reuters.com
www.reuters.com

France is working with partners on a plan over how to respond should the United States act on its threat to take over Greenland, Foreign Affairs Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said on Wednesday.

  • Disillusionist@piefed.worldEnglish
    243·
    3 天前

    Real serious stuff happening right now, including American threats and claims against other nations — like what this post is about (it’s really not bullshit at this point). Not everything is about Epstein.

      • Disillusionist@piefed.worldEnglish
        91·
        3 天前

        Fair enough. I posted this rather long comment elsewhere, but what I said there pretty much explains a lot of my thoughts on the situation.

        I wouldn’t put much past the current American administration. I haven’t been able to shake this impression that we might really be looking a the telegraphing of an invasion. From what we know and have seen, the administration is very much itching to apply the fullest extent of its powers. It’s defined by unprecedented and extraordinary use of extralegal action and complete disregard for how it might be seen by the world at large.

        They said for years that Russia wouldn’t move on Ukraine, and then green men marched in and took over Crimea. It’s no secret how much America is becoming increasingly like Russia in every way. US already has significant military presence in Greenland — a green men play would be really easy. And Greenland also has a surprising number of politicians who openly say that they prefer the security offered by Trump’s America over Denmark, even as they declare that they want independence (experts argue that independence might make them even more vulnerable to takeover right now). It’s easy to assume that at least some Greenland doors would open up to an American green man advance.

        Also, as far as consequences for taking over Greenland, we seem to be primarily looking at a breakup of NATO — something that is also on this US administration’s longstanding wish list. Experts don’t seem to think it’s ultimately likely to result in an actual war so much as make it crystal clear that the old rules no longer apply, and that the US isn’t a friend (the Article 5 debate is shaky, especially against the prospect of actually going to war against America, and especially while NATO is also dealing with the Russian war in Ukraine). On paper it kind of reads like a win-win-win situation for the current brazen, imperialist, and isolationist American kleptocracy.

        I’d say we at least need to take this stuff seriously.

        [Edited for formatting]

        • Jo Miran@lemmy.mlEnglish
          4·
          3 天前

          What I think we should expect from this administration is an ever expanding and aggressive move towards control of the Americas. Yes, that includes Greenland but it also seems.like too much of a.pain in the ass. Everything south of thw border is going to take precedent. Or, we could invade Canada next week. Who the fuck knows with these terrorists.

      • Microw@piefed.zipEnglish
        51·
        3 天前

        Look, I dont think the US will launch an all-out military invasion of Greenland. But there are two or three other ways how they could try to gain control over Greenland’s natural resources, and I absolutely believe that they will try that.

        • Kornblumenratte@feddit.orgEnglish
          4·
          3 天前

          The US does not have to invade Greenland, they are already there. I’m not sure about the strength of Danish, Greenlandic and US-forces on Greenland, but I’m pretty sure that they just could appoint the commander of Pituffik Space Base as military governor and arrest the couple of Danish soldiers and Greenlandic police using the forces already on Greenland.

        • Jo Miran@lemmy.mlEnglish
          2·
          3 天前

          With this approach I can agree. I just don’t see military action as a viable approach when it can be far more effective against governments in South America. The US has a LONG history of fucking with South America. I doubt they’ll change that course now.

          I worry about Cuba.

        • Jo Miran@lemmy.mlEnglish
          3·
          3 天前

          This is all based on small bits of data but I’d expect them to take something in the Caribbean or South America first. Over the past months the US has moved into an deactivated naval base in Puerto Rico. Roosevelt Roads is base and land they had already given back to the island years ago, but they just walked right in and took it again without asking. The armament moved in there is vast, including squadrons of F-35s and bombers. Why? Cuba?

          No matter what, I think Greenland is a distraction while they make moves and preparations for an attack elsewhere.

      • shalafi@lemmy.worldEnglish
        36·
        3 天前

        Stay away from games of Risk. Greenland becomes prime real estate as global warming advances; making mining easier, opening Artic shipping lanes.

        Also, this action gets America kicked out of NATO, a goal of both the administration and Putin. Win win.