@@seanspindleshanks2529 Oi, fighting Denmark is our thing, you're stealing the very core of our Swedish culture, we are not going to let this outrage slide! Your queen and her Corgies will stand no chance against our glorious king and his silly hats. Denmark is ours, ya wanker!
@@seanspindleshanks2529 The Swedish Empire was like our rebellious teenage years, cool but now we are older and wiser, now we only desire the sweet rebirth of the Kalmar Union!
"Britain shelled Copenhagen, finally teaching the Danes how it feels to have a bunch of angry ships turn up at your shore and set things on fire" God I love this channel
@@LiLBitsDK maybe if denmark made it known more and not keep everything hush hush because they don't want to offend their environmental dogs then maybe I won't have to make that comment
Given that the first offer was in 1867 and the next in 1946 it does make sense that the US renew their offer another 79 years later in 2025. Making it only slightly more rare than a return of Halley's Comet, but more frequent than a World Cup win by England. Fun Fact: By that math, the first possible year for a combined sighting of the comet, an US offer and an English WC win is 2736.
And whilst potentially monotonous or tedious, that _would_ mean, 1. We can all laugh at Poms for their historic failure record against any and all opponents, and 2. As above, but swapping nationality to Seppo/Murrrcan, and opposed by Danes and Greenlanders. 😄
Doesn't frequency require at least two reference points? Like you can measure the frequency of how often football is coming home, which I believe is 2 years but world cup wins? “Frequency is the number of occurrences of a repeating event per unit of time."
Fun fact: There is a small border dispute between Canada and Denmark over a tiny island. Whenever a party lands on it they place their flag, and also a bottle of drink for the neighbors. Update: It was called to my attention that on June 11, 2022, Canada and Denmark resolved their dispute and agreed to divide the island.
@@kameronjones7139 I mean it would be hard for Russia to defend that region. They have a hard time defending Kalinigrad, Greenland will be a nightmare for them to defend
What are you talking about? Greenland isn't cold, Gulf Stream makes it pleasant. Go any where else on the same altitude, like Alaska or RuSSia and learn what a cold climate means! City dweller.. 😁
@@robinwaal-borrebaek6442 Denmark is in the process of helping Greenland become independent. It's just not that easy to run a country when you've never tried it before, so Greenland is in training. As far as I understand it. Love from a Dane
Greenland has wanted its independence for some time now.. but the conversation always goes: - “We want our independence”.. - “Sure, we’re just gonna retract the huge grants, as you’re no longer part of the Danish realm” - “Damn you Danes! We hate you, but you got us this time”. And that’s pretty much the end of the conversation.
Imo Greenland might've been better off joining Canada as an autonomous region (similar to Quebec) rather staying with Denmark or being bought and eventually annexed by the USA. Plus there are several examples in the past that show independence can do more harm than good in the long run especially if you lack the infrastructure to sustain and protect your nation meaning you need help from foreign powers to sustain yourself thus creating a dependency that can be easily cut off if you don't "play ball" and well you can't exactly consider yourself independent at that point. Greenland is definitely among the more understated yet still important geopolitical situations, Greenlanders naturally deserve self-determination but with a population smaller than even some of the microstates yet with a land area comparable to Australia they lack the feasible means of running a country. Who knows how this situation will resolve itself but for the foreseeable future Greenland will remain part of the Danish realm.
@@lynxfresh5214 Well Greenland is pretty much autonomous in every thing they do, they are dependent on the infrastructure and dealing with foreign and defensive affairs, which Denmark provides. I can’t really see how they can get it any better really. They do get more than enough compensation relative to the size of their population to be part of the realm, plus they’ve 2 mandates in any elections which is also proportional pretty substantial, and it was the tipping balance at the last election. I can’t really imagine them being in a better state, being an autonomous region for Canada… at best, it’ll probably be the same. Greenland would probably be ruined, if it gets in the hands of USA. Greenland has pretty much been part of Denmark since the Viking Age… or to be fair, it was within Norway territory.. but Denmark and Norway has been United for a long time, but once the divorced happened, Denmark took Greenland, Iceland and the Faroe Island. So Greenland is part of the legacy and history of Denmark’s past, so I don’t think I agree if it would be better in any others hand, especially when they are relatively thriving. Greenland is not able to run their own country, that’s just a fact, and because they live under extreme conditions, they are forced by nature to live in a particular way, which makes them kind of excluded in their own bubble. There’s actually a known phenomenon, that when Greenlanders decides to settle in Denmark, they become alcoholics, because they cannot process and comprehend, how fast the modern world works. They’re living entirely different lives, now the internet has had an influence, but their culture is still very much ingrained, I would hate to say they have an “insular” approach to anything outside, but Denmark do provide with their cultural understanding and facilitate it with lucrative grants, protection by being a member of NATO, access to free market, they do govern themselves, except the areas that they are incapable of doing themselves, and even though that we know, that there’s valuable mineral materials in Greenland, Denmark is not interested in pursuing it… I know US would. Don’t know about Canada. Geopolitical, it’s a very interesting topic, and it’s an issue that’s under great consideration, which also makes Denmark suddenly a huge player.
@@Christian_Bagger losing out on free money from a successful nation seems to be the number #1 cause of lack of independence. Greenland, Scotland, Costa Rica etc
@@Christian_Bagger Also we have a great bond with Greenland and have had it for many years, + it's not really ethical to "sell" a practically self-ruled nation, we live in 2023 and there should be a vote for the citizens even if Denmark agreed to "sell" it.. and yeah that won't probably favor much to the Americans favor, because we have a good bond with them already.
@@paulsoldner9500 Scotland is a poor example of this, firstly due to their very lucrative offshore oil and natural gas field exports, and secondly their economy declining due to Brexit (which was favoured by England, but rejected by Scotland).
This was because Joao Lavrador had already laid claim to Labrador, Canada (see the connection?) and also settled a few small fishing villages in New Foundland. The Portuguese quickly lost interest in the North Atlantic though and focused on the more lucrative India and Brazil.
Dane here. I would like to clarify something. Denmark tried to avoid participating in the napoleon wars. UK however was afraid that Denmark would side with Napoleon, and decided to strip Denmark of its fleet (but before this, they wanted the Danish king to put the fleet available to the english navy, which was refused). After this, Copenhagen was bombed, and in response to this, Denmark sided with Napoleon.
Brit here. Sorry about that chaps. Our navy seems to do some weird things. We sank french and Italian ships to "stop them falling into the wrong hands." Basically anyone's hands but ours. I hope the apology makes up for this. 👍 Big love from the failing empire. ❤️
@@effdiffeyeno171in the Good old days you would "deliberately" agreed to exchange some tons of silver in excuse... Now what? Any fair blondes, or such values also lost ... 😐
"1066 and Napoleon's Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Grand Uncle's Second Cousin Twice Removed's best friend.... is dead." *thud*
At 1:20 "Denmark made one silly mistake, to ally with Napoleon". Actually, Denmark wanted to be neutral during the Napoleonic war, but because Denmark had the second-largest fleet in Europe, the British bombed the harbours of Copenhagen, fearing that the massive fleet that rivalled their own would join the enemy. In doing so, they basically forced Denmark to side with Napoleon to fight against Britain. So, at the time of the bombing, Denmark was neutral, not an ally of Napoleon.
The eventual defeat of Napoleon led to the break-up of the Denmark-Norway union. The next major combats were over control of Schleswig, in the First and Second Schleswig Wars.
He participated passionately in the legitimate princes' declaration of open enmity to Napoleon, who in 1804 had himself crowned emperor. And in October 1805 he declared war on Napoleon and allied himself with Austria and Great Britain in the Third Coalition.
Not only were we neutral - the main reason why the English attack succeeded was that most of our army and navy were down south to prevent a French/Spanish attack!
I remember having this incredibly inaccurate kid’s geography book as a kid, and because of what I read in it I believed until today that the King of Norway lost Greenland to the King of Denmark in a poker game
Maybe they are hoping one time the Danes will misunderstand the question, answer "yes" by mistake, and then tell them that you cannot recover a gift you made.
How so? Greenland is named accurately as the Scandinavians landed in the south western fjords during summer. Have you ever been to Greenland during summer? It's very very green by the moss covering the hillsides and cliffs. Hardly any snow or ice. So seeing that is what they saw, that is the name given. Iceland, I do not know why they call it that. Might be cuz they found the ice floating in the see or cuz it's so barren. Your guess is better than mine as I have only been to Greenland.
It would help if people would not use the Mercator projection when comparing the comparative size of countries, states, islands etc. Most people do not understand how much the Mercator projection distorts the size of land masses as we approach the poles or why.
@@valkyrie948 dude shut up you seem to not understand how many places the usa owns and how they really doesn’t effect them. please learn to understand how the purchase of land by countries works. look at the us ownership of guam they basically do it all by themselves other than the us just owning the land and being able to use it to boost its own economy and put of military bases which would overall probably make greenland much safer. there would also be almost no change to you if america bought greenland were not looking for another state we’re looking for a territory to own and again benefit from the same way denmark benefits. we’re not some corrupt business looking to put you in slavery or change everything about the country just benefit the same way denmark does. and buying a state is very different than buying an autonomous land owned by a country one is completely controlled by the us the other is not completely controlled by denmark and would not be completely controlled by the us. this is how the world has worked for thousands of years
@@valkyrie948 The united states has ownership of the Americas and parts of Africa through the Banana Republic system. We are the puppet masters of Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, India, and Germany. Saudi Arabia gives all of its oil as with out us it would be the property of the UK. We have had pacific naval dominance since 1894. All the germanic countries of Europe all kowtow to us since they lack a military. If we really wanted Greenland we would take it from you threatened you with nuclear hellfire and you would just give it to us. Now that I think about it why am I arguing about a country that has not had any power over Europe since it began the trend of great empires taking over Europe then dying to Russia.
@@valkyrie948 You sound crazy based on your writings. A country wanting to have a strategic position regarding its enemy is not "disgusting" as you claim. The US has promoted peace and has achieved this largely by creating the United Nations which has forced bellicose nations like those of Europe to the bargaining table. Stop pretending that the US is as evil as the warmongering European nations.
They did that because they didn’t want the Danish navy to be in the hands of the French so when the Danish did ally with the French they were pretty useless to their cause because the Danish fleet had been destroyed.
Even if they did make Denmark join Napoleon they really didn't care since as long as their fleet was destroyed there is little they could do about it. The British actually after the battle of Copenhagen continued the war with Denmark and launched a major invasion of the country, something people know little about perhaps because it had limited success. That is also where the experimental 95th rifle regiment saw action for the first time. After the Danish campaign was over they focused on Portugal and Spain where the regiment was sent later. As for the Danish navy, yea the Brits thought the risk was worth it since they were aware of the reality that even if you have the largest navy in Europe, not only you could end up slightly outnumbered if multiple nations combine their navies at once and concentrate in a dangerous strategic battle that could even potentially tip the naval hegemony, but even a small navy was a danger to Britain. The country was probably very vulnerable on land and one covert naval invasion that their intelligence was unaware of might end up being catastrophic. Nations for centuries had little difficulty in landing troops randomly along the British coast.
This is the worst part lol. Denmark had proclaimed neutrality and The British still attacked them, it was a massive warcrime. Especially since burning copenhagen was ENTIRELY unneccesary. They just wanted to get rid of the danish navy, but they happened to have an english natural philospher along for the ride who had recently developed some incidiary rockets he was *really* excited to test out, so the english just said "fuck it; while we're here you may as well test your rockets on that city full of innocent civilians"
That approach has worked pretty well throughout most of US history. In fact it's literally how we got most of our land. Edit: Look up the size of Alaska and the Louisiana Purchase. Also the confederacy was not a legitimate state, the only mistake America made when dealing with it was not killing more slave owners and redistributing more of it's own returned land to the the freedmen.
*If I had a nickel for every time the U.S. asked to buy Greenland from Denmark,* *I would have four nickels, which isn't a lot but weird it happens four times.*
@@remymcwin4673 Wow....some people really just take jokes seriously. Maybe you need to go out for a drink sometime and just chill. If the person I'm telling a joke to has any problem, he can tell me himself. But seriously don't profile people you don't know, I'm obviously much older than you are. And btw, I am the older brother.
Dartzinho _V lol they didn’t teach you? Lol let me guess the Portuguese landed in the Philippines before the Spanish the reason why they might not teach you this is cause many people don’t believe it even though it’s true also the guy who settled their was killed by Filipino tribesmen when he settled there in 1491
The US trying to buy Greenland is like in Total War when you have a victory condition but really don't want to start a war for it. So you keep offering more money but the AI keeps rejecting you.
To me it’s like when someone has a classic car that they leave out in the rain to rust apart but refuse to sell it to someone who’ll actually do something with it.
America: "Hey Denmark, wanna sell Greenland to us?" Denmark: "No, not really." America: "Are you sure?" Denmark: "Yes, we're sure." America: "But are you really sure for sure, or are you just saying that?"
I'm really glad the Danes never said yes, the US always thought their money was always enough to buy any shit they pleased. And lucky for the Greenlandic people too, not to mention the native Inuit tribes as well, as we all know how the US treat native tribes and minorities. I also think it is some sort of Scandinavian psychological cultural trait in general as these people always seemed to take territorial integrity very seriously and often fought over small scraps of land. Like the war in the 19th century between Prussia and Denmark over Schleswig-Holstein and again the Finns refusing to give Stalin some land in 1940 and again even some years ago were some Norwegian prime minister wanted to gift a mountain to Sweden for his pr but even after signing the treaty the Norwegian parliament destroyed the deal based on their constitution. The Scandinavians in general had their own advanced forms of philosophy for centuries, one of them being apparently they where well aware of the fact that if you give in to another nation even an inch of land you put the future of your people and culture at risk.
@@ivanf.482 This is the best thing I've seen ever , Because as a Italian I feel the same way , The Danish have a big land there and its going to be even valuable when the ice melts and they mine valuables as a European I always want the danes to have that land , NEVER SELL IT!
As an American, I love visiting Greenland. It's an amazing place and I always look forward to going there. The Greenlanders would be insane to want to join the US though, and the Danes are unlikely to sell it without Greenland's approval.
1:18 this is incorrect. The shelling of Copenhagen happened before Denmark joined Napoleon. Denmark was neutral, but the king of the UK wouldn't accept that and gave Denmark an ultimatum, Denmark decided to stay neutral, which led to the shelling Copenhagen and destroying the Danish fleet. After this, Denmark was angered by the unprovoked state terrorism committed by the UK and decided to join Napoleon's side.
British had little choice because they couldn’t risk the French gaining the Danish fleet because they could then use it to invade Britain so it was either do what you described as “state terrorism” or risk being invaded by the French and possibly losing the entire war in the process. Which one would Denmark pick in that situation?
It wasn't entirely unprovoked, yes Denmark was natural but at the time was being heavily pressured by Napoleon to give him control of their fleet aswell as to join the continental system, poor Denmark just got caught up in its neighbours wars.
An interesting note is that the inuit cultures that lived in Greenland pre viking no longer exists. The current inuit culture, called Thule, emigrated from Cananda reaching Greenland around 1300. So in actual fact, Scandinavians has been present in Greenland around 300 years longer then the "indigenous people" of Greenland. The inuit people of Greenland today, share more DNA with Danish people, then the pre existing Dorset inuit culture, which they share non with. Denmark did not conquer a country and people. There was no country when the vikings settled and the country that exists now, was build by the Danes and the Thule people together.
A Dane told me that the Inuit traditionally tried to have children with visitors, since Inuit villages were pretty much all interrelated. I haven't been able to find anything to confirm that through a cursory search, however. If it's true, then it's not surprising that there's a decent amount of Danish DNA among Greenlanders.
@@jeffspaulding9834that's a long known fact. Pretty important praxis to impede inbreeding. Though in modern time, women's sexual liberation and curiosity had more impact on present genetic heritage. Danish craftsmen with working experience in Greenland has a lot of stories to tell... Though certainly not suitable for this place 🙈🙈
Why is indigenous people in quotes? Indigineity is not necessarily about who got there first, it’s about how you relate to the land and also experiencing subjugation and discrimination under a dominant culture. Inuit people in Greenland are discriminated against under Danish control and are still having their children taken away from them by the Danish government even today
@Firstname last name - I think he is and if that actually is the case then that’s very sad . People shouldn’t be punished for the mistakes of the past but that appears to be the norm sadly . He also forgetting all of the good things that Britain has given the world .
@Ahmed -The vikings had literally nothing to do with the British attack on Copenhagen. The reason they attacked was because they didn’t want the Danish fleet to be in the hands of the French and quite probably used AGAINST them so it had nothing to do with centuries old grudges which by this point were long dead . No one in England is triggered by the vikings anymore !! 😂😂😂😂😂😂🤦♂️
@@IhomahomayYou've already been managed by the USA - during a time of war, by the way - because clearly nobody else could. Unlike Europe, we weren't about to let Hitler walk all over us. You're welcome.
Fun fact, Helge Ingstad, who led the Norwegian attempt to take East Greenland, was also the person who found the viking settlement L'Anse aux Meadows and thus demonstrate that the vikings did make it to America.
@@RockSmithStudio "Most Americans" don't know anything about Greenland or even know there's an independence movement there. I suspect the people you're confusing for "most Americans" are just the people in your echo chamber. Greenland has a clearly defined peaceful path towards independence if they want to go that route - which they might this year if the pro-independence parties have their way. Greenland doesn't need money for this process - the only thing money will do is skew the vote, which a lot of countries would see as the US interfering with internal affairs of allied nations. Given that we have an important military base there, it would not be wise to give Greenlanders a reason to want us gone. Ukrainians, on the other hand, have clearly shown their desire not to be part of Russia several times and have also clearly shown their desire to be closer to Europe and the US. An independent Ukraine is a useful buffer state at worst, a potential ally at best. If the US is to maintain its position as a world leader, letting one of its two major rivals eat a potential ally isn't the way to do it. Especially when a lot of our other allies are also contributing to the war and are going to start wondering if we'll just step aside whenever Russia comes for them. Showing Russia get a black eye from a former soviet state can only help the US. Sending weapons and aid to Ukraine is a cheap price to pay considering what we get out of it.
yeah,they signed a neutrality agreement in the 1790s,but it was still kind of foolish to ally with Napoleonic France,they lost a big country over north.
@@maximilianolimamoreira5002 Well, really the danish King lost the title of King of norway. The norwayans were the ones who lost part of the realm to Denmark
This is not entirely true. Great Britain preemtively attacked the Danish Navy, and Copenhagen, out of fear that we would join Napoleon. Before that we remained neutral. However, after the unprovoked attack, we DID join Napoleon (wonder why...)
@@thwalesproductions actually our navy was only halved after the first attack and even then it was still considered one of the most dangerous navies in the world so Great Britain went at us again hoping to take the last of our fleet. but the second time the British learned from their first attack and decided not to make an assault on the Harbor of Copenhagen but make a land assault on Copenhagen to avoid a direct confrontation with the Danish navy that almost destroyed the British the first time around. And that is one of the first bombardment using primitive Missiles and one could argue another War crime done by the British, at least according to contemporary rules of war. result was that the Danes was without a fleet after the war. However even without a fleet the British quickly found that any ships too close to Danish territories would be stolen by Angry Danes in row boats. claiming Danes did nothing and claiming Danes had a weak navy after the first attack even the second one would be a erroneous mistake. Yes the navy was weaker but still not one you would just overlook and sail past,
@@jwil4286 no not the faroe islands. But the british sent abiut 700 soldiers to conqured iceland to ensure that the germans didnt use it. Then after the war iceland "left" the Danish kingdom and became independent
2:42, lol you can see a U-boat covertly sailing. Edit: damn guys, English is my second language. I thought a U-boat and a submarine was the same thing. We only have one word for it in danish, and that's "Ubåd" (I'm from Denmark).
Where? Edit: found it. From the bottom of the video, a quarter of the way towards the No Commies sign. The submarine sweeps from right to left and moves quite quickly.
I went to Iceland a couple of months ago on vacation. I had two Icelandic people discuss how learning English and danish is required in school and how useless learning Danish is, but that they still had to learn it. I found that interesting.
How useful it is is debatable but learning danish they pretty much also learn Norwegian too since Norwegian bokmål is based on danish. It also makes it easier for them to learn swedish. All are nordic countries and closely connected and with a lot of travel, studying and settling in each other´s countries. I´d say learning one of the Scandinavian languages is pretty useful.
Yes, and in fact: English is useful when speaking with Danish, while the same cannot be said about Danish: the Danish will understand what you say, but you won't understand their answers.
That's not uncommon at all, I mean if you look at former Portuguese colonies in the far east of Macau and Goa, and in Macau I think up to 1999 when it was ceded back to China the schools would be in both Cantonese (I think or mandarin) and Portuguese and to this day many street signs are bilingual and due to them being in a special place similar to Hong Kong they use many Portuguese standards (like for license plates) and Macau citizens have with Portugal the same deal which many other former Portuguese colonies have which is that they can move and gain residency in Portugal no questions asked (same is true for Guinea-Bissau and Capo Verde) and some others I don't remember of the top of my head
@@marcofava yeah but most African colonies have their former colonizer’s language as an official language still. And the Icelandic guides I have both said they don’t understand learning Danish.
Its really good!! Tried it both in Norway and Portugal! :)Might be because I am swedish and us scandinavian has something of a obsession with really salty fish!
I could be wrong, but the version i was taught in school was: Denmark: we're not gonna join that mess down south. England: i think the danes are gonna join napoleon. And then they invaded, an took our fleet...
More complicated. We wanted to stay neutral AND sell all sort of things to Napoleon and earn a lot of money. UK would rather have a clear enemy than living with a country subverting their wars against France. So first, in 1801, a large shootout in Copenhagen to get Denmark drop neutrality. And then in 1807 finishing the job (and taking the fleet). Finishing the job meant a heavy bombardment of Copenhagen with fancy weapons.
Honestly, as a dane, I find your comments on us joining the war, misleading at the very least. We were neutral to the war and stated this to the brits multiple times throughout. The brits then claimed the danes were about to make an alliance with Napoleon. Despite many attempts, british historians have yet to find any evidence of any such negotiations ever taking place. In other words, even the brits themselves have acknowledge this as a complete fabrication. Imagine this: Switzerland declares neutrality during WW2. The french, fearing an alliance between Switzerland and Germany, ask Switzerland to join them multiple times. The Swiss decline. France then fabricates a claim that switzerland is about to join Germany and attacks. The swiss now join Germany to protect themselves from France. The swiss then does nothing for the entirety of the remainding war. The war ends with the defeat of the axis. Switzerland is punished for their involvment by lossing more than 50% of their territory to the Allies. Kind of wild to claim Denmark made a mistake, by joining Napoleon, when in reality we were backstabbed and attacked by the british.
@Supernova Cinnamon Eye for an eye? How much suffering did you cause in America? India? Africa? China? If it was eye for an eye, the British Empire would've been dismantled and given away in pieces. What a stupid thing to say lol
@Supernova Cinnamon The viking age was full of savages, barely controlled by any laws. There was no such thing as a "warcrime". Besides, taking revenge for something literally more than 800 years ago, doesn't really make sense
@Supernova Cinnamon I just think it's very odd to compare a warcrime 200 years ago, to one that happened 1200 years ago, where there was no such thing as a warcrime.
We did earn quite a big sum on capturing english ships with the cannon boats though... so "doing nothing" is not completely true.. but in the grand scheme of things.. yeah we did nothing.
@@cyberfux well i think that monaco is 100% udner french rules and 100% dependent it's purely to look cool that they say they are a country they are a "principauté"
From what I understood there was a pirate who claimed it and called himself prince. The French were to busy somewhere else to give it attention (I'm not even going to look it up but it has to be something to do with the British), and thus Monaco remained it's own thing because it was a hill and a fishing village.
@@GijsTheDogI think it was part of Genoa or something until after war it got gave to France and then at some point it became some kind of autonomous state and got annexed by France until in around 1890 France recognize it's independence and until then it is protected by France and still exist
"finally teaching the Danes how it feels to have a bunch of angry ships turn up at your shore and set things on fire" As a Dane I fucking love this line.
Makes me think back to the good old days. Seriously Danmark is like that violent teen who became a nice family man next door who invite people for bbq every summer.
Can you do the Second French Intervention in Mexico? I really like this war and I think a lot of people forget about it due to the American civil war and stuff.
@@goldietheswagbear8288 lol no. It was Latin for 'you too'. It was supposedly Caesar's last words after seeing that his friend Brutus was one of his assassins (the original quote being 'Et tu Brutus?'). The implication being that Denmark didn't see such a betrayal coming. For the record Canada has never asked to buy Greenland even though individual Canadians have kept bringing up the idea.
@@golternator333 It's because James Bissonnette has been here literally forever, spinning 3 plates is also a old one but James Bissonnette is older/the first.
@Frank-ru5imI’m not so sure. We have a Compact of Free Association with Palau, the Marshall Islands, and Micronesia where they get military and economic assistance. I can see Greenland falling under that same umbrella. Do I think Greenland will ever become a state? No, but I think they’ll gain independence and fall into a CFA-type arrangement with the help of both Greenland’s pro-independence parties and the 2nd Trump Administration.
@stoneeagle7360 No, he says he wants to buy it. We'll see about their push for independence but they sure as hell don't want to be pushed into doing anything by an orange.
Greenland is named accurately as the Scandinavians landed in the south western fjords during summer. Have you ever been to Greenland during summer? It's very very green by the moss covering the hillsides and cliffs. Hardly any snow or ice. So seeing that is what they saw, that is the name given.
Greenland is named that way because a viking decided to live there and want to sell the land so he said it was green and nice Iceland is named that way because the vikings landed in winter on the icy bit of the island didn't explore much and went home
Congratualations, a very good job on this video, love your series. Just 1 error in this video : Before the British attack, Denmark wasn’t an allied of Napoleon. It had a huge fleet however, and did not comply to British demands in the British conflict with the French. Hence the attack and afterwards Denmark unwisely did ally with Napoleon.
One big error in your presentation--when the British attacked Copenhagen, Denmark-Norway was neutral, not allied with Napoleon. The Brits made a preemptive attack to make sure the Danish fleet wouldn't be used to attack them if Napoleon attacked Denmark or the Danes joined Napoleon. So they attacked first. Having been attacked, the Danes then joined Napoleon in retaliation.
The first European to come across Greenland was the Norse explorer Gunnbjorn Ulfsson in the 9th century, when he was blown off course in a heavy storm, however he didn't actually set foot on his newly discovered land. The first European to set foot on Greenland was the Norse explorer Erik Thorvaldsson in 982 AD, he was better known as "Erik the Red" due to his fiery red hair and beard, Erik was born in Jaeren, Norway in 950 AD, Erik started colonising Greenland from Iceland in the spring of 985, to attract settlers Erik described the island as a "Green Land" as opposed to Iceland that they were living on at the time. Erik the Red died on Greenland in1003 AD at the age of 53. Around 1000 AD, Leif Erikson who was the son of Erik the Red, sailed west from Greenland to explore and hopefully discover new lands. Leif discovered a large island that he named Vinland, today it's known as Newfoundland. Leif died in 1020 AD on Iceland at the age of 50
Note that Bjarni Herjólfsson was the first European to come across Vinland but he didn't set foot on it. He told Leif Ericsson, who did. So history did repeat itself.
The Danish didn't decide to side with Napoleon, that decission was made for them. The English just sailed into Copenhagen and sunk the entire Danish fleet, and as a consequence of that, Denmark naturally ended up on Napoleon's side.
"(Britain) finally teaching the Danes what it feels like to have a bunch of angry ships roll up at your shore and set everything on fire" Reverse vikings
@@MegaOgrady not really. The Danes mostly went to England, and the Norwegians mostly went to Scotland and Ireland, but the Swedes mostly went to Russia.
*ice melts Greenland: i know we have been together for a long time and i am grateful for all the financial support u have given me thru the years.... but i just got my hand on a shit ton of natural resources and i don't feel like sharing, so i break up with u, by by Denmark Greenland rolls away in a fancy car
@@mrbrierley4344 nah, the norse died out, then the inuits came from canada. Driving out the other native populatoin. A good part of the norse settelment went to iceland so their claim is more historic than the inuits that has only been there for 500 years
Denmark allying with Napoleon was not "silly". Britain attacked Denmark's trade fleet FIRST to prevent Napoleon from potentially invading Denmark and seizing their fleet, one of Europe's largest at the time. Denmark had tried to stay neutral in the Napoleonic conflict, but was strongarmed by the British to side with Napoleon.
Without the fleet Denmark had no military power so it was silly to join the war because it could do very little to help the French. Secondly, the attack on Denmark was necessary to prevent the French from potentially attacking Britain with that Danish fleet .
@@Valencetheshireman927 So u would expect us to endure an unprovoked attack on our capital city including the sinking of our entire fleet and just go hide under a rock? Im with qupp75 on that 1 - FU.
@@Valencetheshireman927 "an unprovoked attack against a neutral country with no signs of giving a shit about the war was necessary and justified." yikes
Hang on, the Orange President isn't the first one to offer to buy Greenland from Denmark. And isn't even the second one to do this either? Literally mindblowing.
He may be the first US president to threaten Denmark over it but that is his pattern; threaten people he knows want to stay friendly with us while coddling our adversaries.
“Finally teaching the Danes how it feels to have a bunch of angry ships appear on your shores and set fire to everything” Jesus your dry humour is just unreal!
- (Denmark): I'm not joining Napoleon. - (Britain): I don't think so. (Proceeds to attack indiscriminately Copenhagen). - (Pissed Denmark): now I'm joining Napoleon. - (Britain): you see, I was right. But now it doesn't matter anymore. And that's how a cynical empire is built.
I'm imagining an orange-faced square looming over denmark's shoulder. "And as we all know, truman was the last american president to offer to buy Greenland.
They literally use the standard world map and people complain. People know that the mercator projection isn't a true indication of the size, but to get the right coordinates instead.
Hmm part of this story isn’t true. Denmark was neutral when Brittain showed up and bombed Copenhagen in 1807. That attack made Denmark join the alliance with Napoleon. As always the order of events are pretty important to get right;)
Is this a bit like saying "America was neutral in WWII until Pearl Harbour"? Honestly curious, because if so, then the neutrality is not that relevant.
David Lodge class of 2022 not at all. USA was supplying Uk with weapons and all neccesities (sorry camt spell). UK would have been lost without US in ww2. Denmark was trading with all parties and as far as I know not weapons. UK and USA was de facto allied beofre US joined the war. Denmark and France was NOT allied before the british attack on Copenhagen in 1807. Denmark didn’t even join the war after the british attack of 1801.
@@TheMrRonQ Cool. Like I said, I was genuinely curious. :) I will contest one thing, though. The UK was not hopeless without American intervention, or at least without the American military. Americans helped shorten the war in the East, and did a ton to stop the advance of the USSR, but the Allies had already begun to turn the tide in Europe before America joined. The Americans did shorten it, though, and selling weapons did help (although it was also motivated simply by profit).
You offer 2 things: - A 3 minute summary of international events that others couldn't explain in hours - Animation that is both cruder and funnier than South Park
"Finally teaching the Danes, how it feels to have a bunch of angry ships turn up off your shore and set everything on fire" Lmao.
As a dane, I found that shit hilarious. Though I think it's high time we took another "shopping trip" to England as soon as they leave the EU >:3
@@seanspindleshanks2529 Yeah that might upset Germany as they own some of that peninsula. And Germany is in the EU. Sooooooooo.........
@@seanspindleshanks2529 Oi, fighting Denmark is our thing, you're stealing the very core of our Swedish culture, we are not going to let this outrage slide! Your queen and her Corgies will stand no chance against our glorious king and his silly hats. Denmark is ours, ya wanker!
@@seanspindleshanks2529 The Swedish Empire was like our rebellious teenage years, cool but now we are older and wiser, now we only desire the sweet rebirth of the Kalmar Union!
@@seanspindleshanks2529 we'll just bring our own queen and she'll smoke em outta existence
"Britain shelled Copenhagen, finally teaching the Danes how it feels to have a bunch of angry ships turn up at your shore and set things on fire"
God I love this channel
i didn't get it at first, then i remembered vikings
@@smg7650 RIP the british then
@@smg7650 rip
Please tell me one of the ships was the HMS Lindisfarne
Then the danes knew what it was like for the ottomans.
Denmark: “We’re not making the same mistake Russia made with Alaska.”
And what natural resources has Denmark tapped into? None
@@attiepollard7847 Chill out, the natural resources aren't going anywhere and god knows we dont need the money lol. - A Dane
@@attiepollard7847 actually we have a lot of oil and natural gas, if you weren't clueless you wouldn't make clueless claims like yours
@@LiLBitsDK maybe if denmark made it known more and not keep everything hush hush because they don't want to offend their environmental dogs then maybe I won't have to make that comment
@@attiepollard7847 not really all that hush hush lol... we just pay dearly to have big companies do the hard work for us
Given that the first offer was in 1867 and the next in 1946 it does make sense that the US renew their offer another 79 years later in 2025.
Making it only slightly more rare than a return of Halley's Comet, but more frequent than a World Cup win by England.
Fun Fact: By that math, the first possible year for a combined sighting of the comet, an US offer and an English WC win is 2736.
And whilst potentially monotonous or tedious, that _would_ mean,
1. We can all laugh at Poms for their historic failure record against any and all opponents, and
2. As above, but swapping nationality to Seppo/Murrrcan, and opposed by Danes and Greenlanders. 😄
With or without robot legs?
Doesn't frequency require at least two reference points? Like you can measure the frequency of how often football is coming home, which I believe is 2 years but world cup wins?
“Frequency is the number of occurrences of a repeating event per unit of time."
seeing Trumps in power i wouldnt be surprised if he tried
Thanks for clearing that up!
Fun fact: There is a small border dispute between Canada and Denmark over a tiny island. Whenever a party lands on it they place their flag, and also a bottle of drink for the neighbors.
Update: It was called to my attention that on June 11, 2022, Canada and Denmark resolved their dispute and agreed to divide the island.
That's what happens when two nice countries goes to war
Actually Canada leaves a bottle of rye, and Denmark leaves a bottle of schnapps.
Do they take the flag with them when they leave, or is there just a pile of Canadian and Danish flags on the island?
@@wireshock4633 i think there just taking it down laying the flag in a box and vise versa.
@@michael-gb3rn Oh c'mon. Are they at least writing evil words on each others flags or are they rather complimenting each others looks? -.-'
As someone who doesn’t live in Greenland I ask myself this every day.
@Wacky Venky *_OOOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH_*
Do you favour independence or continue union with Denmark?
Same im glad I got clarification from this channel so I can sleep peacefully
Lmao
why just leave
Denmark: "No means no!"
USA: "What? Yes? Awesome! How much you want for it?"
We definitely want it lol
@@aristotleofathens6806 meh Denmark can keep it, we have enough land already
@@ApersonIguess-rb6fu tell that to Russia
@@kameronjones7139 I mean it would be hard for Russia to defend that region. They have a hard time defending Kalinigrad, Greenland will be a nightmare for them to defend
What part of offering to buy it counts as not accepting a no answer? If they had invaded it, THAT would be refusing their answer
I’ve been to Greenland. Saying “it’s cold” is possibly the greatest understatement ever uttered. Iceland felt like Hawaii in comparison.
Iceland is volcanic, of course it’s going to feel like Hawaii!
What are you talking about? Greenland isn't cold, Gulf Stream makes it pleasant. Go any where else on the same altitude, like Alaska or RuSSia and learn what a cold climate means! City dweller.. 😁
@@OmmerSysselmfw I gatekeep feeling cold
The Gulf Stream keeps Iceland from being Antarctica, much like the rest of Europe.@@jonathanwells223
sometimes it’s funny to see tourists in huge winter jackets only to see them having the jackets off later on
"It was decided that Norway needed to calm down and leave."
*Norway would like to speak to your manager*
As a Norwegian I hate you but as a Meme Connoisseur I am bound to give you a thumbs up.
Only time Norway was ever told to chill out lmao
I would actually. Give Iceland, Greenland and the Faroe Islands back ffs
@@robinwaal-borrebaek6442 Denmark is in the process of helping Greenland become independent. It's just not that easy to run a country when you've never tried it before, so Greenland is in training. As far as I understand it. Love from a Dane
@@2xdrews ah ok. We'll just take them over when they're independent then :D
Greenland has wanted its independence for some time now.. but the conversation always goes:
- “We want our independence”..
- “Sure, we’re just gonna retract the huge grants, as you’re no longer part of the Danish realm”
- “Damn you Danes! We hate you, but you got us this time”.
And that’s pretty much the end of the conversation.
Imo Greenland might've been better off joining Canada as an autonomous region (similar to Quebec) rather staying with Denmark or being bought and eventually annexed by the USA.
Plus there are several examples in the past that show independence can do more harm than good in the long run especially if you lack the infrastructure to sustain and protect your nation meaning you need help from foreign powers to sustain yourself thus creating a dependency that can be easily cut off if you don't "play ball" and well you can't exactly consider yourself independent at that point.
Greenland is definitely among the more understated yet still important geopolitical situations, Greenlanders naturally deserve self-determination but with a population smaller than even some of the microstates yet with a land area comparable to Australia they lack the feasible means of running a country.
Who knows how this situation will resolve itself but for the foreseeable future Greenland will remain part of the Danish realm.
@@lynxfresh5214 Well Greenland is pretty much autonomous in every thing they do, they are dependent on the infrastructure and dealing with foreign and defensive affairs, which Denmark provides. I can’t really see how they can get it any better really. They do get more than enough compensation relative to the size of their population to be part of the realm, plus they’ve 2 mandates in any elections which is also proportional pretty substantial, and it was the tipping balance at the last election. I can’t really imagine them being in a better state, being an autonomous region for Canada… at best, it’ll probably be the same. Greenland would probably be ruined, if it gets in the hands of USA. Greenland has pretty much been part of Denmark since the Viking Age… or to be fair, it was within Norway territory.. but Denmark and Norway has been United for a long time, but once the divorced happened, Denmark took Greenland, Iceland and the Faroe Island. So Greenland is part of the legacy and history of Denmark’s past, so I don’t think I agree if it would be better in any others hand, especially when they are relatively thriving. Greenland is not able to run their own country, that’s just a fact, and because they live under extreme conditions, they are forced by nature to live in a particular way, which makes them kind of excluded in their own bubble. There’s actually a known phenomenon, that when Greenlanders decides to settle in Denmark, they become alcoholics, because they cannot process and comprehend, how fast the modern world works. They’re living entirely different lives, now the internet has had an influence, but their culture is still very much ingrained, I would hate to say they have an “insular” approach to anything outside, but Denmark do provide with their cultural understanding and facilitate it with lucrative grants, protection by being a member of NATO, access to free market, they do govern themselves, except the areas that they are incapable of doing themselves, and even though that we know, that there’s valuable mineral materials in Greenland, Denmark is not interested in pursuing it… I know US would. Don’t know about Canada.
Geopolitical, it’s a very interesting topic, and it’s an issue that’s under great consideration, which also makes Denmark suddenly a huge player.
@@Christian_Bagger losing out on free money from a successful nation seems to be the number #1 cause of lack of independence.
Greenland, Scotland, Costa Rica etc
@@Christian_Bagger Also we have a great bond with Greenland and have had it for many years, + it's not really ethical to "sell" a practically self-ruled nation, we live in 2023 and there should be a vote for the citizens even if Denmark agreed to "sell" it.. and yeah that won't probably favor much to the Americans favor, because we have a good bond with them already.
@@paulsoldner9500 Scotland is a poor example of this, firstly due to their very lucrative offshore oil and natural gas field exports, and secondly their economy declining due to Brexit (which was favoured by England, but rejected by Scotland).
nobody:
portugal: *let's claim greenland because why not*
The next best Portuguese idea after dividing the entire world with Spain in Tordesillas.
This was because Joao Lavrador had already laid claim to Labrador, Canada (see the connection?) and also settled a few small fishing villages in New Foundland. The Portuguese quickly lost interest in the North Atlantic though and focused on the more lucrative India and Brazil.
The Portuguese probably also though “brrr this climate sucks”
That claim came from the treaty, Greenland was in Portugal’s side of the line
@@claudiosmith170 Greenland climate go brrr
Dane here. I would like to clarify something. Denmark tried to avoid participating in the napoleon wars. UK however was afraid that Denmark would side with Napoleon, and decided to strip Denmark of its fleet (but before this, they wanted the Danish king to put the fleet available to the english navy, which was refused). After this, Copenhagen was bombed, and in response to this, Denmark sided with Napoleon.
So, UK feared Denmark would side with Napoleon, so they made sure Denmark would side with Napoleon by bombing Denmark's capital, right? Real smart.
Brit here. Sorry about that chaps. Our navy seems to do some weird things. We sank french and Italian ships to "stop them falling into the wrong hands."
Basically anyone's hands but ours.
I hope the apology makes up for this. 👍
Big love from the failing empire. ❤️
@@effdiffeyeno171in the Good old days you would "deliberately" agreed to exchange some tons of silver in excuse... Now what?
Any fair blondes, or such values also lost ... 😐
Napoleon is in every European story😂
It's not like he tried to conquer it or anything
every european nations history has a chapter that starts like : "And then Napoleon came around"
And, this includes Russia too, me thinks...
"1066 and Napoleon's Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Grand Uncle's Second Cousin Twice Removed's best friend.... is dead." *thud*
And Vikings.
Denmark wouldn’t have said “no” if the proposal to buy Greenland had come from James Bissonette.
😡F you,
@@klausmortensen you clearly aren’t funded by James Bisonette either 🤷♂️
@@klausmortensen calm down.
@@klausmortensen de joker for satan xD
Kelly Money Maker is also a good buyer too
At 1:20 "Denmark made one silly mistake, to ally with Napoleon". Actually, Denmark wanted to be neutral during the Napoleonic war, but because Denmark had the second-largest fleet in Europe, the British bombed the harbours of Copenhagen, fearing that the massive fleet that rivalled their own would join the enemy. In doing so, they basically forced Denmark to side with Napoleon to fight against Britain. So, at the time of the bombing, Denmark was neutral, not an ally of Napoleon.
The eventual defeat of Napoleon led to the break-up of the Denmark-Norway union. The next major combats were over control of Schleswig, in the First and Second Schleswig Wars.
He participated passionately in the legitimate princes' declaration of open enmity to Napoleon, who in 1804 had himself crowned emperor. And in October 1805 he declared war on Napoleon and allied himself with Austria and Great Britain in the Third Coalition.
Not only were we neutral - the main reason why the English attack succeeded was that most of our army and navy were down south to prevent a French/Spanish attack!
@@peterfireflylund also it was the first time a nation use terro bombing of civilians.
@@85Zeroangel We we’re only getting you back for what you did a thousand years before.
I remember having this incredibly inaccurate kid’s geography book as a kid, and because of what I read in it I believed until today that the King of Norway lost Greenland to the King of Denmark in a poker game
2067: The 15th American purchase attempt of Greenland
@@hotel3667 ..what
Maybe they are hoping one time the Danes will misunderstand the question, answer "yes" by mistake, and then tell them that you cannot recover a gift you made.
There will be no America in 2067
@@shafqatishan437 And yet we'll somehow keep trying to buy Greenland
No!
Fun fact: in Denmark the first thing we learn to say, is “No”.
I don’t know if this is a joke or not cuz I’m dying 🤣
um, no
@@dotdashdotdash You're learning very well
Nej
If the USA wants Greenland the USA can just invade Greenland
Vikings swapping the names of Iceland and Greenland: My comedy is genius
*prankd*
How so?
Greenland is named accurately as the Scandinavians landed in the south western fjords during summer. Have you ever been to Greenland during summer? It's very very green by the moss covering the hillsides and cliffs. Hardly any snow or ice. So seeing that is what they saw, that is the name given.
Iceland, I do not know why they call it that. Might be cuz they found the ice floating in the see or cuz it's so barren. Your guess is better than mine as I have only been to Greenland.
@@nedsteven4622 I know, and?
@@nedsteven4622 Would have been better to throw out in a seperate post mister Misinformationer
@@beersmurff it's was just a joke
It would help if people would not use the Mercator projection when comparing the comparative size of countries, states, islands etc. Most people do not understand how much the Mercator projection distorts the size of land masses as we approach the poles or why.
Yes, it makes Greenland look almost as big as Africa, whereas in reality, Africa is almost 14 times as big as Greenland!
Just trying to make us look bigger… it’s a tallywacker thing.
Exactly!!
@@CarlGerhardt1so what? They're still not as munch into useless child production 😇
💯
In American English, "no" can mean, "not yet."
Unfortunately for the Americans, no can also mean, that its not ours to sell. They might as well as the UK, if they can buy Canada.
@@valkyrie948 dude shut up you seem to not understand how many places the usa owns and how they really doesn’t effect them. please learn to understand how the purchase of land by countries works. look at the us ownership of guam they basically do it all by themselves other than the us just owning the land and being able to use it to boost its own economy and put of military bases which would overall probably make greenland much safer. there would also be almost no change to you if america bought greenland were not looking for another state we’re looking for a territory to own and again benefit from the same way denmark benefits. we’re not some corrupt business looking to put you in slavery or change everything about the country just benefit the same way denmark does. and buying a state is very different than buying an autonomous land owned by a country one is completely controlled by the us the other is not completely controlled by denmark and would not be completely controlled by the us. this is how the world has worked for thousands of years
This is untrue but also a funny joke
@@valkyrie948 The united states has ownership of the Americas and parts of Africa through the Banana Republic system. We are the puppet masters of Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, India, and Germany. Saudi Arabia gives all of its oil as with out us it would be the property of the UK. We have had pacific naval dominance since 1894. All the germanic countries of Europe all kowtow to us since they lack a military. If we really wanted Greenland we would take it from you threatened you with nuclear hellfire and you would just give it to us. Now that I think about it why am I arguing about a country that has not had any power over Europe since it began the trend of great empires taking over Europe then dying to Russia.
@@valkyrie948 You sound crazy based on your writings. A country wanting to have a strategic position regarding its enemy is not "disgusting" as you claim. The US has promoted peace and has achieved this largely by creating the United Nations which has forced bellicose nations like those of Europe to the bargaining table. Stop pretending that the US is as evil as the warmongering European nations.
British: fire on danish ships so they don’t join Napoleon
Danes: join Napoleon for protection against the British
British: surprised pikachu face
They did that because they didn’t want the Danish navy to be in the hands of the French so when the Danish did ally with the French they were pretty useless to their cause because the Danish fleet had been destroyed.
Even if they did make Denmark join Napoleon they really didn't care since as long as their fleet was destroyed there is little they could do about it. The British actually after the battle of Copenhagen continued the war with Denmark and launched a major invasion of the country, something people know little about perhaps because it had limited success. That is also where the experimental 95th rifle regiment saw action for the first time. After the Danish campaign was over they focused on Portugal and Spain where the regiment was sent later.
As for the Danish navy, yea the Brits thought the risk was worth it since they were aware of the reality that even if you have the largest navy in Europe, not only you could end up slightly outnumbered if multiple nations combine their navies at once and concentrate in a dangerous strategic battle that could even potentially tip the naval hegemony, but even a small navy was a danger to Britain. The country was probably very vulnerable on land and one covert naval invasion that their intelligence was unaware of might end up being catastrophic. Nations for centuries had little difficulty in landing troops randomly along the British coast.
@@Iason29 To be clear, Denmark had at the time the 5th biggest navy in the world
This is the worst part lol. Denmark had proclaimed neutrality and The British still attacked them, it was a massive warcrime. Especially since burning copenhagen was ENTIRELY unneccesary. They just wanted to get rid of the danish navy, but they happened to have an english natural philospher along for the ride who had recently developed some incidiary rockets he was *really* excited to test out, so the english just said "fuck it; while we're here you may as well test your rockets on that city full of innocent civilians"
@@Freekymoho yeah because the Danes were always so peaceful towards the English right!?
Yeeeesh
"pls give us Greenland, we'll give money in return"
- America
What's Danish for, "What's English for no?"?
"pls give me Greenland, I'll give money in return"
- James Bizanette
That approach has worked pretty well throughout most of US history. In fact it's literally how we got most of our land.
Edit: Look up the size of Alaska and the Louisiana Purchase. Also the confederacy was not a legitimate state, the only mistake America made when dealing with it was not killing more slave owners and redistributing more of it's own returned land to the the freedmen.
@@remembertotakeshowerspleas355 And Denmark did sell the Virgin Islands to the US in 1917
@@jesseberg3271 nej = no
I love how the thumbnail is bugged into just "no" now
*If I had a nickel for every time the U.S. asked to buy Greenland from Denmark,*
*I would have four nickels, which isn't a lot but weird it happens four times.*
"It's weird that it happened four times" lol, funny coincidence, that is what your gf had told me as well.
@@Iason29 You must think you're really funny.
@@gabriel.b9036 Hey, leave him be. Lason29 is probably some first grader that wants to try out his new roasts that his older brother told him about.
@@remymcwin4673 Wow....some people really just take jokes seriously. Maybe you need to go out for a drink sometime and just chill. If the person I'm telling a joke to has any problem, he can tell me himself. But seriously don't profile people you don't know, I'm obviously much older than you are. And btw, I am the older brother.
@@Iason29 Seems to me like you're the one who took the joke seriously :p
“The Portuguese laid claim to the land” - sorry, what the actual hell? Why wasn’t I taught this in school? I live in Portugal!
Perhaps because they never did anything to enforce the claim and everyone just ignored it anyways, so nothing really came of it.
Dartzinho _V neither was I and I’m Norwegian
You were taught, but the teachers never specified that, in the treaty of tordesillas, greenland was on your side of the deal.
Dartzinho _V lol they didn’t teach you? Lol let me guess the Portuguese landed in the Philippines before the Spanish the reason why they might not teach you this is cause many people don’t believe it even though it’s true also the guy who settled their was killed by Filipino tribesmen when he settled there in 1491
*american music plays?*
Any sort of European history
Napoleon: Hello there
General Kenobi... wait, that's me....
Also, Vikings.
General Napoleoni!
@@generalkros you are a bold one
Not really, but nice try!
Gotta appreciate how the thumbnail gets straight to the point and answers the question
The US trying to buy Greenland is like in Total War when you have a victory condition but really don't want to start a war for it. So you keep offering more money but the AI keeps rejecting you.
To me it’s like when someone has a classic car that they leave out in the rain to rust apart but refuse to sell it to someone who’ll actually do something with it.
Late response...but to build on that...you try to be in the AI's good graces for mutual benefit and then they end up declaring war on you.
@@xymos7807 literally happens every time.. essentially, you end up funding your own demise. It's like paying a hooker to give them head.
If Greenland had oil in then USA would've invaded soon afterwards and start a war with Denmark
@@dmeads5663 are you american by any chance?
America: "Hey Denmark, wanna sell Greenland to us?"
Denmark: "No, not really."
America: "Are you sure?"
Denmark: "Yes, we're sure."
America: "But are you really sure for sure, or are you just saying that?"
Hehe 😂👍
It's hard to tell sometimes.
I'm really glad the Danes never said yes, the US always thought their money was always enough to buy any shit they pleased. And lucky for the Greenlandic people too, not to mention the native Inuit tribes as well, as we all know how the US treat native tribes and minorities.
I also think it is some sort of Scandinavian psychological cultural trait in general as these people always seemed to take territorial integrity very seriously and often fought over small scraps of land. Like the war in the 19th century between Prussia and Denmark over Schleswig-Holstein and again the Finns refusing to give Stalin some land in 1940 and again even some years ago were some Norwegian prime minister wanted to gift a mountain to Sweden for his pr but even after signing the treaty the Norwegian parliament destroyed the deal based on their constitution. The Scandinavians in general had their own advanced forms of philosophy for centuries, one of them being apparently they where well aware of the fact that if you give in to another nation even an inch of land you put the future of your people and culture at risk.
"Yes and no"
Norway: hey wanna sell us Greenland? We're pals aren't we? We just want it ok😢
As an American I can promise that we will try again.
I am still amazed that no American boat has exploded near Greenland...
@@Jayako12 😂😂😂
We did, under Trump.
As an italian, I hope the Danish will never sell it to America. We Europeans must not give and inch to the US
@@ivanf.482 This is the best thing I've seen ever , Because as a Italian I feel the same way , The Danish have a big land there and its going to be even valuable when the ice melts and they mine valuables as a European I always want the danes to have that land , NEVER SELL IT!
Denmark: "Do not come, do not come"
USA in 2025: "I'm gonna come"
199
As an American, I love visiting Greenland. It's an amazing place and I always look forward to going there.
The Greenlanders would be insane to want to join the US though, and the Danes are unlikely to sell it without Greenland's approval.
Denmark be like: Let's sell all our tropical islands.
Also Denmark: We can't sell Greenland.
Emma Skovgård you’re just stating reasons to why Norway should own Greenland.
@@ganjafi59 nah mate, how about a happy medium. Give it to Portugal
People's Republic of Liberland would rather give independence
@@emmaisalone Imagine being this nationalistic
The comments feel like Marvel's Scandinavian civil war.
1:18 this is incorrect. The shelling of Copenhagen happened before Denmark joined Napoleon. Denmark was neutral, but the king of the UK wouldn't accept that and gave Denmark an ultimatum, Denmark decided to stay neutral, which led to the shelling Copenhagen and destroying the Danish fleet. After this, Denmark was angered by the unprovoked state terrorism committed by the UK and decided to join Napoleon's side.
British had little choice because they couldn’t risk the French gaining the Danish fleet because they could then use it to invade Britain so it was either do what you described as “state terrorism” or risk being invaded by the French and possibly losing the entire war in the process. Which one would Denmark pick in that situation?
I'm glad I wasn't the only one to notice that.
It wasn't entirely unprovoked, yes Denmark was natural but at the time was being heavily pressured by Napoleon to give him control of their fleet aswell as to join the continental system, poor Denmark just got caught up in its neighbours wars.
@@Valencetheshireman927 Denmark was neutral, did you miss that? Denmark's fleet would not be acquired by the French because it was neutral
@@Valencetheshireman927 Shelling civilian and cultural targets specifically is what I would call “state terrorism”, but I know that happens alot.
18th century European geopolitics: *exists*
Napoleon: bonjour
More like the beginning of the 19th century.
An interesting note is that the inuit cultures that lived in Greenland pre viking no longer exists. The current inuit culture, called Thule, emigrated from Cananda reaching Greenland around 1300.
So in actual fact, Scandinavians has been present in Greenland around 300 years longer then the "indigenous people" of Greenland.
The inuit people of Greenland today, share more DNA with Danish people, then the pre existing Dorset inuit culture, which they share non with.
Denmark did not conquer a country and people. There was no country when the vikings settled and the country that exists now, was build by the Danes and the Thule people together.
A Dane told me that the Inuit traditionally tried to have children with visitors, since Inuit villages were pretty much all interrelated. I haven't been able to find anything to confirm that through a cursory search, however. If it's true, then it's not surprising that there's a decent amount of Danish DNA among Greenlanders.
@@jeffspaulding9834that's a long known fact. Pretty important praxis to impede inbreeding.
Though in modern time, women's sexual liberation and curiosity had more impact on present genetic heritage.
Danish craftsmen with working experience in Greenland has a lot of stories to tell... Though certainly not suitable for this place 🙈🙈
Why is indigenous people in quotes? Indigineity is not necessarily about who got there first, it’s about how you relate to the land and also experiencing subjugation and discrimination under a dominant culture. Inuit people in Greenland are discriminated against under Danish control and are still having their children taken away from them by the Danish government even today
Denmark: Why are you bombarding us?
Britain: Payback
@@smg7650 god i hope you're not triggered by 200 year old events
@@firstnamelastname-we6rt the british were triggered by 740 years events when they bombed Denmark
@Firstname last name - I think he is and if that actually is the case then that’s very sad . People shouldn’t be punished for the mistakes of the past but that appears to be the norm sadly . He also forgetting all of the good things that Britain has given the world .
@Ahmed -The vikings had literally nothing to do with the British attack on Copenhagen. The reason they attacked was because they didn’t want the Danish fleet to be in the hands of the French and quite probably used AGAINST them so it had nothing to do with centuries old grudges which by this point were long dead . No one in England is triggered by the vikings anymore !! 😂😂😂😂😂😂🤦♂️
Officially for allying with Napoleon, but also for the countless raid and colonization of the Vikings.
"Why does Denmark Own Greenland?"
As a Norwegian, I look out my window and ponder this question a lot.
Hahahaha!
If it makes you sad, just do, what I often like to do - Take pride and comfort in not being Swedish :)
@@fastertove I agree
Glad we are managed by Denmark and not the Norway or USA 😊
@@IhomahomayYou've already been managed by the USA - during a time of war, by the way - because clearly nobody else could. Unlike Europe, we weren't about to let Hitler walk all over us. You're welcome.
@@Gaeilgeoir Oh lol the stupidity of American bigotry
Fun fact, Helge Ingstad, who led the Norwegian attempt to take East Greenland, was also the person who found the viking settlement L'Anse aux Meadows and thus demonstrate that the vikings did make it to America.
Yes and anotherfun fact, as he was born in 1899 and died in 2001, he lived in 3 different centuries.
Truely a Norwegian hero, in contrast to present whiners and despicable terrorist supporters 🙄🤮😴😴
2025 and this is relevant again. I always love the signs the little characters hold up. "What part of "NO"?" at 2:46 is just perfect.
Most Americans would rather give money to Greenland to help support their independence than give money to Ukraine
@@RockSmithStudio "Most Americans" don't know anything about Greenland or even know there's an independence movement there. I suspect the people you're confusing for "most Americans" are just the people in your echo chamber.
Greenland has a clearly defined peaceful path towards independence if they want to go that route - which they might this year if the pro-independence parties have their way. Greenland doesn't need money for this process - the only thing money will do is skew the vote, which a lot of countries would see as the US interfering with internal affairs of allied nations. Given that we have an important military base there, it would not be wise to give Greenlanders a reason to want us gone.
Ukrainians, on the other hand, have clearly shown their desire not to be part of Russia several times and have also clearly shown their desire to be closer to Europe and the US. An independent Ukraine is a useful buffer state at worst, a potential ally at best.
If the US is to maintain its position as a world leader, letting one of its two major rivals eat a potential ally isn't the way to do it. Especially when a lot of our other allies are also contributing to the war and are going to start wondering if we'll just step aside whenever Russia comes for them. Showing Russia get a black eye from a former soviet state can only help the US. Sending weapons and aid to Ukraine is a cheap price to pay considering what we get out of it.
But Denmark-Norway only signed an alliance with Napoleon because the British attacked them first, they had tried to remain neutral before that.
yeah,they signed a neutrality agreement in the 1790s,but it was still kind of foolish to ally with Napoleonic France,they lost a big country over north.
thank you so much your saying it!!! xD
@@maximilianolimamoreira5002 Well, really the danish King lost the title of King of norway. The norwayans were the ones who lost part of the realm to Denmark
Like Netherlands in 1940?
Ok so i was not the only one who remembered it like this
This is not entirely true. Great Britain preemtively attacked the Danish Navy, and Copenhagen, out of fear that we would join Napoleon. Before that we remained neutral. However, after the unprovoked attack, we DID join Napoleon (wonder why...)
Though you didn't add anything to the Napoleon cause as you had such a weak navy after the attack
@@thwalesproductions actually our navy was only halved after the first attack and even then it was still considered one of the most dangerous navies in the world so Great Britain went at us again hoping to take the last of our fleet.
but the second time the British learned from their first attack and decided not to make an assault on the Harbor of Copenhagen but make a land assault on Copenhagen to avoid a direct confrontation with the Danish navy that almost destroyed the British the first time around. And that is one of the first bombardment using primitive Missiles and one could argue another War crime done by the British, at least according to contemporary rules of war.
result was that the Danes was without a fleet after the war. However even without a fleet the British quickly found that any ships too close to Danish territories would be stolen by Angry Danes in row boats. claiming Danes did nothing and claiming Danes had a weak navy after the first attack even the second one would be a erroneous mistake. Yes the navy was weaker but still not one you would just overlook and sail past,
didn't the UK eventually conquer the Faroe Islands during WW2 to prevent the Nazis from using them (the Nazis had conquered Denmark)?
@@jwil4286 no not the faroe islands. But the british sent abiut 700 soldiers to conqured iceland to ensure that the germans didnt use it. Then after the war iceland "left" the Danish kingdom and became independent
In 1800 Denmark was hoping for French help to recover Scania from Sweden But this did not happen and it all ended.
2:42, lol you can see a U-boat covertly sailing. Edit: damn guys, English is my second language. I thought a U-boat and a submarine was the same thing. We only have one word for it in danish, and that's "Ubåd" (I'm from Denmark).
I think it's meant to be a soviet sub but well spotted
Oh God you are right
Where?
Edit: found it. From the bottom of the video, a quarter of the way towards the No Commies sign. The submarine sweeps from right to left and moves quite quickly.
I see it
@@joshuacampbell1625 Yeah, not a U-boat. It would be out of place when he's talking about the post-war Atlantic.
I went to Iceland a couple of months ago on vacation. I had two Icelandic people discuss how learning English and danish is required in school and how useless learning Danish is, but that they still had to learn it. I found that interesting.
It's not useless for those Icelanders who study in Copenhagen
How useful it is is debatable but learning danish they pretty much also learn Norwegian too since Norwegian bokmål is based on danish. It also makes it easier for them to learn swedish.
All are nordic countries and closely connected and with a lot of travel, studying and settling in each other´s countries. I´d say learning one of the Scandinavian languages is pretty useful.
Yes, and in fact: English is useful when speaking with Danish, while the same cannot be said about Danish: the Danish will understand what you say, but you won't understand their answers.
That's not uncommon at all, I mean if you look at former Portuguese colonies in the far east of Macau and Goa, and in Macau I think up to 1999 when it was ceded back to China the schools would be in both Cantonese (I think or mandarin) and Portuguese and to this day many street signs are bilingual and due to them being in a special place similar to Hong Kong they use many Portuguese standards (like for license plates) and Macau citizens have with Portugal the same deal which many other former Portuguese colonies have which is that they can move and gain residency in Portugal no questions asked (same is true for Guinea-Bissau and Capo Verde) and some others I don't remember of the top of my head
@@marcofava yeah but most African colonies have their former colonizer’s language as an official language still. And the Icelandic guides I have both said they don’t understand learning Danish.
Back in 2003 the oak trees plantet some 200 years ago to replace the lost danish fleet was finally ready to be used for ship building. Mindblowing.
Oak can grow in Greenland?!?
@@SvenElvennothing but alcoholics are thriving in Greenland... 🍻🙈😴
@@SvenElven They were planted in Denmark obviously.
Trump: "Can we buy Gr ..."
Denmark: "What part of 'What part of no' don't you understand?"
I mean, it’s Trump. Considering how many people he’s sexually assaulted, he clearly has trouble with ‘no’.
@@ErzengelDesLichtes Clinton
@@aristotleofathens6806 His actions don't make Trumps less bad.
Aristotle Of Athens
Found someone trapped in their bubble.
@@ErzengelDesLichtes Alright then, Trump and Clinton. Wasn't really denying the accusations, just brought up somebody that's far worse
Portugal, why on earth would you even.....
Portugal: Ever heard of bacalhau?
Viva ao povo de Afonso Henriques
I don’t think many people have tried it😅🤣
Cold Brazil
@@alexdiaz155 Nós estamos de olho em você Diaz
Its really good!! Tried it both in Norway and Portugal! :)Might be because I am swedish and us scandinavian has something of a obsession with really salty fish!
2:45 "What part of 'No.'" lol. That hits differently in 2025.
I could be wrong, but the version i was taught in school was:
Denmark: we're not gonna join that mess down south.
England: i think the danes are gonna join napoleon.
And then they invaded, an took our fleet...
More complicated. We wanted to stay neutral AND sell all sort of things to Napoleon and earn a lot of money. UK would rather have a clear enemy than living with a country subverting their wars against France. So first, in 1801, a large shootout in Copenhagen to get Denmark drop neutrality. And then in 1807 finishing the job (and taking the fleet). Finishing the job meant a heavy bombardment of Copenhagen with fancy weapons.
@Alex Croton thanks;)
Norway: they forgot 1 ship... and soon there be 4 more (reclaimed)
Huh the UK are war criminals? Who’d’ve thunk
Honestly, as a dane, I find your comments on us joining the war, misleading at the very least.
We were neutral to the war and stated this to the brits multiple times throughout. The brits then claimed the danes were about to make an alliance with Napoleon. Despite many attempts, british historians have yet to find any evidence of any such negotiations ever taking place. In other words, even the brits themselves have acknowledge this as a complete fabrication.
Imagine this:
Switzerland declares neutrality during WW2. The french, fearing an alliance between Switzerland and Germany, ask Switzerland to join them multiple times. The Swiss decline. France then fabricates a claim that switzerland is about to join Germany and attacks. The swiss now join Germany to protect themselves from France. The swiss then does nothing for the entirety of the remainding war.
The war ends with the defeat of the axis. Switzerland is punished for their involvment by lossing more than 50% of their territory to the Allies.
Kind of wild to claim Denmark made a mistake, by joining Napoleon, when in reality we were backstabbed and attacked by the british.
@Supernova Cinnamon Eye for an eye? How much suffering did you cause in America? India? Africa? China? If it was eye for an eye, the British Empire would've been dismantled and given away in pieces. What a stupid thing to say lol
@Supernova Cinnamon The viking age was full of savages, barely controlled by any laws. There was no such thing as a "warcrime". Besides, taking revenge for something literally more than 800 years ago, doesn't really make sense
@Supernova Cinnamon I just think it's very odd to compare a warcrime 200 years ago, to one that happened 1200 years ago, where there was no such thing as a warcrime.
@Supernova Cinnamon But how dies that justify the bombings of Copenhagen in 1807?
We did earn quite a big sum on capturing english ships with the cannon boats though... so "doing nothing" is not completely true.. but in the grand scheme of things.. yeah we did nothing.
2:00 Lol at King Haakon VII of Norway saying "it's not yours" to his own grandfather King Christian IX of Denmark regarding ownership of Greenland.
Greenland is rightful American clay! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Olayinka Amara this is literally every country when someone’s comps their stuff
Scott Anno Greenland is rightfully Norwegian 🇳🇴🇳🇴🇳🇴
Scott Anno America is rightfully Estonian 🇪🇪🇪🇪🇪🇪
Sweden has entered the chat. 🇸🇪🇸🇪🇸🇪
(ducks)
the Village People gag is the best sight gag I have ever enjoyed on your channel!
I love how this channel answers questions in such a short amount of time but answers them well and also questions people actually want to know about
I'm waiting for the "why does Monaco exist" video, looking forward to it
So the rich have somewhere sunny to hide from paying taxes...
@@cyberfux well i think that monaco is 100% udner french rules and 100% dependent it's purely to look cool that they say they are a country they are a "principauté"
From what I understood there was a pirate who claimed it and called himself prince. The French were to busy somewhere else to give it attention (I'm not even going to look it up but it has to be something to do with the British), and thus Monaco remained it's own thing because it was a hill and a fishing village.
@@GijsTheDogI think it was part of Genoa or something until after war it got gave to France and then at some point it became some kind of autonomous state and got annexed by France until in around 1890 France recognize it's independence and until then it is protected by France and still exist
There already that video
"finally teaching the Danes how it feels to have a bunch of angry ships turn up at your shore and set things on fire"
As a Dane I fucking love this line.
Makes me think back to the good old days. Seriously Danmark is like that violent teen who became a nice family man next door who invite people for bbq every summer.
Are you a redditor?
And we’ll fucking do it again!
The Danes will have to dust off their “What part of No you don’t understand” plackard.
In an alternate dimension; Why does Greenland own Denmark?
The best dimension
Or why does Denland own Greenmark?
@@theemissary1313 it took a while to register what you just said
The Great Greenland Empire
@@Koala1203 the green empire for short
I love that you did include the faroe islands in the danish realm despite them being comedically small on the map shown
To be honest most of what's happening up there is considered some kind of a joke... 👀🤗
Can you do the Second French Intervention in Mexico? I really like this war and I think a lot of people forget about it due to the American civil war and stuff.
yeah,very interesting,also,my name is the Portuguese and Spanish version of the name of that Austrian emperor that ruled the second Mexican empire.
Maximiliano Moreira yea!! Maximilian! I really hope he does a video of that topics
Most Poles don't even know how Secession War looked like, and most of them don't even know about American-Mexican War.
2025: U.S. : * hungry eyes*. Denmark: * rolls eyes *
Canada: "Hey, Denmark, can we hav-"
Denmark: "Et tu Canada?"
... was that an attempt at danish, because that was a piss poor excuse for danish
(I'm danish btw so i should know what I'm talking about)
@@goldietheswagbear8288 lol no. It was Latin for 'you too'. It was supposedly Caesar's last words after seeing that his friend Brutus was one of his assassins (the original quote being 'Et tu Brutus?'). The implication being that Denmark didn't see such a betrayal coming. For the record Canada has never asked to buy Greenland even though individual Canadians have kept bringing up the idea.
@@goldietheswagbear8288 Nobody asked about your nationality
@@andknuckles101 nobody asked for your comment but here you are
@@NoGoodHandlesLeft interesting
I LOVE this style of animation! There's a certain charm to it!
They could've bought Greenland if they had the support of James Bisonette.
Don't forget spinning 3 plates
@@golternator333 It's because James Bissonnette has been here literally forever, spinning 3 plates is also a old one but James Bissonnette is older/the first.
God yes!
Fun Fact: No
pls elaborate
Who's watching this because Trump decided we should buy Greenland?
which will never happen
Me
Yo!
@Frank-ru5imI’m not so sure. We have a Compact of Free Association with Palau, the Marshall Islands, and Micronesia where they get military and economic assistance. I can see Greenland falling under that same umbrella. Do I think Greenland will ever become a state? No, but I think they’ll gain independence and fall into a CFA-type arrangement with the help of both Greenland’s pro-independence parties and the 2nd Trump Administration.
@stoneeagle7360 No, he says he wants to buy it. We'll see about their push for independence but they sure as hell don't want to be pushed into doing anything by an orange.
"So Iceland is green and Greenland is ice. WTF is up with that?"
Leif Ericksen: "How'd you like an ax upside your head?"
"You can hate me, but you can't leave. Now go and catch some seals before winter else we all starve."
It was a marketing scheme basically
Fun Fact! This is because of marketing! Extra History did a really cool episode on it.
Greenland is named accurately as the Scandinavians landed in the south western fjords during summer. Have you ever been to Greenland during summer? It's very very green by the moss covering the hillsides and cliffs. Hardly any snow or ice. So seeing that is what they saw, that is the name given.
Greenland is named that way because a viking decided to live there and want to sell the land so he said it was green and nice
Iceland is named that way because the vikings landed in winter on the icy bit of the island didn't explore much and went home
Congratualations, a very good job on this video, love your series. Just 1 error in this video : Before the British attack, Denmark wasn’t an allied of Napoleon. It had a huge fleet however, and did not comply to British demands in the British conflict with the French. Hence the attack and afterwards Denmark unwisely did ally with Napoleon.
You can't blame them.
King George the III kinda was know for some silly things about 1807. Conducting terrorism on the Danish didn’t help.
0:34 "It gets worse"
Well, he wasn't lying.
I literally LOL'ed at that moment.
One big error in your presentation--when the British attacked Copenhagen, Denmark-Norway was neutral, not allied with Napoleon. The Brits made a preemptive attack to make sure the Danish fleet wouldn't be used to attack them if Napoleon attacked Denmark or the Danes joined Napoleon. So they attacked first. Having been attacked, the Danes then joined Napoleon in retaliation.
Uses Mercator to make Greenland look bigger.
By like, a lot.
True, but it's still massive compared with continental Denmark.
You know the internet - exaggerate the upper and lower regions, underestimate the round part in the middle. Mercator was just ahead of his time.
Things heating up in the map fandom
Greenland is still really big.
If we counted it as part of Denmark that would have made Denmark the second biggest European country after Russia.
The first European to come across Greenland was the Norse explorer Gunnbjorn Ulfsson in the 9th century, when he was blown off course in a heavy storm, however he didn't actually set foot on his newly discovered land. The first European to set foot on Greenland was the Norse explorer Erik Thorvaldsson in 982 AD, he was better known as "Erik the Red" due to his fiery red hair and beard, Erik was born in Jaeren, Norway in 950 AD, Erik started colonising Greenland from Iceland in the spring of 985, to attract settlers Erik described the island as a "Green Land" as opposed to Iceland that they were living on at the time. Erik the Red died on Greenland in1003 AD at the age of 53.
Around 1000 AD, Leif Erikson who was the son of Erik the Red, sailed west from Greenland to explore and hopefully discover new lands. Leif discovered a large island that he named Vinland, today it's known as Newfoundland. Leif died in 1020 AD on Iceland at the age of 50
Note that Bjarni Herjólfsson was the first European to come across Vinland but he didn't set foot on it. He told Leif Ericsson, who did. So history did repeat itself.
Love the submarine under the No Commies sign
2:42
0:26 "Norsemen decided to 'Go West'".... Village People
This joke killed me
Go west was the Petshop Boys
@@lindenheyer6762 They covered it. Village People did it first.
Oh I was wondering about that reference.
@@clivemead6410 I stand corrected, I only heard/seen the Petshop Boys version :)
Life is peaceful there.
History Matters- "Have you ever wondered about this random, obscure fact?"
Me- "Well not exactly but now that you mention it I'm listening."
0:26 I don’t keep track if every History Matters “pop figure” character is relevant but the Villiage People (I think) made me burst out laughing 😂
"Some Norsemen opted to go west...". One of the Village People's songs was "Go West".
The Danish didn't decide to side with Napoleon, that decission was made for them. The English just sailed into Copenhagen and sunk the entire Danish fleet, and as a consequence of that, Denmark naturally ended up on Napoleon's side.
"(Britain) finally teaching the Danes what it feels like to have a bunch of angry ships roll up at your shore and set everything on fire"
Reverse vikings
Thank you. Swedish here. Took this comment to figure out why there was a "finally" in there. :)
Sgnikiv
@@Viktor16161616 Sweden also set britain on fire back then, so you kinda should know that lol
@@MegaOgrady to be sure. I just needed that comment for it to click with me.
@@MegaOgrady not really. The Danes mostly went to England, and the Norwegians mostly went to Scotland and Ireland, but the Swedes mostly went to Russia.
2:00 I love how Haakon is arguing with his grandpa
My grandpa served in Greenland during WW2 as an army accountant. We have a picture of him and a friend standing at attention holding brooms.
I get a feeling, this video will be viral in the next few weeks... for some reason.
*ice melts
Greenland: i know we have been together for a long time and i am grateful for all the financial support u have given me thru the years....
but i just got my hand on a shit ton of natural resources and i don't feel like sharing, so i break up with u, by by Denmark
Greenland rolls away in a fancy car
@plentyness The flag doesnt match the others so no
@plentyness Well technically, Kalaallit Nunaat belongs to the Inuits in such case.
@@davidcervantes9336 does not big parts of canada belong to the inuits as well then? and meaby usa should give land back to the indians ?
@@12345678981010 Yes.
@@mrbrierley4344 nah, the norse died out, then the inuits came from canada. Driving out the other native populatoin. A good part of the norse settelment went to iceland so their claim is more historic than the inuits that has only been there for 500 years
Denmark allying with Napoleon was not "silly". Britain attacked Denmark's trade fleet FIRST to prevent Napoleon from potentially invading Denmark and seizing their fleet, one of Europe's largest at the time. Denmark had tried to stay neutral in the Napoleonic conflict, but was strongarmed by the British to side with Napoleon.
Without the fleet Denmark had no military power so it was silly to join the war because it could do very little to help the French.
Secondly, the attack on Denmark was necessary to prevent the French from potentially attacking Britain with that Danish fleet .
“ the attack on Denmark was necessary”
FU
@@Valencetheshireman927 So u would expect us to endure an unprovoked attack on our capital city including the sinking of our entire fleet and just go hide under a rock? Im with qupp75 on that 1 - FU.
@@Valencetheshireman927 "an unprovoked attack against a neutral country with no signs of giving a shit about the war was necessary and justified." yikes
@@Valencetheshireman927delusional perfidious Albion strikes again
Makes me want Danish to be my official breakfast. Much respect. Hard-boiled eggs may still be top contender but the jury is still open. Awesome video.
Thanks!
America sees Greenland, asks
"Is for me 👉👈 ??"
That lief erikson “it gets worse “ cracked me up”
Hang on, the Orange President isn't the first one to offer to buy Greenland from Denmark. And isn't even the second one to do this either? Literally mindblowing.
He may be the first US president to threaten Denmark over it but that is his pattern; threaten people he knows want to stay friendly with us while coddling our adversaries.
@@dlsamson Don't misleading what Trump said. He said he would not remove any options, which is what he always says.
Denmark has this "I dont want to play with it but I still wont let you have it" vibe
I had to watch the "Go West" part twice to make sure I want imagining it. LOL
😂😂 "I mean if you can buy Alaska why not Greenland" 😂😂😂
Anyone else just randomly get this in there recommendations? Haha Time is a flat circle.
I think another chapter of this story is about to unfold.
“Finally teaching the Danes how it feels to have a bunch of angry ships appear on your shores and set fire to everything” Jesus your dry humour is just unreal!
0:26 love how you used the phrase Go West to show the Village People, LMAO!
- (Denmark): I'm not joining Napoleon.
- (Britain): I don't think so. (Proceeds to attack indiscriminately Copenhagen).
- (Pissed Denmark): now I'm joining Napoleon.
- (Britain): you see, I was right. But now it doesn't matter anymore.
And that's how a cynical empire is built.
This popping up on my feed again can't be coincidence 😂
I thought Trump's offer to buy it again would make its way into the video lol
I'm trying to imagine a square Trump in HM's style and he looks exactly the same.
I don’t think he offered anything, he just expressed interest to buy it.
I'm imagining an orange-faced square looming over denmark's shoulder. "And as we all know, truman was the last american president to offer to buy Greenland.
0:09
>talks about Greenland's size
>uses Mercator projection which is notorious for distorting the size of Greenland.
They literally use the standard world map and people complain. People know that the mercator projection isn't a true indication of the size, but to get the right coordinates instead.
Hmm part of this story isn’t true. Denmark was neutral when Brittain showed up and bombed Copenhagen in 1807. That attack made Denmark join the alliance with Napoleon. As always the order of events are pretty important to get right;)
Even better, this means the British ships showed up unexpected and started setting things of fire, even more accurate
Is this a bit like saying "America was neutral in WWII until Pearl Harbour"? Honestly curious, because if so, then the neutrality is not that relevant.
David Lodge class of 2022 not at all. USA was supplying Uk with weapons and all neccesities (sorry camt spell). UK would have been lost without US in ww2. Denmark was trading with all parties and as far as I know not weapons. UK and USA was de facto allied beofre US joined the war. Denmark and France was NOT allied before the british attack on Copenhagen in 1807. Denmark didn’t even join the war after the british attack of 1801.
@@TheMrRonQ Cool. Like I said, I was genuinely curious. :)
I will contest one thing, though. The UK was not hopeless without American intervention, or at least without the American military. Americans helped shorten the war in the East, and did a ton to stop the advance of the USSR, but the Allies had already begun to turn the tide in Europe before America joined. The Americans did shorten it, though, and selling weapons did help (although it was also motivated simply by profit).
@@TheMrRonQ Another question, then. Was there a worry that Napolean would conquer Denmark, taking their navy as his?
You offer 2 things:
- A 3 minute summary of international events that others couldn't explain in hours
- Animation that is both cruder and funnier than South Park
“History is a set of lies agreed upon.”
― Napoleon Bonaparte
And here u are again. I think we are subscribed to all the same channels
So you are calling the narrator a liar?
Stop trying to be edgy.
"People will believe every quote on the Internet" - Vladimir Lenin
"saying quotes of famous people doesn't make you deep"
- Luke Skywalker