. It's an like RTS game on easy mode.
@@comradecat3678Have you ever been there? Im danish and grew up there, if was that simple it would allready have happened. You either fly or go by boat to the next city. There's currently a legal issue between the Greenlandic goverment and an Australian mining company, enviromental laws in Greenland doesn't allow bi-produce to be radioactive, why Kuannerit near Narsaq in south greenland is holted for the moment. Currently not far from Nuuk they have an extraction plant working red rubies, they are easy to extract they sometimes appear to grow out of the cliffs as " flowers". They are used to make jewelry with and sold. Next mine opening soon is in Kangerlussuaq ( Bluie West 8, name during WW2) North of Nuuk, a gold mine named " White Mountain". I believe the one they had in Nanortalik ( south greenland ) is empty now, name was Nalunaq goldmine and was a joint Greenlandic/ Canadian venture. The difference in the tide water from low-high can be up to 16 + feet, and with ice moving around from the east coast up the west coast, building bridges and off shore oil rigs seem impossible.
Think about the future, America has made numerous investments and land acquisitions that only truly paid off decades, sometimes over a century later. Ice caps melting means the resources will be much easier to extract and there will be more people fighting over it when that happens. Solidify American ownership before that and we’re golden. Military power wouldn’t be required considering the people of Greenland are supportive of it and wouldn’t be used if a deal fell through realistically, Americans would never support a war over this nor would congress.
@CarbonatedGravy Maybe not regarding Greenland. But The Reagan doctrine have cause mayhem around the world. South America and especially in Indonesia. Who in the world would support a genocide like that under Suharto? America did, go watch " the act of killing". And remember the US both supported and covered it up. No offense meant Sir, I hope none talen?
@CarbonatedGravy it would be cheaper and easier to cut Denmark out and just offer every citizen 100k cash. (Under 21 goes into a trust for said individual) also applies for all babies born with in the next 4 years.
In case you didn't notice, they have computers and AI now. They not only can understand every language there is, they can speak in your voice, in a languages you don't speak.
If USA wants to build additional bases, I see no reason to mess with occupation of Greenland. Just pay a yearly rent to Greenland and build a second Thule air base at the east coast, and be done with it. If they actually want to get the whole Greenland, let's make an offer to each resident of the country: get a million dollars and USA citizenship each. It's less than 60 billion dollars, and easier than a military operation.
For the same amount we have given Ukraine we could buy off the Danes and Greenlanders while making America a safer place and diminishing the aggressive bargaining power of Russia and China.
@@Lena-vw6ye let's make an offer, and see where that leads. I suppose a million dollars in the pocket of each Greenland citizen would be a great offer. And USA has done it this way (see the Louisiana purchase and the purchase of Alaska)
But all the Greenlanders want independence from Denmark. And they might get it sooner than most people realise. There is serious talk about a referendum.
SIMPLE STEPS. 1) Greenland citizens (some 57,000) vote for Independence from Denmark. They want this badly. 2) PM Egede has already indicated he would like to work with the US. The majority of their 57,000 like the US (polls taken). 3) A TREATY is made with the US to include all details of resources, military, etc. (good for both countries). 4) Greenland still has their sovereignty. (US has control to do what they need). 5) Russia and China would think more than twice about attacking. PROBLEM SOLVED. 🇺🇲
Why would Greenland want to join the US when only nations capable invade Greenland are on North American and European continent??? Frankly, unless Greenland is subjected to economic blackmail as Cuba is to this day, there is nothing to gain (any company doing business with Cuba is prohibited from doing business with the US by law, so de facto economic blockade by other means). The US companies can invest in Greenland resources exploration even without owning its people as if it was a South American nation during the Banana wars where nations sovereignty was overtaken under the premise that people do not fight against greedy US fruit corporations but because they were influenced by communists.
The Danish premier has ruled out any possibility of a diplomatic channel for Greenland to switch to American sovereignty. That only leaves the possibilty of military invasion. A great video would be a battle projection of a hypothetical war between USA and Greenland/Denmark/whichever countries join its coalition. The problem i see that short of a beach invasion through the atlantic the only possible route is through Canada. The issue i see for the Americans is that since Canada falls under the purview of the British crown an invasion of Canada would amost certainly trigger a response by a British/ANZAC coalition, I'd be keen to see your thoughts Binkov
Until a country with an actual army and navy comes along and says otherwise. You rely on Denmark's reputation, the global world order (upheld by the US) and the goodwill of others for your continued safety and self determination.
Independence next to a nasty undeveloped country requires a massive army with underground granite bases and cities loaded with modern weapons, such as Finland's 900.000 modern troops and their gear. With Denmark we're with you, think about that. Natives in America/Russia/China live in tents and shacks.
As a Danish veteran and half Greenlander I feel betrayed by our US Allies. We fought and bled for you in Iraq and Afghanistan. And this is how you treat us? By threatening with military forces and economic sanctions? I thought we were friends. I thought we were allies. Trump says you need Greenland for security and economics, but that is not true. You already have a base there and you can have more if you ask. Just ask. The same thing goes for rare earth minerals. Greenland, while not for sale, is open for business. Just invest. The relationship between Greenland and Denmark is complicated. The greenlanders want independence. However, they certainly do not want to be a part of the US either. Has American become a country that conquer small neighbors, even friendly allies?
As an America this is what I thought he planned to do. Trump's whole "art of the deal" thing, figured he was talking about acquiring it a few months ago jokingly, then once president he would offer to use American companies and infrastructure to build mines for rare Earth materials in exchange for America getting a good price on buying them, and allowing us to build some more bases to create a shield against potential Russian missile attack. Very shocked that it appears he actually wants to acquire Greenland and is threatening economic retaliation if Denmark doesn't sell it to him.
@@jeremyjefferson9045 He was president for a whole 4 years once. I can only ask, why do so few take Trump seriously? He makes no pretense as to who he is or what he wants: a ruthless gangster who will rape your wife and burglarize your home while you watch like a cuck. Just richer and on a bigger scale...
Denmark hasn't taken Greenland seriously, they're to blame. Denmark, like most European nations, also hasn't taken defence that seriously up until recent years. Denmark has also been very ambigious about it's ownership of Greenland the past decades and as you said would allow it to just leave them, if Denmark barely sees Greenland as a part of it's realm, why wouldn't the most powerful nation in the West try to take it?
The northern sea routes are greatly overestimated. First of all are kind of ice free only for a couple of months per year. Moreover the “ice free” still means a lots of iceberg floating around so you still need an icebreaker class of ship to go there without having to stop every second day waiting for the wind to clear the icebergs from your route. Moreover the sea between the Canadian artic islands is mostly shallow with moving sand banks. So very treacherous and not suitable for large cargo ships.
You forgot another major factor. It would provide additional security to the trans atlantic cables undersea that connects Europe and the US which is commonly threatened by Russian submarines patrolling it’s vicinity
Its. No ' (apostrophe). - Otherwise … Major factor? How about you being stupid? That would also affects Russia's ability to communicate with the world, so… Look up "Cutting off one's nose to spite one's face". That won't happen.
Greenland is rich in resources and is strategic. Imagine deploying ICBM/IRBMs which can reach Russia and China in half the time? And that the current goverment will allow that or putting in a whole fleet of THAADs. It IS strategic.
As a Dane, I am deeply disappointed by President Trump’s lack of respect for longstanding allies, exemplified by his threats to abandon NATO members who don’t meet the 2% defense spending target. These remarks dismiss Denmark’s significant contributions and sacrifices. Denmark has stood by the U.S. in decades of wars, including Afghanistan and Iraq, suffering 43 fatalities in Afghanistan alone-one of the highest per capita casualty rates among NATO allies. Trump’s idea of NATO allies being “in debt” reduces these sacrifices to mere financial transactions. As the saying goes, “Some expenses are paid with cash; some are paid with blood.” Let me remind you that the only time NATO’s Article 5 has been invoked was after 9/11, when the U.S. called on its allies for support. Denmark, like many others, responded without hesitation. If any NATO member is in "debt," it is the U.S. Denmark has more than paid its share. If Denmark hadn’t borne these losses in Afghanistan, who does Trump think would have taken those casualties instead? If the U.S. continues treating its allies this way, it risks eroding NATO. The result will be more young Americans dying in future wars, as allies grow less willing to shoulder the costs of U.S.-led conflicts. Danish and European leaders will find it increasingly difficult to justify sending their soldiers to fight and die for a country that offers little gratitude in return. For those who question the importance of us alliances, I recommend watching Perun’s video, "US Grand Strategy: NATO, Alliances, & Ukraine", which explains how alliances are essential to U.S. global strategy. Trump has further strained relations by threatening military force over Greenland, a Danish territory. Such actions undermine the trust that underpins NATO and alienate loyal allies like Denmark. If Trump’s goal is to push the EU toward greater strategic independence from the U.S., he is succeeding. Alienating allies will only encourage Europe to strengthen its own defense capabilities, reducing reliance on American-made military equipment. Ultimately, the U.S. must ask itself: does it want allies who stand by its side in times of crisis, sharing the costs of war, or will it alienate them with self-serving rhetoric? Denmark has paid its dues-in both cash and blood-and deserves far more respect from the country it has so faithfully supported.
If you can't even meet a 2% minimum then you very clearly are not paying your way and are relying on America to protect you. Acting morally outraged won't change these basic facts.
@@Matt_Alaricprotecting os from who? Rusias budget for its military is 1/5 og the EU budget so who is it we need a higher budget to protest us self from?
@@KalleOkasper Your post makes no sense, OP says he doesn't want to be abandoned, Matt said they need to pay their share, you criticize Matt for saying there is no threat. Wut?
@@ASpyNamedJames the point is not if usa is needed to defend eu it is that they shoud fell obligatet to do so by historical friendship, and NATO ageement.. I stand by that eu alone coud defeat rusia if it comes to it, however the friendly casualties woud be greatly greatly reduced if the us joint.. Just like usa coud have been in Afghanistan solo, but i woud think american mothers woud be gratefull that hundress of the casualties in Afghanistan was EU's not only americans....
I dont really like this video because it didn't mention from that the start the usa already has agreements with Greenland and it literally doesn't need to take it. I would prefer binkov not make click bate for people who should really understand this kinda stuff. It really could tick off allies in Greenland. I honestly binkov talk about another topic today.
This vid has problems. -The magical attack vectors from Greenland; more or less pass over Severomorsk...the HQ for their Northern Fleet (their strongest). -If the US wanted more bases in Greenland; they could have just asked and negotiated terms/price/etc like they do at Thule and most places. -The lead is being buried; this is mostly about ego/posturing (at the expense of the US' reputation and honour) and likely also about resource exploitation.
New air base, new army base, new naval base, new marine base, new missile defense base. A few mines. Cut dividend checks to the natives. Long live Norte Rico!
Greenland is 40k people. That's nothing compared to the amount of Americans who died saving Europe in WW2. If Greenland tries that, they get squashed, and oh well.
@@sdagoth3037 depends if Chinese troops or Russian troops are already stationed. Then it would be WWIII. Or if they are not present then it would be exactly like Ukraine and Russia, with USA as Russia and Ukraine played by Greenland. This would turn USA into a pariah even if USA succeeded, and make USA very isolated...
@@tomdefig6514Maybe stop starting color revolutions, Maidan happened after Victoria Nuland visited Kiev and handed out cookies in the street's. Some of us remember the infamous voice recording, why was 2 US goverment officials disgussing who to install in the Ukranian parlament?
We're allies with Denmark, and get a free hand for bases already. We don't need to invade Greenland to get all the advantages (and none of the costs) of managing the territory. Trump seems to have learned geopolitics from civilization 2; in the modern world you don't need to own a territory to get all its important benefits
The “modern” world is based on a unipolar world where a benevolent America made a set of rules that tried to decrease war. A “multi” polar world where China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea is strong makes going back to the old system more likely. In the multi polar world where free passage and free trade are not guaranteed, countries will have to secure their own resources.
From a Danish perspective, it would be like if we said we wanted Alaska to secure Greenland... As our prime Minister once said the last time a certain US president wanted to buy Greenland: "It is an absurd discussion". Furthermore, Greenland has a very strong independence movement, and this is certainly not a wish to become American, but rather to be Greenlandic. This whole thing is so crazy: If US wants a stronger presence in Greenland then just ask! Now US just made trade with China much more appealing to EU as a whole ...
@@mtdnspirit so China can ask for a strong presence on Greenland as well then. China could toss around billions to build their own base. China has expressed interest in building an airport. If China decides to lease a 100 square kilometer base, Greenland is so big, hardly any Greenlanders would object to its presence or notice it in their day to day lives. Yet they could build radars, logistics, and store weapons there and Denmark’s d Greenland wouldn’t even notice or care. Denmark could be strapped for cash one day and agree to this. That’s why sovereignty is important.
@@gj1234567899999 You seem forget that Greenland and its fate is decided by the Greenlandic people. Denmark could not "sell" Greenland even if we for some weird reason wanted to. This is the concept of self rule. As of now Greenland is responsible for most of its own governing, besides justice, foreign affairs and defence. And sure, Greenland could lease a plot of land to China if they wanted. Chinese mining companies have shown some interest in Greenland earlier. But if US treats the Greenlandic people nice they might let you keep Pittufik, and keep others out. The Greenlandic Prime Minister even mentioned the will to cooperate with likeminded countries in an interview recently, but also pointed out that they would not hesitate to align with other partners if no investment are made in the Greenland from the like minded countries (like US and EU countries).
@@mtdnspirit “IF” so US can be as nice as possible but ultimately there is no guarantee and we are not be able to stop Greenland from leasing a plot of land for 10 billion dollars to China. Then US would be screwed. Also the idea that U.S. can equally benefit from Greenland mining is not true. U.S. benefits from Alaska and Texas mineral resources mainly. Not other countries. China brags about how they can deny rare earth minerals to those who don’t to China’s line. So it’s defiantly not far fetched or stupid for Trump to try to get Greenland for the U.S. it’s smart and realistic geopolitics.
I see, so the U.S. is leveraging its position as the European subsidizer (both economically and militarily) to secure long-term security. Fair, the U.S. has already paid trillions with little return
Soldiers in Iraq, in Afghanistan, Vietnam. 5 eyes. Huge network of bases. Aid in Syrian ops, in red sea ops. Without Europe USA essentially has 3 major allies
@@bobbybrown1258vietnam hardly counts, it was the French who started the war and called the Americans for help, and once they came to support them the French ran away and let the US deal with it, and besides the largest support to the US came from Australia and Canada.
No, at least not completely. The USA is a superpower. Europe never was. We put up with the US screwing up in Iraq, didn't ask questions. We put up with the US infiltrating the German government, didn't ask questions. After 9/11 we joined the USA for 20 years in Afghanistan. Do you honestly think that the US would have done the same if something like 9/11 happened in a European NATO nation? Anyway, if Trump invades Greenland, what's the difference with Putin invading Ukraine? Oh and Denmark was among the nations to donate F-16s to that country, and order new F-35s. And the UN charter is why NATO supported Ukraine. But I guess you consider that a joke?
Denmark can stop them from expanding or setting up new bases, and can kick them out entirely, any time they want to. That's the difference between owning a place and being there by invitation only.
Nothing. Because that island right next to it is part of NATO and NORAD member CANADA and the US can put whatever they want up there. We aren't going to complain if the US spends even more on north american ballistic missile defenses or air interception assets. Reality is that its not feasible to base significant forces that far north due to resupply costs and temps below operating temps of most military tech.
As an American this is exactly how i feel. we will not be stronger by shitting on our best friends. I consider the EU family and have many friends there ill never support this.
@@Bern_il_CinqHaha the people Said they don’t want to be a part of your third world nation. Remember it was Denmark who had to stand up for your imprealisem in Iraq and Afghanistan. No American died for Denmark. Never have and we know you Never will.
Greenland can become independent from Denmark under the Self-Government Act of 2009. The process requires: - A referendum where Greenlandic people vote for independence - Negotiations between Greenlandic and Danish governments - Approval from both parliaments Theoretically, the US could incentivize Greenland's independence with promises of territory status and economic benefits. Once sovereign, Greenland could legally choose to join the US as an unincorporated territory. Denmark couldn't object after independence, though they'd likely block independence if US annexation was the obvious intent. As an unincorporated territory, Greenland would have US citizenship, one non-voting delegate in Congress, no electoral votes, and less federal funding than states - similar to Puerto Rico but a significant downgrade from current Danish relationship. This relies on Denmark's approval which will most likely never happen, and US Congress' commitment for years that would be required for this process. So all this is to say, while there may be a path for US taking over Greenland, it would be very very unlikely.
Russia has sizable contingents of soldiers and air and naval assets based in artctic areas and a number of icebreaker ships. The US has one (edit 2-3) icebreakers (they take years to build) and no major bases in the area. America is playing catch-up.
@Djamonja Thanks. I did a quick web search and found material from a DOD source claiming that the Coast Guard had two operational icebreakers as of 2022.
Russia's Northern Fleet puts it at a bit of an advantage. In the event of a conventional or limited nuclear war Russia could establish FOBs on Greenland and use them and their subs to harass the US & Canada supply chain.
Europe is not an ally of the U.S. They have been plundering the U.S. for 80 years or more. Greenland would just mean more leverage for the EU to continue this practice. Greenland should vote on who it wants to join. Also, if Greenland had all these natural resources then the EU would have exploited them years ago, just like they have been doing in Africa.
As you say not really about security because Denmark gives them a free reign. May be about resources but Denmark gives them a free reign but maybe they don't wanna pay anything to the vasal. Might be a pressure tactic for the EU to foot the bill for the Ukraine. Might be implicit acknowledgement the the Denmark and hence Europe become subservient to some other power center (perhaps within Europe, stranger things did happen).
Plundering the US for 80 years or more? I think reality begs to differ. The united states provides a security guarantee, that's why it has value as an ally. Yes that comes with the cost of footing most of the security bill, otherwise it really wouldn't be needed would it? Greenland has been danish for some 800 years, if it was in Africa Trump would call it a shithole country.
LMFAO Europe is our Ally. We used the current system to become THE global power and spread our influence. we get far more FROM this system than we pay INTO it. The strength of our economy is an ENORMOUS part of how we influence the world. If UA wins the war, who do they rely on? who do they give access to their resources, markets etc? We made ourselves indispensable.And as s result we reap huge benefits
What about Svalbard? It's also in the middle. Does Norway really need that? It's essential for American national security to annex Svalbard. Gimme gimme
...the US already has an air base there (and has since WWII), and has used that as a critical part of the US's ballistic missile warning system since the cold war.
Doing as much would be one of the most stupid moves ever made by the US, but that would also. be expected given the "intellect" of the current administration. While US allies do count on the US a fair amount, what the current dimwits in power and their supporters don't get is that we, the US, also count on our allies. Being isolated will not be good for the US. The US taking over Greenland and stealing the Panama Canal, i.e. the US acting just like Russia is acting toward Ukraine, would be epically stupid, an epic embarrassment, and anti-American.
The US does not need to own Greenland. Denmark can just as easily start allowing investment in resource extraction and leases for military bases for icebreakers. But I have a feeling Denmark will not do it because they had all the opportunity to do so but refused.
The biggest nonsense in this is due to the normally great relations between Denmark/Greenland and USA, any base building, stationing of personel and materiel, would probably be instantly approved and welcomed, no need to hurl threaths or "own" anything. Just ask nicely.
@Gravitatis I'm simply speaking of the thought of Nuclear war. It's terrifying. It would be nice if we (USA) could have more military bases in Greenland.
@ nuclear war won't be caused by big countries like the US or china, too much money is involved if i were you, id be more nervous about the proliferation of nuclear technology to non-official actors
California and new York are sick of Trump. Let it become a part of Denmark. You Will find more people willing to join Denmark than Greenlanders willing to join third world usa
so the US has valid reasons for wanting military bases on greenland, why does he have to make it so obvious on the world stage and make it seem as if he'll invade... some behind closed doors diplomacy could've sorted all of this, no?
I think the words used are that the President has "not ruled out" the use of the military, not that it would be preferred. In the event of an all-out war with Russia or China (of which the C-I-C has undoubtedly been drilled) the US is seizing key points in Greenland and Panama anyway. This is part of the "You're Staying the F$ck Over There" Doctrine. Peace is the status quo and it is likely to remain this way; a reminder of the potential alternative opens parties to negotiation.
Mr. Bincov, I am disappointed with the analysis you have made now. It makes no sense to say that America would have advantages if they conquered Greenland. In my opinion, they are only after mineral resources and energy resources, in one word money. They are just greedy. And from a military point of view, the Americans already had control, it makes no sense, and there is something else you said that the Russians and Americans could enter into a limited battle without nuclear weapons. This is nonsense, if something like that happens it means nuclear war. In my opinion, you should redo this video. And Greenland belongs to Denmark and Greenland people, not America
Lol disappointing comment. Greenland was taken over by Denmark. And you got no problen with that nor do you care about how the Greenlanders feel. Also Denmark got its assed kicked and taken over by the Nazi. If it was not for the US to free Denmark, it would still be a Nazi territory. Also the US was kind enough to give back Greenland when it never had to. Imagine if Nazi, Russia or China got it, they would never give it back. Regardless you are coming from a weak perspective and probably a leftist or a Dane, both which means nothing compared to real men in power.
@@LeanneGodfried-jp5uhAll the territory of the USA was taken from the Native Americans . So let's not start a story about who owes what to whom. Because you will go into the Minus as the US National Debt.😂
Great Video Binkov. This really explains the military issues at play. It is sometimes hard to understand arctic geography because we don’t often look at the Globe from the view of the North Pole.
Encirclement of the Northwest Passage and Canada is an underrated reason as well. The US would get a lot more leverage over trade routes and ocean energy mining in the region as a result, and be able to pressure Canada to reduce political and economic ties with China, and pressure Canada to unfuck itself militarily to contribute more to NATO instead of continuing to allow its military to remain a basket case by expecting free US protection.
The fact is TDS is what MAGA suffers from, not rational people who live in a world in which objective facts exist. Symptoms include a self righteous victim complex, denying objective facts exist, belief that willful ignorance equals strength, racism, misogyny, sadism, being outraged by everything and ashamed of nothing.
These people act like they understand trumps every move and a spouse moral puritanism. Honestly, quite insufferable. Europe is in a bit of a decline. If they could handle all of their problems by themselves, Americans would be happy and have less leverage over Europe. Unfortunately, the upper echelons of Europe are more interested in enriching themselves on their citizenry and slowly sliding into authoritarianism.
Why did Americans gave the Franz Joseph land to Russia then? That was European land by far the closest to Russia. Russians are there unlawfully actually, its still European land by law.
You can try invideo AI for free at invideo.io/i/Binkov to save hundreds on editing, animating and other production costs.
first
i can't believe you run ads for AI garbage when your market is saturated with AI garbage channels drowning out decent stuff like yours.
When your love of money has an inverse relationship with your integrity:
@ it’s a shame they can’t get better sponsors. UA-cam has no problem getting all the big conpanies to work for them and they run porn ads and all sorts of disgusting shit too. I wish people who make things in UA-cam (I find the term ‘content creator’ disgusting) had better options but at the same time idk how you can endorse this garbage. It’s so bad I use sponsorskip for the worst offenders.
Please don't support these AI slop generating products. This is a quality channel, don't let robots replace you.
Let me tell you the true reason... Polar Bear Cavalry
This is the best reason I have heard.
With Lazer beams!
CIA: Delete this now
...with lasers
@jakobneubert6801 it's funniest my way
BREAKING : Greenland to be renamed Orangeland !
When I’m in a “piss off and alienate all my allies” competition and my opponent is the United States:🤯
* Russia seizes Crimea *
* Next President says NATO needs to step up military spending *
* some do some don't *
* Russia invades Ukraine *
NATO: * surprised Pikachu face *
Allies will do nothing in response because they rely on the United States for defense and have little baby militaries.
@ crazy mental gymnastics because Ukraine isn’t and hasn’t been a NATO member
@@cliffh.3279oh why is anyone upset then huh?
what good is a bunch of allies that wont fight?
Let's be honest - when it comes to military presence, the U.S. can build all the bases then want in Greenland even now.
But Russia is too weak, the U.S. want Greenland's resources. Military bases are secondary.
That’s such a childish argument. I don’t think the US is resource deprived, or that there aren’t free capital flows between Denmark and the US where deep pocketed investors can’t already invest in resource extraction if it’s profitable. The Us doesn’t have any SOEs that would benefit either, and commodities markets, especially between the US and EU/Denmark/Greenland, are fungible(there isn’t a restriction on price/flow of the resource)
I don't think Russia is weak. How many countries do you know that could withstand a proxy war against the entire West?
I don’t think US is needing that much of resources from there, they have rare earth minerals in their own country and even if they ran low on it they can just use Canada
I think you are right. Look at Alaska, it was the best purchase US ever made. Paid little, reaped in huge amounts of gold and oil. Russia must be swallowing huge amounts of regret pills for selling it to the US. 😅
@@xiphoid2011 they would've lost it to Brits/Canada anyway.
America doesn't need to literally acquire Greenland to use the island for military purposes, they already have a military base there and more could be negotiated with Denmark and Greenland if needed. It's about natural resources. "Defense" concerns is a pretext.
US does not need to own it for defense. There's already US military bases there, so negotiate another base. It's not security it's about resources for billionaires.
What are they gonna do about?
The US does need to own at least a couple square miles of the coast in order to have legal claim over shipping routes
you didnt watch the video, did you
It's about reducing Russian influence over Arctic shipping.
turtle chad actually right for once
Alot of people forget how close the northern artic nations are too each other.
Those harsh conditions create another form of distance in itself.
You wrote it this way just to tick off spelling and grammar trolls didn't you? :)
a video about the cons of "getting" greenland would be informative too
There are none besides expense. Europe will be pretentious and have a supremacist view toward Americans until they need us. Intuit of Greenland should reunite with Canadian and Alaskan brothers and sisters.
What cons?
@@sdagoth3037 what cons do you see? what do you think does this would mean for other countries beside the usa for example, what do you think will this mean for greenland and its inhabitants etc. i think its impossible to just see the pros
@@Psychonau Greenland has about 40k inhabitants, an insignificant number even compared to the medium sized US state I live in. I don't think it matters much, but it's not like they will suffer some terrible fate. Denmark can't utilize Greenland to the fullest or keep the Chinese out of Greenland, so why not sell?
@@sdagoth3037 you are wrong: greenland has 56,583 inhabitants, that is about 1/3 higher. Greenland has a lot of autonomy and they decide how they utilize themselve. The chinese investment into the usa is higher on percentage then in greenland, i think the usa cant keep the chinese out, so why not sell yourself to denmark? its only about 300 milllion people so only half of the eu. They will probably not suffer a terrible fate, instead they will probably really profit from some more european regulation and social systems... Anyway, how do you think would any chinese Freighter go if it wants to visit greenland? Do you remember that alaska is part of the USA? the usa can pretty much controll all direct traffic from china to greenland, if this route is ice free.
Binkov shouldn't have to take sketchy sponsorships from AI content slop farms.
Robbing one of your longest and most faithful friends tells a bit about your attitude.
sir, have you ever read machiavelli?
@@Gravitatisit was a satirical work
@
your post is a satirical work
you mean the country that surendered so fast to the Nazis it fade france look fanaticle?
@
what does it reveal about someone's intelligence when they let their nation be destroyed in the name of "virtue"?
Taking by force whatever they want is what criminals, murderers, thieves and rapists do.
Still there are people who defend it. I wonder what kind of country they want.
They just show that they've always been fine with imperialism, but only when it's their country doing it.
Yeah, Russia's a pretty shitty place.
you mean like every country ever does or have done?
@@timothy6672 in the past lots of countries had lived with the pillage and plunder like a way of living, but not today.
Don't try to normalize something that most countries don't do nowadays.
Still, the question remains. This is the country you want to be?
@@kaiser3626 Like who?
what country are you from?
im willing to bet they are guilty of abusing power llike everyone else
Don't they all ready give them military access?
i'm a dane. the 1951 defense deal with USA gives practically unlimited rights to build military bases as they please. when it comes to ressources, there are some, however, it is doubtful wether mining them would be economically viable. i suppose they could be considered a strategic ressource... greenland is not economically viable and denmark sends about 5-600 mio dollars in support each year.
if i was to speculate as to why trump wants greenland, it's because it's big. it's spectacular. he doesn't care about the inuits. he doesn't care if he is destroying an alliance with a people who have always stood by the USA and have send troops to fight and be killed in a war based on lies about wmd's.
the reason is more rather more insidious. He has a friendship with a wealthy sponsor called Dryden Brown who wishes to set up a libertarian nation called Praxis outside of the US legislative purview.
He would rather give territory to Brown from another country (In this case Greenland's) rather than cede US territory for the same purpose.
Why are these comments so braindead. Like AI writes them
Because it does.
you've just discovered the matrix bro, its all downhill from here
Great Video! Love these in detail videos!
It can be argued to be benefitial for the US to own just about every inch of this planet.
No, most of Africa, the Middle East and Asia would only be a liability.
@@donaldcarey114 Not beneficial for America, beneficial for them.
No, the world would be a fucking terrible place if that happened, especially with who's in power right now. Also nobody wants that except idiots
Also, learn to spell
"National security" for the U.S. is really global dominance.
This makes no sense. America already has access to Greenland...It has a huge base there and it's the territory of arguably the US' biggest Nordic ally (highest casualty rate per capita during the war in Afghanistan, part of the Coalition of the Willing, and that's not even mentioning that it's a NATO member). Now America is throwing that friendship away and for what?
"Throwing it away" by offering to BUY a massive financial drain off of Denmark??
Offering lol
Then you do not rule out the use of force its not an offer...@@Liberty_or_Ded
@@KalleOkasper You may have tissues for your years.🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 All the way.
@@Liberty_or_Ded You mean threatening them to sell it or else.
@@mathieusimoneau3358 "Threatening" lol
Great work❤
It's not the military aspect that is important for Trump, Greenland is NATO already territory. It's the blue polar ocean in the coming decades that is important. Denmark (and Canada) has potential economic privileges over a vast portion of the polar ocean that are closest to the land, extending from the shoreline to the continental shelf. There are hot disputes about the borders in the polar continental shelf between the Asian (Russia) and the North-American (US, Canada, Greenland) continents.
The US could put a thad system with a massive amount of interceptors in greeland and that would make it easier to intercept hypersonic glide vehicles.
Do you know how many Thaad battery/system the US has? Seven with an eight on order. Each Thaad battery/system consists of six trucks with eight launch tubes for a total throw weight of 48 missiles per battery.....its easily swamped especially when it takes 30 minutes per launcher to reload it so do the math.
And while capable of bringing down a ballistic missile and some hypesonic ballistic missile, it though to be unable to intercept the new hypersonic glide weapon that can manouver and dodge it.
People take too much at face value. Sometimes things are said to produce a desired effect. Sometimes the threat of something precludes the need to actually follow through.
Threatening denmarks government is no joke // sweden
If Trump by force in any way take greenland, im shure we Nordic countries will think twice about US building bases on our soil
Trump has won. Greenland gains much independent status to favor the US and maybe Trump never wanna use force to take Greenland from the very beginning. Denmark government is the one menaced and conceded.
@@UpRisingDown I’m sure the US would be very negatively impacted by that 😂
This comment section is cancer
A lot of people are mad they lost.
Let's be real. The US can already build all of bases they want in Greenland. Nothing special required. Just some negotiations on the fine print with rent and environmental laws needs to be hammered out.
That's what NATO is for... yes.
They actually need Luxembourg’s permission first as they secretly have a planet destroying army stationed there
Greenland is viking land 🙂
America was asian squatters land how did that work out?
You already have permission to build bases over there. Why the greed? You wanna conquer some land? Get bigger? This BS about security is just that.. BS. If it could remain danish during the height of the cold war, why do you need it now?
There is nothing surer than outright annexation - it's also about optics, domestically and interntionally, being powerful...
It's a classic tactic from fascists
to invent some security threat to justify whatever violence or undemocratic actions
@@val566 Nazis in Ukraine... Nazis in Greenland next?!? The only surprising thing is that Germany isn't part of the band wagon this time around, at least not yet
People are speaking here in the comments "US could..." or "For resources" but as in the video, and in the comments, people are missing the important part.
The people living there.
literally 50k so it's very negligeable
@@ommsterlitz1805 well we see how USA treat other countries they have bought like Virgin Isle, they have zero rights. Greenlands citizens would most likely be deported to Denmark to make american great again.
@@ommsterlitz1805 Oh sorry, just 50k people, so "negligeable"
@Mexican_America Well 🇺🇸 doesn’t need there fishing resources and 🇺🇸 would give them way more than the 500 million Netherlands currently give. But We will not invade Greenland that’s just stupid liberal thinking. Trump will one push of a button can make the 52 F35s they just got operational in Oct worthless. The F35’ 😊will never fly again until he tells pentagon to turn em back on. Think I’m BS you look it up. And since 80 of there weapons are USA they would screwed.
@Mexican_America calm down russian bot, islanders have full rights you're just uneducated.
Russia takes Crimea - bad, USA takes Greenland - national interest (please dont mix it - its different things) ))))))
😂 1 is an illegal armed invasion and one will be negotiated for a price... russia has paid 800,000 lives so for for the little bit of Ukraine they have been able to take or hold on to... I think you are too bias to make an informed perspective.
@@th3merper190maior reserva de lítio da Ucrânia foi tomada a menos de um mês , reservas de minério de ferro, campos férteis do segundo maior produtor agrícola da Europa, a Ucrânia não e só uma posição defensiva mas um grande campo agrícola, e exatamente a mesma posição da Groelândia, os mísseis Europeus terão que passar por cima da Ucrânia
Is the word 'consent' in your vocabulary.
@@th3merper190 why 800.000 lives ? Write 50.000.000 it’s sounds better or maybe 100.000.000 lives 😉
@jevgenijliogkij7849 because 800,000 russians have been killed or wounded by the most "reliable" reaources...that's why. I'm not a leftist democrat so I cant rely on feelings or emotions, I need to rely on what passes for the closest thing to facts.
The USA already has tons of bases there. How would owning it make it better for us?
They could exploit the natural resources that have been predicted to be there, like crude oil, coal, and natural gas.
@@owenbelezos8369That would be against The greenlandic goverments enviromental laws. Especially if bi-produce is radioactive, why they are in an legal fight with an Australian mining company.
Watch the video 🤣
@@AahFukItwhich is why he was talking about if the US owned it.
@@jay-1800 Better pay off the debt first
Excellent video thank you
not really, he missed that denmark dont own greenland
@ true but the rest was quite good
It's all about the mineral wealth being uncovered.
Trump slipped and said it was about "Economic Security" in one of his interviews.
From the American point of view, occupying Greenland is a very good idea. If Democrats believe in climate change, this could end up being an oasis. Previously, the US was ridiculed for buying land in Alaska and Louisiana, and now Trump wants Greenland to be ridiculed by many. If the US doesn't take it now, Russia and China will have more and more influence here.
I remember as a kid China was a nation of mostly peasants on bikes.
I watched production outsourced around the world to make a quick buck for elite investors while the western world's working class has turned into the working poor, renters needing things like "Give a little" site for basic medical help as profit outweighs humanity.
@@zhengshi-p5u From the global perspective, invasion of Greenland would as well be a start of World War 3.
Not really about security because Denmark gives them a free reign. May be about resources but Denmark gives them a free reign and they would exploit it already if there were good prospects. Might be a pressure tactic for the EU to foot the bill for the Ukraine. Might be an implicit acknowledgement that the Denmark and hence Europe will become subservient to some other power center (perhaps within Europe, stranger things did happen).
Greenland isn't nearly as big as the map you used shows. It's about the size of Alaska. Peters World Map does a good job for true country sizes
Exactly, the slight size difference whether intentionally or not will alter how people see the US landgrab
Denmark helped keep greenland greenland. If not, it wouldve been russia already
It seems that Denmark is just a proxy land keeper of the US, instead of the owner...
It's not a terrible idea for the very long term. But.... there's a reason the resources aren't accessed already. It'll take insane investment to reach them. They're not really economically accessible. They don't have a major port to export them. But worse of all, it shatters our illusion of being a relatively peaceful hegemonic power. In that, we only invade dictators and destabilizers. If we start invading allied territory for economic advantage (any military or national security advantage for missile defense could be obtained peacefully) we really mess our public image up. Which is how we get most things done. Through influential soft power, not hard, military power.
A country of 50k would be easy to elevate, that's litteraly less people then a mid size suburb. A major port would be easy to make, build a major roadway connecting Nuuk and all the "cities" on the west coast. Start minning and off shore oil production. It's an like RTS game on easy mode.
@@comradecat3678Have you ever been there? Im danish and grew up there, if was that simple it would allready have happened. You either fly or go by boat to the next city.
There's currently a legal issue between the Greenlandic goverment and an Australian mining company, enviromental laws in Greenland doesn't allow bi-produce to be radioactive, why Kuannerit near Narsaq in south greenland is holted for the moment. Currently not far from Nuuk they have an extraction plant working red rubies, they are easy to extract they sometimes appear to grow out of the cliffs as " flowers". They are used to make jewelry with and sold.
Next mine opening soon is in Kangerlussuaq ( Bluie West 8, name during WW2) North of Nuuk, a gold mine named " White Mountain". I believe the one they had in Nanortalik ( south greenland ) is empty now, name was Nalunaq goldmine and was a joint Greenlandic/ Canadian venture.
The difference in the tide water from low-high can be up to 16 + feet, and with ice moving around from the east coast up the west coast, building bridges and off shore oil rigs seem impossible.
Think about the future, America has made numerous investments and land acquisitions that only truly paid off decades, sometimes over a century later. Ice caps melting means the resources will be much easier to extract and there will be more people fighting over it when that happens. Solidify American ownership before that and we’re golden.
Military power wouldn’t be required considering the people of Greenland are supportive of it and wouldn’t be used if a deal fell through realistically, Americans would never support a war over this nor would congress.
@CarbonatedGravy Maybe not regarding Greenland. But The Reagan doctrine have cause mayhem around the world. South America and especially in Indonesia. Who in the world would support a genocide like that under Suharto? America did, go watch " the act of killing". And remember the US both supported and covered it up.
No offense meant Sir, I hope none talen?
@CarbonatedGravy it would be cheaper and easier to cut Denmark out and just offer every citizen 100k cash. (Under 21 goes into a trust for said individual) also applies for all babies born with in the next 4 years.
Missile interception may not be too relevant knowing nuclear subs may show up anywhere..
Puppet Europe protested in the quietest voice 🤣
Basics, when you acquire a new piece of land with natives that means a new language pool for the enemy to be worried about
In case you didn't notice, they have computers and AI now. They not only can understand every language there is, they can speak in your voice, in a languages you don't speak.
@danielch6662 AI can speak in deep dish?
If USA wants to build additional bases, I see no reason to mess with occupation of Greenland. Just pay a yearly rent to Greenland and build a second Thule air base at the east coast, and be done with it.
If they actually want to get the whole Greenland, let's make an offer to each resident of the country: get a million dollars and USA citizenship each. It's less than 60 billion dollars, and easier than a military operation.
US is not going to invade Greenland.
They probably want much more than $60 billion for all that land
For the same amount we have given Ukraine we could buy off the Danes and Greenlanders while making America a safer place and diminishing the aggressive bargaining power of Russia and China.
@@Lena-vw6ye let's make an offer, and see where that leads. I suppose a million dollars in the pocket of each Greenland citizen would be a great offer.
And USA has done it this way (see the Louisiana purchase and the purchase of Alaska)
@@MrChickennugget360
"russia will never invade ukraine"
"trump will never be president"
"china will never invade taiwan"
greenland has massive rescources
Yes, have you ever been there? It's highly expensive to extract, blasting in huge ammounts
Yup and that's the real reason Trump and Co want to get their greedy greasy mitts on it.
Does Trump know that Denmark is a NATO ally and they can just ask for more bases?
We're taking Greenland and there's nothing you can do about it.
@@Charlemagne_III based
Its not just about bases.
They can always leave...
But all the Greenlanders want independence from Denmark.
And they might get it sooner than most people realise. There is serious talk about a referendum.
SIMPLE STEPS.
1) Greenland citizens (some 57,000) vote for Independence from Denmark.
They want this badly.
2) PM Egede has already indicated he would like to work with the US.
The majority of their 57,000 like the US (polls taken).
3) A TREATY is made with the US to include all details of resources, military, etc. (good for both countries).
4) Greenland still has their sovereignty. (US has control to do what they need).
5) Russia and China would think more than twice about attacking.
PROBLEM SOLVED. 🇺🇲
Why would Greenland want to join the US when only nations capable invade Greenland are on North American and European continent???
Frankly, unless Greenland is subjected to economic blackmail as Cuba is to this day, there is nothing to gain (any company doing business with Cuba is prohibited from doing business with the US by law, so de facto economic blockade by other means).
The US companies can invest in Greenland resources exploration even without owning its people as if it was a South American nation during the Banana wars where nations sovereignty was overtaken under the premise that people do not fight against greedy US fruit corporations but because they were influenced by communists.
The Danish premier has ruled out any possibility of a diplomatic channel for Greenland to switch to American sovereignty. That only leaves the possibilty of military invasion.
A great video would be a battle projection of a hypothetical war between USA and Greenland/Denmark/whichever countries join its coalition.
The problem i see that short of a beach invasion through the atlantic the only possible route is through Canada. The issue i see for the Americans is that since Canada falls under the purview of the British crown an invasion of Canada would amost certainly trigger a response by a British/ANZAC coalition,
I'd be keen to see your thoughts Binkov
This is our homeland, we don’t belong to anybody and here we rule supreme and no country dare dictate anything on our island. 🇬🇱💪
Other than Denmark
Denmark can though
Until a country with an actual army and navy comes along and says otherwise. You rely on Denmark's reputation, the global world order (upheld by the US) and the goodwill of others for your continued safety and self determination.
Independence next to a nasty undeveloped country requires a massive army with underground granite bases and cities loaded with modern weapons, such as Finland's 900.000 modern troops and their gear. With Denmark we're with you, think about that. Natives in America/Russia/China live in tents and shacks.
@@UserDefaultEurope Greenlanders want to end the colonial relationship with Denmark, and become an independent nation.
As a Danish veteran and half Greenlander I feel betrayed by our US Allies. We fought and bled for you in Iraq and Afghanistan. And this is how you treat us? By threatening with military forces and economic sanctions? I thought we were friends. I thought we were allies. Trump says you need Greenland for security and economics, but that is not true. You already have a base there and you can have more if you ask. Just ask. The same thing goes for rare earth minerals. Greenland, while not for sale, is open for business. Just invest.
The relationship between Greenland and Denmark is complicated. The greenlanders want independence. However, they certainly do not want to be a part of the US either. Has American become a country that conquer small neighbors, even friendly allies?
As an America this is what I thought he planned to do. Trump's whole "art of the deal" thing, figured he was talking about acquiring it a few months ago jokingly, then once president he would offer to use American companies and infrastructure to build mines for rare Earth materials in exchange for America getting a good price on buying them, and allowing us to build some more bases to create a shield against potential Russian missile attack. Very shocked that it appears he actually wants to acquire Greenland and is threatening economic retaliation if Denmark doesn't sell it to him.
@@jeremyjefferson9045 He was president for a whole 4 years once. I can only ask, why do so few take Trump seriously? He makes no pretense as to who he is or what he wants: a ruthless gangster who will rape your wife and burglarize your home while you watch like a cuck. Just richer and on a bigger scale...
The United States has always betrayed its allies, and itself. The hope is that one day it will recover, as it has in the past.
Denmark hasn't taken Greenland seriously, they're to blame. Denmark, like most European nations, also hasn't taken defence that seriously up until recent years. Denmark has also been very ambigious about it's ownership of Greenland the past decades and as you said would allow it to just leave them, if Denmark barely sees Greenland as a part of it's realm, why wouldn't the most powerful nation in the West try to take it?
Probably depends upon whom you ask. They fantasize about "true independence," but that isn't really possible in the 21st Century.
I hope this comment section isnt a representative of the average American because you are pretty sad to see
No it's not just the feeble minded MAGA trolls with low IQ's who are easily swayed by their cult leader.
The northern sea routes are greatly overestimated. First of all are kind of ice free only for a couple of months per year. Moreover the “ice free” still means a lots of iceberg floating around so you still need an icebreaker class of ship to go there without having to stop every second day waiting for the wind to clear the icebergs from your route.
Moreover the sea between the Canadian artic islands is mostly shallow with moving sand banks. So very treacherous and not suitable for large cargo ships.
You forgot another major factor. It would provide additional security to the trans atlantic cables undersea that connects Europe and the US which is commonly threatened by Russian submarines patrolling it’s vicinity
Its. No ' (apostrophe). - Otherwise …
Major factor? How about you being stupid? That would also affects Russia's ability to communicate with the world, so…
Look up "Cutting off one's nose to spite one's face". That won't happen.
i spy DCS footage at 10:06
Greenland is rich in resources and is strategic. Imagine deploying ICBM/IRBMs which can reach Russia and China in half the time? And that the current goverment will allow that or putting in a whole fleet of THAADs. It IS strategic.
格陵兰岛距离中国很远，格陵兰岛威胁俄罗斯更多，而不是中国
萨德只是一个垃圾系统
@@RdghxbnkpyTdbk You can tell the Chicoms are concerned when their bots are out in force.
Japan is much closer to Beijing.
@ Yes but you can't take over Japan or put a nuke base on it.
As a Dane, I am deeply disappointed by President Trump’s lack of respect for longstanding allies, exemplified by his threats to abandon NATO members who don’t meet the 2% defense spending target. These remarks dismiss Denmark’s significant contributions and sacrifices. Denmark has stood by the U.S. in decades of wars, including Afghanistan and Iraq, suffering 43 fatalities in Afghanistan alone-one of the highest per capita casualty rates among NATO allies.
Trump’s idea of NATO allies being “in debt” reduces these sacrifices to mere financial transactions. As the saying goes, “Some expenses are paid with cash; some are paid with blood.”
Let me remind you that the only time NATO’s Article 5 has been invoked was after 9/11, when the U.S. called on its allies for support. Denmark, like many others, responded without hesitation. If any NATO member is in "debt," it is the U.S.
Denmark has more than paid its share. If Denmark hadn’t borne these losses in Afghanistan, who does Trump think would have taken those casualties instead?
If the U.S. continues treating its allies this way, it risks eroding NATO. The result will be more young Americans dying in future wars, as allies grow less willing to shoulder the costs of U.S.-led conflicts. Danish and European leaders will find it increasingly difficult to justify sending their soldiers to fight and die for a country that offers little gratitude in return.
For those who question the importance of us alliances, I recommend watching Perun’s video, "US Grand Strategy: NATO, Alliances, & Ukraine", which explains how alliances are essential to U.S. global strategy.
Trump has further strained relations by threatening military force over Greenland, a Danish territory. Such actions undermine the trust that underpins NATO and alienate loyal allies like Denmark. If Trump’s goal is to push the EU toward greater strategic independence from the U.S., he is succeeding. Alienating allies will only encourage Europe to strengthen its own defense capabilities, reducing reliance on American-made military equipment.
Ultimately, the U.S. must ask itself: does it want allies who stand by its side in times of crisis, sharing the costs of war, or will it alienate them with self-serving rhetoric? Denmark has paid its dues-in both cash and blood-and deserves far more respect from the country it has so faithfully supported.
If you can't even meet a 2% minimum then you very clearly are not paying your way and are relying on America to protect you. Acting morally outraged won't change these basic facts.
@@Matt_Alaric ^ This
@@Matt_Alaricprotecting os from who?
Rusias budget for its military is 1/5 og the EU budget so who is it we need a higher budget to protest us self from?
@@KalleOkasper Your post makes no sense, OP says he doesn't want to be abandoned, Matt said they need to pay their share, you criticize Matt for saying there is no threat. Wut?
@@ASpyNamedJames the point is not if usa is needed to defend eu it is that they shoud fell obligatet to do so by historical friendship, and NATO ageement..
I stand by that eu alone coud defeat rusia if it comes to it, however the friendly casualties woud be greatly greatly reduced if the us joint..
Just like usa coud have been in Afghanistan solo, but i woud think american mothers woud be gratefull that hundress of the casualties in Afghanistan was EU's not only americans....
I dont really like this video because it didn't mention from that the start the usa already has agreements with Greenland and it literally doesn't need to take it. I would prefer binkov not make click bate for people who should really understand this kinda stuff. It really could tick off allies in Greenland. I honestly binkov talk about another topic today.
Santa Claus and elves won't be happy about this
Maybe Canada can build base in Greenland
Maybe Canada will be smart for once, and sell the USA whatever provinces/territories wanted.
That map trips my brain. Does that mean I can walk from canada to russia in the winter?
if you could survive the negative 40 degree temps with winchills exceeding -100 then yeah you could.
if the Bering straight froze over like it did when the native americans crossed over from Eurasia you would be able to.
Watch for 🐻❄️
This vid has problems.
-The magical attack vectors from Greenland; more or less pass over Severomorsk...the HQ for their Northern Fleet (their strongest).
-If the US wanted more bases in Greenland; they could have just asked and negotiated terms/price/etc like they do at Thule and most places.
-The lead is being buried; this is mostly about ego/posturing (at the expense of the US' reputation and honour) and likely also about resource exploitation.
Passing “over” severomorsk is a feature, not a bug
@@JohnMaxGriffin and yet Greenland is supposedly valuable because the routes are supposedly less defended....
@ Yeah I’m not saying that makes any sense. Most aspects of this Greenland thing don’t make sense
New air base, new army base, new naval base, new marine base, new missile defense base. A few mines. Cut dividend checks to the natives. Long live Norte Rico!
Operation Sleeper Santa
@@Bern_il_Cinq The Han have forgotten how to make babies.
Greenland is protected through treaties with French nuclear weapons.
Trump is asking for World War 3.
Bold countermove, Greenland gives Russia land for bases.
Nah... More likely China
Greenland is 40k people. That's nothing compared to the amount of Americans who died saving Europe in WW2. If Greenland tries that, they get squashed, and oh well.
@@sdagoth3037 depends if Chinese troops or Russian troops are already stationed. Then it would be WWIII. Or if they are not present then it would be exactly like Ukraine and Russia, with USA as Russia and Ukraine played by Greenland. This would turn USA into a pariah even if USA succeeded, and make USA very isolated...
"Thickly" defended... You're looking for "densely" defended.
Only thing dense about America is Trumps 🧠!!
@@FromaTwistedMind You should do open mics.
If US takes greenland expect europe to respond
And Canada USA is threatening us now too
Like they did to letting Russia plunder and mutilate Ukraine.
Looool they can't even defend themselves, 😂😂
I'm sure the actions will be "Condemned in the strongest possible terms"
@@tomdefig6514Maybe stop starting color revolutions, Maidan happened after Victoria Nuland visited Kiev and handed out cookies in the street's. Some of us remember the infamous voice recording, why was 2 US goverment officials disgussing who to install in the Ukranian parlament?
We're allies with Denmark, and get a free hand for bases already. We don't need to invade Greenland to get all the advantages (and none of the costs) of managing the territory.
Trump seems to have learned geopolitics from civilization 2; in the modern world you don't need to own a territory to get all its important benefits
The “modern” world is based on a unipolar world where a benevolent America made a set of rules that tried to decrease war. A “multi” polar world where China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea is strong makes going back to the old system more likely. In the multi polar world where free passage and free trade are not guaranteed, countries will have to secure their own resources.
From a Danish perspective, it would be like if we said we wanted Alaska to secure Greenland... As our prime Minister once said the last time a certain US president wanted to buy Greenland: "It is an absurd discussion". Furthermore, Greenland has a very strong independence movement, and this is certainly not a wish to become American, but rather to be Greenlandic. This whole thing is so crazy: If US wants a stronger presence in Greenland then just ask! Now US just made trade with China much more appealing to EU as a whole ...
@@mtdnspirit so China can ask for a strong presence on Greenland as well then. China could toss around billions to build their own base. China has expressed interest in building an airport. If China decides to lease a 100 square kilometer base, Greenland is so big, hardly any Greenlanders would object to its presence or notice it in their day to day lives. Yet they could build radars, logistics, and store weapons there and Denmark’s d Greenland wouldn’t even notice or care. Denmark could be strapped for cash one day and agree to this. That’s why sovereignty is important.
@@gj1234567899999 You seem forget that Greenland and its fate is decided by the Greenlandic people. Denmark could not "sell" Greenland even if we for some weird reason wanted to. This is the concept of self rule. As of now Greenland is responsible for most of its own governing, besides justice, foreign affairs and defence.
And sure, Greenland could lease a plot of land to China if they wanted. Chinese mining companies have shown some interest in Greenland earlier. But if US treats the Greenlandic people nice they might let you keep Pittufik, and keep others out. The Greenlandic Prime Minister even mentioned the will to cooperate with likeminded countries in an interview recently, but also pointed out that they would not hesitate to align with other partners if no investment are made in the Greenland from the like minded countries (like US and EU countries).
@@mtdnspirit “IF” so US can be as nice as possible but ultimately there is no guarantee and we are not be able to stop Greenland from leasing a plot of land for 10 billion dollars to China. Then US would be screwed.
Also the idea that U.S. can equally benefit from Greenland mining is not true. U.S. benefits from Alaska and Texas mineral resources mainly. Not other countries. China brags about how they can deny rare earth minerals to those who don’t to China’s line. So it’s defiantly not far fetched or stupid for Trump to try to get Greenland for the U.S. it’s smart and realistic geopolitics.
I see, so the U.S. is leveraging its position as the European subsidizer (both economically and militarily) to secure long-term security. Fair, the U.S. has already paid trillions with little return
Soldiers in Iraq, in Afghanistan, Vietnam. 5 eyes. Huge network of bases. Aid in Syrian ops, in red sea ops.
Without Europe USA essentially has 3 major allies
@@bobbybrown1258vietnam hardly counts, it was the French who started the war and called the Americans for help, and once they came to support them the French ran away and let the US deal with it, and besides the largest support to the US came from Australia and Canada.
No, at least not completely. The USA is a superpower. Europe never was. We put up with the US screwing up in Iraq, didn't ask questions. We put up with the US infiltrating the German government, didn't ask questions. After 9/11 we joined the USA for 20 years in Afghanistan. Do you honestly think that the US would have done the same if something like 9/11 happened in a European NATO nation?
Anyway, if Trump invades Greenland, what's the difference with Putin invading Ukraine? Oh and Denmark was among the nations to donate F-16s to that country, and order new F-35s. And the UN charter is why NATO supported Ukraine. But I guess you consider that a joke?
It's just an excuse to get all resources in greenland
None of this requires Greenland to be part of the US. The US already has a base there and nobody stops them from expanding it or setting up new bases.
Denmark can stop them from expanding or setting up new bases, and can kick them out entirely, any time they want to. That's the difference between owning a place and being there by invitation only.
"nobody stops them" ← are you on some mushroom?
NATO should be dissolved immediately
@@johanponkenYes, nobody stops the US from building more bases in Greenland. Permit is a formality. Please provide any proof to the contrary.
@ Just reminding the US lost wars against Afghanistan and Vietnam within living memory. They arguably lost Iraq too.
Nothing.
Because that island right next to it is part of NATO and NORAD member CANADA and the US can put whatever they want up there. We aren't going to complain if the US spends even more on north american ballistic missile defenses or air interception assets.
Reality is that its not feasible to base significant forces that far north due to resupply costs and temps below operating temps of most military tech.
Do Israel vs Egypt 2025
Didn't need it for 200 years.
Multiple attempts to buy it in last 200 years by America. So it’s not unreasonable to want it again.
@daltonlyle7727 Whatever daddy Trump wants is just fine with me. His time is short, McDonalds will have its share. 🤡
Greenland should be aware of America's healthcare issues plus tons of red tape
Stop paying attention comrade Binkov 😂
Denmark has faithfully behaved like a true doormat, employee, servant and dog of the United States. And what has they gained from this?
As an American this is exactly how i feel. we will not be stronger by shitting on our best friends. I consider the EU family and have many friends there ill never support this.
@@logmo7959 There are no friends in geopolitics. Binkovs is more American than you, he understood that we are back to imperialism 2.0.
How has America even slightly inconvenienced Denmark aside from pacifying Germany and guaranteeing the longest European peace in human history?
I mean lol sorry for being so badass and good for you. Let us have Greenland they don't like you anymore anyway
@@Bern_il_CinqHaha the people Said they don’t want to be a part of your third world nation. Remember it was Denmark who had to stand up for your imprealisem in Iraq and Afghanistan. No American died for Denmark. Never have and we know you Never will.
Greenland can become independent from Denmark under the Self-Government Act of 2009. The process requires:
- A referendum where Greenlandic people vote for independence
- Negotiations between Greenlandic and Danish governments
- Approval from both parliaments
Theoretically, the US could incentivize Greenland's independence with promises of territory status and economic benefits. Once sovereign, Greenland could legally choose to join the US as an unincorporated territory. Denmark couldn't object after independence, though they'd likely block independence if US annexation was the obvious intent.
As an unincorporated territory, Greenland would have US citizenship, one non-voting delegate in Congress, no electoral votes, and less federal funding than states - similar to Puerto Rico but a significant downgrade from current Danish relationship.
This relies on Denmark's approval which will most likely never happen, and US Congress' commitment for years that would be required for this process. So all this is to say, while there may be a path for US taking over Greenland, it would be very very unlikely.
Greenland should really join the US. Because after seeing Puerto Rico doing so well, who wouldn't?
Russia has sizable contingents of soldiers and air and naval assets based in artctic areas and a number of icebreaker ships. The US has one (edit 2-3) icebreakers (they take years to build) and no major bases in the area.
America is playing catch-up.
The US has 3 polar-class ("heavy") icebreakers, but yes, they need more. I think they have some plans for more, so we'll see.
@Djamonja Thanks. I did a quick web search and found material from a DOD source claiming that the Coast Guard had two operational icebreakers as of 2022.
Russia's Northern Fleet puts it at a bit of an advantage. In the event of a conventional or limited nuclear war Russia could establish FOBs on Greenland and use them and their subs to harass the US & Canada supply chain.
Correction: Australia is the Largest Island, and smallest continent. It can be both.
Australia is too large to be considered an island. You are incorrect.
@@SL1CEND1CEN Says who?
@@lidopina4334 Science
Can Americas be considered an island as well? Or Afroeurasia?
Do a hypothetical American imvasion of Greenland and make it a tie like your many other incorrect projections
Let the salt flow.
Europe is not an ally of the U.S. They have been plundering the U.S. for 80 years or more. Greenland would just mean more leverage for the EU to continue this practice. Greenland should vote on who it wants to join. Also, if Greenland had all these natural resources then the EU would have exploited them years ago, just like they have been doing in Africa.
As you say not really about security because Denmark gives them a free reign. May be about resources but Denmark gives them a free reign but maybe they don't wanna pay anything to the vasal. Might be a pressure tactic for the EU to foot the bill for the Ukraine. Might be implicit acknowledgement the the Denmark and hence Europe become subservient to some other power center (perhaps within Europe, stranger things did happen).
Plundering the US for 80 years or more? I think reality begs to differ. The united states provides a security guarantee, that's why it has value as an ally. Yes that comes with the cost of footing most of the security bill, otherwise it really wouldn't be needed would it? Greenland has been danish for some 800 years, if it was in Africa Trump would call it a shithole country.
LMFAO Europe is our Ally. We used the current system to become THE global power and spread our influence. we get far more FROM this system than we pay INTO it. The strength of our economy is an ENORMOUS part of how we influence the world.
If UA wins the war, who do they rely on? who do they give access to their resources, markets etc?
We made ourselves indispensable.And as s result we reap huge benefits
What about Svalbard? It's also in the middle. Does Norway really need that? It's essential for American national security to annex Svalbard. Gimme gimme
...the US already has an air base there (and has since WWII), and has used that as a critical part of the US's ballistic missile warning system since the cold war.
Yeah and they could just expand that base
Its a Space Force base now
Greenland sho' soundz much mo' invitin that callin' it Grayland.
With Hegseth just confirmed as Defense Secretary invading Green Land and taking it over might be a possibility.
Try, invader, I dare you. Let's see how long you continue drawing breath.
Doing as much would be one of the most stupid moves ever made by the US, but that would also. be expected given the "intellect" of the current administration. While US allies do count on the US a fair amount, what the current dimwits in power and their supporters don't get is that we, the US, also count on our allies. Being isolated will not be good for the US. The US taking over Greenland and stealing the Panama Canal, i.e. the US acting just like Russia is acting toward Ukraine, would be epically stupid, an epic embarrassment, and anti-American.
@Inoffensive_name there is a fine line between bravery and stupidity
No invasion. Not realistic. But let's stop pretending nothing is for sale. There is a price but most can't afford it.
The US will purchase Greenland and make it the 51st State.
Trump is interested in Greenland's continental shelf resources in the arctic
The US does not need to own Greenland. Denmark can just as easily start allowing investment in resource extraction and leases for military bases for icebreakers.
But I have a feeling Denmark will not do it because they had all the opportunity to do so but refused.
Easy way to turn an ally into an enemy, and make the US pay ($$)
Denmark offered exactly that today, and allegedly Trump angrily refused. He wants to actually own it.
Greenland is already swarming with American prospectors, who fail, because its not easy to get resources out of a 2 miles deep icelayer.
That offer haven stod for years, no investere are willing to pay up for the testing. Had you spend 5 min, you would know this
It's a secret !
The biggest nonsense in this is due to the normally great relations between Denmark/Greenland and USA, any base building, stationing of personel and materiel, would probably be instantly approved and welcomed, no need to hurl threaths or "own" anything.
Just ask nicely.
This is in no way wildly anxiety inducing.
how is this any different from the US operating military bases in the middle east or pacific ocean?
@Gravitatis I'm simply speaking of the thought of Nuclear war. It's terrifying. It would be nice if we (USA) could have more military bases in Greenland.
@
nuclear war won't be caused by big countries like the US or china, too much money is involved
if i were you, id be more nervous about the proliferation of nuclear technology to non-official actors
@@Gravitatis I'm also very worried about that.
@
so are the US and chinese governments
It'd make eggs cheaper thus making our troops stronger
Yes. All those chickens in Greenland. Very few people know that chickens originally came from Greenland.
why do Americans have such an obsession with eggs?
@robbiejames1540 they're delicious
Green land might make you to glow GREEN
Western canada and it's northern territories would also be taken, because the locals are sick of Ottawa and Quebec.
We connect alaska
Yes, and Alberta oil and gas would help fuel the annexation
California and new York are sick of Trump. Let it become a part of Denmark. You Will find more people willing to join Denmark than Greenlanders willing to join third world usa
I think the billionaires figure that once global warming really kicks in it might make a nice place to rule from. It was green once....
There's an fasconating amout of things wrong with your comment, but outside of all the science you're misstreating here: does Alaska not exist?
Yeah when the mile thick ice sheet melts 😂🙄
so the US has valid reasons for wanting military bases on greenland, why does he have to make it so obvious on the world stage and make it seem as if he'll invade... some behind closed doors diplomacy could've sorted all of this, no?
No
I think the words used are that the President has "not ruled out" the use of the military, not that it would be preferred. In the event of an all-out war with Russia or China (of which the C-I-C has undoubtedly been drilled) the US is seizing key points in Greenland and Panama anyway. This is part of the "You're Staying the F$ck Over There" Doctrine. Peace is the status quo and it is likely to remain this way; a reminder of the potential alternative opens parties to negotiation.
3:34
Thule air base????
They kept the name of the Not-See secret society????
Mr. Bincov, I am disappointed with the analysis you have made now. It makes no sense to say that America would have advantages if they conquered Greenland. In my opinion, they are only after mineral resources and energy resources, in one word money. They are just greedy. And from a military point of view, the Americans already had control, it makes no sense, and there is something else you said that the Russians and Americans could enter into a limited battle without nuclear weapons. This is nonsense, if something like that happens it means nuclear war. In my opinion, you should redo this video. And Greenland belongs to Denmark and Greenland people, not America
So Greenland cant be owned by USA, but there is no problem with it being owned by Denmark in the same way? Double standard...
Lol disappointing comment. Greenland was taken over by Denmark. And you got no problen with that nor do you care about how the Greenlanders feel. Also Denmark got its assed kicked and taken over by the Nazi. If it was not for the US to free Denmark, it would still be a Nazi territory. Also the US was kind enough to give back Greenland when it never had to. Imagine if Nazi, Russia or China got it, they would never give it back. Regardless you are coming from a weak perspective and probably a leftist or a Dane, both which means nothing compared to real men in power.
@@LeanneGodfried-jp5uhAll the territory of the USA was taken from the Native Americans . So let's not start a story about who owes what to whom. Because you will go into the Minus as the US National Debt.😂
@@LeanneGodfried-jp5uhAnd Yes. If it weren't for the USA, all of Europe would be Soviet! 😂
@@breezyx976If it had not happened 800 years ago you might have a point.
Greenland did not have permanent habitation until fairly recently historically speaking.
Since Viking times I think. But, it is hardly the most habitable real estate on earth.
I want a Normal voice
Yawn.
Great Video Binkov. This really explains the military issues at play. It is sometimes hard to understand arctic geography because we don’t often look at the Globe from the view of the North Pole.
Encirclement of the Northwest Passage and Canada is an underrated reason as well.
The US would get a lot more leverage over trade routes and ocean energy mining in the region as a result, and be able to pressure Canada to reduce political and economic ties with China, and pressure Canada to unfuck itself militarily to contribute more to NATO instead of continuing to allow its military to remain a basket case by expecting free US protection.
Keep talking about annexing Kanada, and their ties with China won’t be just economical.
The TDS is strong here
Yes these dumbass wokes just don't relish in the tastiness of his hog. They don't know what they're missing out these libtards.
The fact is TDS is what MAGA suffers from, not rational people who live in a world in which objective facts exist. Symptoms include a self righteous victim complex, denying objective facts exist, belief that willful ignorance equals strength, racism, misogyny, sadism, being outraged by everything and ashamed of nothing.
These people act like they understand trumps every move and a spouse moral puritanism. Honestly, quite insufferable.
Europe is in a bit of a decline.
If they could handle all of their problems by themselves, Americans would be happy and have less leverage over Europe.
Unfortunately, the upper echelons of Europe are more interested in enriching themselves on their citizenry and slowly sliding into authoritarianism.
Rejecting fascist imperialism is “TDS”
Okay
Why did Americans gave the Franz Joseph land to Russia then? That was European land by far the closest to Russia. Russians are there unlawfully actually, its still European land by law.
I think a 4th ageis ashore facility and another interceptor base on Greenland would be a good move
They can't stop Kinzhal nor can they stop Oreshnik. Aegis is a joke that even Iran defeats easily.