Historically, it has worked more often than it hasn’t. The Big Lie of Vietnam is that it was The Rule rather than a glaring exception.
Most countries don’t mount a successful domestic defense. Most opposition groups don’t have a rival Superpower at their backs. Most insurgency and paramilitary efforts fail.
Meanwhile, the folks doing the imperialist terror campaign to seize control only ever profit, personally, from these military operations. And the public only ever gets fed some bullshit about how Americans are being greeted as liberators.
Sure, but then again, most superpowers don’t run out of ammo a month into a war, or telegraph a landgrab against their biggest, most reliable allies, yet here we are. But that’s also besides the point: if the US were to win a shooting war over Greenland, it’s all the more important for them to be the ones to start it.
Most militaries don’t have a very specific kind of anti-ballistic missile defense system that uses $15M/pop interceptors that need to be fired in clusters of 3-5 to be effective per incoming target.
The Americans aren’t running out of bullets or tanks or fighter-bombers. They’re running out of these specific suites of precision anti-air defense tools. And they’re running out because they’ve spread their arsenal across four continents, in an attempt to beat Russia and Iran in an active conflict, while still holding a gun on China and Pakistan.
These weapons shortages aren’t slowing down the Rubio/Hegseth campaign to blow up fishing boats in the Carribean and close off international waters around Cuba. It doesn’t stop them from arming militias in the Philippines and Indonesia, in their crusade to enslave the native peoples of the Pacific Rim. It won’t stop them from sending more special forces in to kidnap a president from Venezuela.
This is the difference between fighting a modern war with a rival industrial power and shoving an underdeveloped, largely rural country into the metaphorical locker.
Of course. Which is why it benefits Greenland to keep it a local affair. If the US intends to invade, it will, but there’s no benefit for Greenland to force their hand.
It has an excuse, which it may or may not act upon. But making that escalation is Trump’s mistake to make. That’s my point.
Historically, it has worked more often than it hasn’t. The Big Lie of Vietnam is that it was The Rule rather than a glaring exception.
Most countries don’t mount a successful domestic defense. Most opposition groups don’t have a rival Superpower at their backs. Most insurgency and paramilitary efforts fail.
Meanwhile, the folks doing the imperialist terror campaign to seize control only ever profit, personally, from these military operations. And the public only ever gets fed some bullshit about how Americans are being greeted as liberators.
Sure, but then again, most superpowers don’t run out of ammo a month into a war, or telegraph a landgrab against their biggest, most reliable allies, yet here we are. But that’s also besides the point: if the US were to win a shooting war over Greenland, it’s all the more important for them to be the ones to start it.
Most militaries don’t have a very specific kind of anti-ballistic missile defense system that uses $15M/pop interceptors that need to be fired in clusters of 3-5 to be effective per incoming target.
The Americans aren’t running out of bullets or tanks or fighter-bombers. They’re running out of these specific suites of precision anti-air defense tools. And they’re running out because they’ve spread their arsenal across four continents, in an attempt to beat Russia and Iran in an active conflict, while still holding a gun on China and Pakistan.
These weapons shortages aren’t slowing down the Rubio/Hegseth campaign to blow up fishing boats in the Carribean and close off international waters around Cuba. It doesn’t stop them from arming militias in the Philippines and Indonesia, in their crusade to enslave the native peoples of the Pacific Rim. It won’t stop them from sending more special forces in to kidnap a president from Venezuela.
This is the difference between fighting a modern war with a rival industrial power and shoving an underdeveloped, largely rural country into the metaphorical locker.
…I mean, all of that is correct, but I don’t understand what point you’re trying to make vis-a-vis the topic at hand.
The point is that Greenland isn’t safe because the US has run out of interceptor missiles to deflect Iranian SCUDs.
Of course. Which is why it benefits Greenland to keep it a local affair. If the US intends to invade, it will, but there’s no benefit for Greenland to force their hand.