Utopia Talk - Politics - Should the US take Greenland?

Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Thu Jan 08 01:44:11 UTC 2026

Utopia Talk / Politics / Should the US take Greenland?

Paramount
rank Sun Jan 04 14:59:43
Why not?

The Danes can't defend it. The US has strong interests in the country. Nobody will do anything.

The Europeans will make some lame statements about international law (which no longer exists) and call for restraint (which is unnecessary) since the US can take Greenland in principle without force or with very restrained force.

Some people in Europe may write an angry tweet, but in two weeks everyone will carry on and forget about it.

So, the US should probably go ahead and take it. I mean, it just sits there in the ocean anyway, a very large island with a very tiny population of only 56k people, and its closer to USA than to Denmark.

murder
rank Sun Jan 04 16:36:31

Never mind Greenland. Canada should be arming all of its citizens.

-

murder
rank Sun Jan 04 16:39:55

For the record, the US can't actually take Venezuela. Venezuelan cowards would have to serve as US puppets to control the country and hand over their oil.

-

Rugian
rank Sun Jan 04 16:48:56
"The Athenians: For ourselves, we shall not trouble you with specious pretences...and make a long speech which would not be believed...holding in view the real sentiments of us both; since you know as well as we do that right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.

The Melians: And how, pray, could it turn out as good for us to serve as for you to rule?

The Athenians: Because you would have the advantage of submitting before suffering the worst, and we should gain by not destroying you."

-Thucydides

Rugian
rank Sun Jan 04 16:59:38
"Map of Greenland Under U.S. Flag Sparks Danish Ambassador Response

The Danish ambassador to the U.S. has urged Washington to "respect" Denmark's territory after a prominent MAGA figure revived the long-running tensions between the two NATO members over Greenland.

Katie Miller, the wife of White House deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, had posted an image to social media that showed the American flag overlaid on the outline of Greenland. Miller's post, which came after U.S. action in Venezuela, included the map with the word "SOON."

http://x.c...h-ambassador-response-11304613

Average Ameriacn
rank Sun Jan 04 18:07:00
Trump is THE deal maker!
He could offer the Danes a small part of Venezuela in exchange for Greenland.

murder
rank Sun Jan 04 18:16:53

Why would he give them anything?

-

TheChildren
rank Sun Jan 04 18:27:06
looks like iran is gonna be 2nd

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GIELy9PgWg

da attempt 2 seize venezulon oilz, da blatant theft, is 2 off set da potentional iran oil shut down shuld they attack iran??

so boots on da ground on venezula and iran?
maybe shuld all dis fails and they get there azz handed in iran, they will grab greenland as trophy prize?

Habebe
rank Sun Jan 04 18:46:18
In other news Jens Frederik Neilsen has been suspected of drug smuggling....

murder
rank Mon Jan 05 13:41:46

The EU's weak ass response to Trump's continued threats to annex Greenland even after his attempt to take Venezuela proves that the EU will never be able to defend itself.

They aren't even making vague threats about defending Greenland.

-

TheChildren
rank Mon Jan 05 15:07:20
ya they r

they shuld have condemned venezula hard. but fail 2 do so...so guess who is gonna be on da list, prolly after iran

dis is wut happenes when u dunt speak up but r completely brainwashed in2 chieenabaaad,

everything china does, doesnt matter right or wrong, is immediately chienaabad

but never says anythin bout then miuricans

TheChildren
rank Mon Jan 05 15:12:07
latins amerca isnt belong 2 u.

they can chose 2 be friends with who they want. is we livin in da middle ages or something.

our women belongs 2 us? rofl they aint even related 2 u.

there resources belong 2 them.

Paramount
rank Mon Jan 05 20:12:23
Starmer of the UK said when asked about it, that he has to talk with the Americans first before he can share his view about the US attack on Venezuela and the kidnapping of its president.

What a fking weak ass frog. Aren’t you ashamed, Seb?

TheChildren
rank Mon Jan 05 20:17:36
very.

and at da end of it. da military op was succes but hardly impressed

da retakin of kursk was more impressed, special ops crawled through 2km of tunnels deep behind enemy lines and encircled troopz and shit

wut happened last week? they flew in 150 coptas and planes but practised 4 six months and shit. and they wasnt against real army, they was against armed civ guards

totally not da same

Paramount
rank Mon Jan 05 20:26:43
USA been trying to change the regime in Venezuela for over 20 years. Only the other day they managed to kidnap the president but the regime is still there, as far as I know.

20+ years lol

TheChildren
rank Mon Jan 05 20:28:22
https://youtu.be/cz57XUSlBv0?t=64

there we have it

basically said wut everyone but da sammies alrdy knows

Paramount
rank Mon Jan 05 22:48:59
Imagine if it was Putin who kidnapped the president of another country and threatened to take Greenland?

What would Keir Starmer and all the other spineless european leaders have said then?

That the europeans are silent, refuse to point out who the criminal is, and remains inactive both in regards to genocide, to terrorism and piracy on the high seas (outside the coast of Venezuela), bombing of embassy fascilities and nuclear facilities (in Iran), bombing of european energy infrastructure (Nordstream), to kidnapping of head of states (Venezuela), and to threats to european countries (Greenland) really proves that international law no longer exist. It’s burial has been cemented, by among others, the human rights lawyer Kier Starmer.

TheChildren
rank Mon Jan 05 23:05:27
rules 4 theee but not 4 me

thats da "world order" aka our world order we made

how it works.

well no more. this is why brics is da future.

is unspoken rule how da world order is unda da murca.

unspoken as in u cant say it in da west, but everybody knows.

everybody in da global south knows. brics is da future.

murder
rank Tue Jan 06 16:47:19

NATO countries are going to allow a moron to steal 836,330 sq miles of territory from a European country ... and are still going to try to hold on to NATO.

They are stuck on cowardice, AND they are stuck on stupid.

-

Forwyn
rank Tue Jan 06 16:53:10
It's expensive to build guided missile cruisers when you're giving every boat conquistador an extended hotel stay and a monthly stipend to churn out more.

Pillz
rank Tue Jan 06 16:54:17
America picks a fight for 20 years
Russia calls them on it
America cries Europe won't fight their war for them

Murder is definitely a faggot

murder
rank Tue Jan 06 20:24:37

I don't know wtf you're talking about.

YOU don't know wtf you're talking about.

-

Rugian
rank Wed Jan 07 00:04:14
Trump weighs using U.S. military to acquire Greenland: White House

Published Tue, Jan 6 2026 4:07 PM EST

President Donald Trump and his team are considering "a range of options" in order to acquire Greenland — including "utilizing the U.S. Military," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told CNBC on Tuesday.

"President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it's vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region," Leavitt said.

"The President and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilizing the U.S. Military is always an option at the Commander in Chief's disposal," she said.

http://www...land-military-white-house.html

TheChildren
rank Wed Jan 07 00:33:08
yall need some xplain 2 do. where u stand on these

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLFkQbPWWDI

tumbleweed
rank Wed Jan 07 00:49:45
he was just joking!........

in what way can we say Russia shouldn't take Ukraine, or China shouldn't take Taiwan (or what any other dictator decides is needed for 'national security')

will R's -finally- have an issue if suddenly we seize it one morning...

Seb
rank Wed Jan 07 00:58:34
If the US invades Greenland it's probably quite hard for Europe to stop it, if it sets it's mid to it.

However, given the huge stocks of us kit warehoused in Europe, the 100k odd servicemen, god knows how many spooks etc on NATO SoF agreements and their families; I think the US administration will find the first day of the war very challenging as all those folks families realise that their loved ones are PoW with no hope is rescue or exfiltration.

TheChildren
rank Wed Jan 07 01:02:20
"
in what way can we say Russia shouldn't take Ukraine, or China shouldn't take Taiwan "

>>taiwan isnt take. taiwan belongs 2 china. yall need 2 accept reality.

Seb
rank Wed Jan 07 01:17:02
Also coordinated sell off of us bonds.

Dukhat
rank Wed Jan 07 02:03:26
It's either real and playing into Putin's hands or it's just more Trump flooding the zone with shit so you don't notice the Epstein files and all the heinously criminal stuff he does.

Forwyn
rank Wed Jan 07 03:34:52
Seb will send the Sharia police to nab US servicemembers on their bases. rofl

kargen
rank Wed Jan 07 04:02:45
no.
The US should support Greenland independence then make them a favored trade nation.

Seb
rank Wed Jan 07 06:21:10
Forwyn:

Not a bad idea. Like the US deal for CECOT but with the Taliban to hold the illegal enemy combatants.

Rugian:
Ironic given the Melian dialogue in context and the point Thucydides was actually getting at.

murder
rank Wed Jan 07 17:44:21

"However, given the huge stocks of us kit warehoused in Europe, the 100k odd servicemen, god knows how many spooks etc on NATO SoF agreements and their families; I think the US administration will find the first day of the war very challenging as all those folks families realise that their loved ones are PoW with no hope is rescue or exfiltration."

Don't kid yourself. Europe and the rest of NATO won't do a damn thing. The heads of most countries won't even make much noise about it. They will just convince themselves that it's a NATO tax and tell the Danes that they should have sold Greenland while they had the chance.

"If the US invades Greenland it's probably quite hard for Europe to stop it, if it sets it's mid to it."

If Europe was prepared to do something to stop it, it could if it acted first. You could start by arming every single willing citizen of Greenland. It doesn't have to be anything fancy. The weapons just need to be able to bleed a limited force that is stupid enough to go in uninvited.

Greenland is > 1000 miles away. That's a very long trip if someone is trying to stop you. And as I pointed out with Russia, you don't have to fight where and how they want to fight. Hitting them anywhere in the world is legit. Stretch them thin and make them defend everything, military and commercial. Hit our ships before they ever leave port.

We only have so many ships and so many bombers. Even fewer if you get the first shots in.

The real issue would be dealing with the consequences.

-

Seb
rank Wed Jan 07 17:58:44
"Don't kid yourself. Europe and the rest of NATO won't do a damn thing"

It's worrying you think that. Touch the stove and find out.

"You could start by arming every single willing citizen of Greenland."

They already are iirc.

"Greenland is > 1000 miles away"

Even further from continental Europe.

"And as I pointed out with Russia, you don't have to fight where and how they want to fight"

Indeed, and what better place to fight the US than to seize 100,000 PoWs, hundreds of £100m+ combat jets and armoured vehicles, and ability to easily control your satellites while they are flying over this hemisphere, dismantle your intelligence capabilities and listening stations, your logistic hubs for projecting force into Asia/middle east.

Also probably a fair few navy vessels too.

Much easier than trying to fight an expeditionary war.

Seb
rank Wed Jan 07 18:01:15
The question then is, do you want risk coming to try and get those back, or are there now millions of Americans with a vested interest in ever seeing their loved ones again that are so fanatically devoted to Trump they'll risk a cataclysmic war the likes Americans have never seen to stage a land war (in such those PoWs are very likely to die); or will they finally kick your corrupt clown-car regime to the curb?

Seb
rank Wed Jan 07 18:02:49
Basically, it would be a very short war from which the US would never recover in the way the UK never recovered from Suez.

murder
rank Wed Jan 07 18:04:59

"It's worrying you think that. Touch the stove and find out."

Seb, they haven't even asserted that they will defend Greenland.

Also, you should understand that if they aren't willing to send forces to engage US forces and possibly die, then they sure as hell aren't going to invite the US to bomb London, Paris, and Berlin, by taking US hostages. That's simply not happening. I doubt they'll even ask them to leave.

-

Seb
rank Wed Jan 07 18:07:02
And then there's the economic aspect. Nationalisation of all the US tech firms physical infrastructure in Europe, strip their IP rights, cut the US off from Swift (it's based in Europe) and coordinate with China and Canada on flooding the bond market to fuck the US finances.

The dependency works both ways, and Europe puts up with a lot because of the interest in Ukraine are considered critical. But not more than the territorial integrity of Western Europe.

murder
rank Wed Jan 07 18:07:33

You can't fight a defensive war. If you don't destroy our means of controlling the seas, then your economy is toast.

-

murder
rank Wed Jan 07 18:10:59

A much better move would be to ally with Canada and Mexico and Brazil and China and anyone else willing to get involved. If the US attacks anyone, everyone attacks the US.

Anywhere and everywhere.

-

Seb
rank Wed Jan 07 18:16:08
Murder:

"they haven't even asserted that they will defend Greenland".

What do you think "inviolable" means?

"by taking US hostages"

PoWs. They are enemy soldiers, entirely legit.

"invite the US to bomb London, Paris, and Berlin"

From which airbases are you planning to do this bombing, exactly?

Is the idea to sail across the Atlantic and try and win air superiority from, what, 6 aircraft carriers? Generally they haven't been very successful in detecting aip subs of the kind Europe has scores of. You'd lose ships. Probably capital ones.

You don't have enough cruise missiles to do this, you don't have enough tankers to do this, and you certainly can't use strategic bombers because they'd be shot down due to not being able to do adequate SEAD and air superiority missions.

The logistics for CENTCOM power projection that let's you do all of this in the middle east and Africa is all based in those European bases and what you've just lost in this insane scenario.

So, like I said, a short humiliating war that the US never recovers from.

Seb
rank Wed Jan 07 18:22:46
"If you don't destroy our means of controlling the seas, then your economy is toast."

The global economy is toast the moment the US invades Greenland. But in terms of fundamentals the EU is pretty self-sufficient; and we have land routes to Asia.

Interdiction of Chinese merchant ships would be a bad idea too (they'll have grabbed Taiwan and see the US acts much in the way Thucydides was portraying the Melian dialogues: a monumental act of hubris squandering it's primacy leading to its loss of hegemony.

If you are hoping to starve Europe into submission that's not going to happen.

And as I said, there's going to be over a million Americans wanting a loved one to be released. Are they prepared to wait years for hostility to end?

A short, probably not very bloody, but incredibly humiliating war.

murder
rank Wed Jan 07 18:26:02

"What do you think "inviolable" means?"

I don't know, but it's sure not how you tell someone that you are prepared to fight.

"From which airbases are you planning to do this bombing, exactly?"

From US bases.

"You don't have enough cruise missiles to do this, you don't have enough tankers to do this, and you certainly can't use strategic bombers because they'd be shot down due to not being able to do adequate SEAD and air superiority missions."

Our bombers are meant to penetrate Russian air defenses and put their payload on target. European air defenses minus the US and with Russia on the other side would not likely be able to fend off the initial attack ... which of course would target Europe's air defenses.

You can't fight and win a defensive war.

-

murder
rank Wed Jan 07 18:31:35

"The global economy is toast the moment the US invades Greenland. But in terms of fundamentals the EU is pretty self-sufficient; and we have land routes to Asia."

Not on my map. What routes are these?

"And as I said, there's going to be over a million Americans wanting a loved one to be released. Are they prepared to wait years for hostility to end? "

That's simply not happening. Trump would just make a deal with the Russians. You can't fight like that. If you're not willing to defang the US armed forces, then you're not going to do anything.

-

show deleted posts

Paramount rank	Sun Jan 04 14:59:43 Why not? The Danes can't defend it. The US has strong interests in the country. Nobody will do anything. The Europeans will make some lame statements about international law (which no longer exists) and call for restraint (which is unnecessary) since the US can take Greenland in principle without force or with very restrained force. Some people in Europe may write an angry tweet, but in two weeks everyone will carry on and forget about it. So, the US should probably go ahead and take it. I mean, it just sits there in the ocean anyway, a very large island with a very tiny population of only 56k people, and its closer to USA than to Denmark.
murder rank	Sun Jan 04 16:36:31 Never mind Greenland. Canada should be arming all of its citizens. -
murder rank	Sun Jan 04 16:39:55 For the record, the US can't actually take Venezuela. Venezuelan cowards would have to serve as US puppets to control the country and hand over their oil. -
Rugian rank	Sun Jan 04 16:48:56 "The Athenians: For ourselves, we shall not trouble you with specious pretences...and make a long speech which would not be believed...holding in view the real sentiments of us both; since you know as well as we do that right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must. The Melians: And how, pray, could it turn out as good for us to serve as for you to rule? The Athenians: Because you would have the advantage of submitting before suffering the worst, and we should gain by not destroying you." -Thucydides
Rugian rank	Sun Jan 04 16:59:38 "Map of Greenland Under U.S. Flag Sparks Danish Ambassador Response The Danish ambassador to the U.S. has urged Washington to "respect" Denmark's territory after a prominent MAGA figure revived the long-running tensions between the two NATO members over Greenland. Katie Miller, the wife of White House deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, had posted an image to social media that showed the American flag overlaid on the outline of Greenland. Miller's post, which came after U.S. action in Venezuela, included the map with the word "SOON." http://x.c...h-ambassador-response-11304613
Average Ameriacn rank	Sun Jan 04 18:07:00 Trump is THE deal maker! He could offer the Danes a small part of Venezuela in exchange for Greenland.
murder rank	Sun Jan 04 18:16:53 Why would he give them anything? -
TheChildren rank	Sun Jan 04 18:27:06 looks like iran is gonna be 2nd https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GIELy9PgWg da attempt 2 seize venezulon oilz, da blatant theft, is 2 off set da potentional iran oil shut down shuld they attack iran?? so boots on da ground on venezula and iran? maybe shuld all dis fails and they get there azz handed in iran, they will grab greenland as trophy prize?
Habebe rank	Sun Jan 04 18:46:18 In other news Jens Frederik Neilsen has been suspected of drug smuggling....
murder rank	Mon Jan 05 13:41:46 The EU's weak ass response to Trump's continued threats to annex Greenland even after his attempt to take Venezuela proves that the EU will never be able to defend itself. They aren't even making vague threats about defending Greenland. -
TheChildren rank	Mon Jan 05 15:07:20 ya they r they shuld have condemned venezula hard. but fail 2 do so...so guess who is gonna be on da list, prolly after iran dis is wut happenes when u dunt speak up but r completely brainwashed in2 chieenabaaad, everything china does, doesnt matter right or wrong, is immediately chienaabad but never says anythin bout then miuricans
TheChildren rank	Mon Jan 05 15:12:07 latins amerca isnt belong 2 u. they can chose 2 be friends with who they want. is we livin in da middle ages or something. our women belongs 2 us? rofl they aint even related 2 u. there resources belong 2 them.
Paramount rank	Mon Jan 05 20:12:23 Starmer of the UK said when asked about it, that he has to talk with the Americans first before he can share his view about the US attack on Venezuela and the kidnapping of its president. What a fking weak ass frog. Aren’t you ashamed, Seb?
TheChildren rank	Mon Jan 05 20:17:36 very. and at da end of it. da military op was succes but hardly impressed da retakin of kursk was more impressed, special ops crawled through 2km of tunnels deep behind enemy lines and encircled troopz and shit wut happened last week? they flew in 150 coptas and planes but practised 4 six months and shit. and they wasnt against real army, they was against armed civ guards totally not da same
Paramount rank	Mon Jan 05 20:26:43 USA been trying to change the regime in Venezuela for over 20 years. Only the other day they managed to kidnap the president but the regime is still there, as far as I know. 20+ years lol
TheChildren rank	Mon Jan 05 20:28:22 https://youtu.be/cz57XUSlBv0?t=64 there we have it basically said wut everyone but da sammies alrdy knows
Paramount rank	Mon Jan 05 22:48:59 Imagine if it was Putin who kidnapped the president of another country and threatened to take Greenland? What would Keir Starmer and all the other spineless european leaders have said then? That the europeans are silent, refuse to point out who the criminal is, and remains inactive both in regards to genocide, to terrorism and piracy on the high seas (outside the coast of Venezuela), bombing of embassy fascilities and nuclear facilities (in Iran), bombing of european energy infrastructure (Nordstream), to kidnapping of head of states (Venezuela), and to threats to european countries (Greenland) really proves that international law no longer exist. It’s burial has been cemented, by among others, the human rights lawyer Kier Starmer.
TheChildren rank	Mon Jan 05 23:05:27 rules 4 theee but not 4 me thats da "world order" aka our world order we made how it works. well no more. this is why brics is da future. is unspoken rule how da world order is unda da murca. unspoken as in u cant say it in da west, but everybody knows. everybody in da global south knows. brics is da future.
murder rank	Tue Jan 06 16:47:19 NATO countries are going to allow a moron to steal 836,330 sq miles of territory from a European country ... and are still going to try to hold on to NATO. They are stuck on cowardice, AND they are stuck on stupid. -
Forwyn rank	Tue Jan 06 16:53:10 It's expensive to build guided missile cruisers when you're giving every boat conquistador an extended hotel stay and a monthly stipend to churn out more.
Pillz rank	Tue Jan 06 16:54:17 America picks a fight for 20 years Russia calls them on it America cries Europe won't fight their war for them Murder is definitely a faggot
murder rank	Tue Jan 06 20:24:37 I don't know wtf you're talking about. YOU don't know wtf you're talking about. -
Rugian rank	Wed Jan 07 00:04:14 Trump weighs using U.S. military to acquire Greenland: White House Published Tue, Jan 6 2026 4:07 PM EST President Donald Trump and his team are considering "a range of options" in order to acquire Greenland — including "utilizing the U.S. Military," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told CNBC on Tuesday. "President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it's vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region," Leavitt said. "The President and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilizing the U.S. Military is always an option at the Commander in Chief's disposal," she said. http://www...land-military-white-house.html
TheChildren rank	Wed Jan 07 00:33:08 yall need some xplain 2 do. where u stand on these https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLFkQbPWWDI
tumbleweed rank	Wed Jan 07 00:49:45 he was just joking!........ in what way can we say Russia shouldn't take Ukraine, or China shouldn't take Taiwan (or what any other dictator decides is needed for 'national security') will R's -finally- have an issue if suddenly we seize it one morning...
Seb rank	Wed Jan 07 00:58:34 If the US invades Greenland it's probably quite hard for Europe to stop it, if it sets it's mid to it. However, given the huge stocks of us kit warehoused in Europe, the 100k odd servicemen, god knows how many spooks etc on NATO SoF agreements and their families; I think the US administration will find the first day of the war very challenging as all those folks families realise that their loved ones are PoW with no hope is rescue or exfiltration.
TheChildren rank	Wed Jan 07 01:02:20 " in what way can we say Russia shouldn't take Ukraine, or China shouldn't take Taiwan " >>taiwan isnt take. taiwan belongs 2 china. yall need 2 accept reality.
Seb rank	Wed Jan 07 01:17:02 Also coordinated sell off of us bonds.
Dukhat rank	Wed Jan 07 02:03:26 It's either real and playing into Putin's hands or it's just more Trump flooding the zone with shit so you don't notice the Epstein files and all the heinously criminal stuff he does.
Forwyn rank	Wed Jan 07 03:34:52 Seb will send the Sharia police to nab US servicemembers on their bases. rofl
kargen rank	Wed Jan 07 04:02:45 no. The US should support Greenland independence then make them a favored trade nation.
Seb rank	Wed Jan 07 06:21:10 Forwyn: Not a bad idea. Like the US deal for CECOT but with the Taliban to hold the illegal enemy combatants. Rugian: Ironic given the Melian dialogue in context and the point Thucydides was actually getting at.
murder rank	Wed Jan 07 17:44:21 "However, given the huge stocks of us kit warehoused in Europe, the 100k odd servicemen, god knows how many spooks etc on NATO SoF agreements and their families; I think the US administration will find the first day of the war very challenging as all those folks families realise that their loved ones are PoW with no hope is rescue or exfiltration." Don't kid yourself. Europe and the rest of NATO won't do a damn thing. The heads of most countries won't even make much noise about it. They will just convince themselves that it's a NATO tax and tell the Danes that they should have sold Greenland while they had the chance. "If the US invades Greenland it's probably quite hard for Europe to stop it, if it sets it's mid to it." If Europe was prepared to do something to stop it, it could if it acted first. You could start by arming every single willing citizen of Greenland. It doesn't have to be anything fancy. The weapons just need to be able to bleed a limited force that is stupid enough to go in uninvited. Greenland is > 1000 miles away. That's a very long trip if someone is trying to stop you. And as I pointed out with Russia, you don't have to fight where and how they want to fight. Hitting them anywhere in the world is legit. Stretch them thin and make them defend everything, military and commercial. Hit our ships before they ever leave port. We only have so many ships and so many bombers. Even fewer if you get the first shots in. The real issue would be dealing with the consequences. -
Seb rank	Wed Jan 07 17:58:44 "Don't kid yourself. Europe and the rest of NATO won't do a damn thing" It's worrying you think that. Touch the stove and find out. "You could start by arming every single willing citizen of Greenland." They already are iirc. "Greenland is > 1000 miles away" Even further from continental Europe. "And as I pointed out with Russia, you don't have to fight where and how they want to fight" Indeed, and what better place to fight the US than to seize 100,000 PoWs, hundreds of £100m+ combat jets and armoured vehicles, and ability to easily control your satellites while they are flying over this hemisphere, dismantle your intelligence capabilities and listening stations, your logistic hubs for projecting force into Asia/middle east. Also probably a fair few navy vessels too. Much easier than trying to fight an expeditionary war.
Seb rank	Wed Jan 07 18:01:15 The question then is, do you want risk coming to try and get those back, or are there now millions of Americans with a vested interest in ever seeing their loved ones again that are so fanatically devoted to Trump they'll risk a cataclysmic war the likes Americans have never seen to stage a land war (in such those PoWs are very likely to die); or will they finally kick your corrupt clown-car regime to the curb?
Seb rank	Wed Jan 07 18:02:49 Basically, it would be a very short war from which the US would never recover in the way the UK never recovered from Suez.
murder rank	Wed Jan 07 18:04:59 "It's worrying you think that. Touch the stove and find out." Seb, they haven't even asserted that they will defend Greenland. Also, you should understand that if they aren't willing to send forces to engage US forces and possibly die, then they sure as hell aren't going to invite the US to bomb London, Paris, and Berlin, by taking US hostages. That's simply not happening. I doubt they'll even ask them to leave. -
Seb rank	Wed Jan 07 18:07:02 And then there's the economic aspect. Nationalisation of all the US tech firms physical infrastructure in Europe, strip their IP rights, cut the US off from Swift (it's based in Europe) and coordinate with China and Canada on flooding the bond market to fuck the US finances. The dependency works both ways, and Europe puts up with a lot because of the interest in Ukraine are considered critical. But not more than the territorial integrity of Western Europe.
murder rank	Wed Jan 07 18:07:33 You can't fight a defensive war. If you don't destroy our means of controlling the seas, then your economy is toast. -
murder rank	Wed Jan 07 18:10:59 A much better move would be to ally with Canada and Mexico and Brazil and China and anyone else willing to get involved. If the US attacks anyone, everyone attacks the US. Anywhere and everywhere. -
Seb rank	Wed Jan 07 18:16:08 Murder: "they haven't even asserted that they will defend Greenland". What do you think "inviolable" means? "by taking US hostages" PoWs. They are enemy soldiers, entirely legit. "invite the US to bomb London, Paris, and Berlin" From which airbases are you planning to do this bombing, exactly? Is the idea to sail across the Atlantic and try and win air superiority from, what, 6 aircraft carriers? Generally they haven't been very successful in detecting aip subs of the kind Europe has scores of. You'd lose ships. Probably capital ones. You don't have enough cruise missiles to do this, you don't have enough tankers to do this, and you certainly can't use strategic bombers because they'd be shot down due to not being able to do adequate SEAD and air superiority missions. The logistics for CENTCOM power projection that let's you do all of this in the middle east and Africa is all based in those European bases and what you've just lost in this insane scenario. So, like I said, a short humiliating war that the US never recovers from.
Seb rank	Wed Jan 07 18:22:46 "If you don't destroy our means of controlling the seas, then your economy is toast." The global economy is toast the moment the US invades Greenland. But in terms of fundamentals the EU is pretty self-sufficient; and we have land routes to Asia. Interdiction of Chinese merchant ships would be a bad idea too (they'll have grabbed Taiwan and see the US acts much in the way Thucydides was portraying the Melian dialogues: a monumental act of hubris squandering it's primacy leading to its loss of hegemony. If you are hoping to starve Europe into submission that's not going to happen. And as I said, there's going to be over a million Americans wanting a loved one to be released. Are they prepared to wait years for hostility to end? A short, probably not very bloody, but incredibly humiliating war.
murder rank	Wed Jan 07 18:26:02 "What do you think "inviolable" means?" I don't know, but it's sure not how you tell someone that you are prepared to fight. "From which airbases are you planning to do this bombing, exactly?" From US bases. "You don't have enough cruise missiles to do this, you don't have enough tankers to do this, and you certainly can't use strategic bombers because they'd be shot down due to not being able to do adequate SEAD and air superiority missions." Our bombers are meant to penetrate Russian air defenses and put their payload on target. European air defenses minus the US and with Russia on the other side would not likely be able to fend off the initial attack ... which of course would target Europe's air defenses. You can't fight and win a defensive war. -
murder rank	Wed Jan 07 18:31:35 "The global economy is toast the moment the US invades Greenland. But in terms of fundamentals the EU is pretty self-sufficient; and we have land routes to Asia." Not on my map. What routes are these? "And as I said, there's going to be over a million Americans wanting a loved one to be released. Are they prepared to wait years for hostility to end? " That's simply not happening. Trump would just make a deal with the Russians. You can't fight like that. If you're not willing to defang the US armed forces, then you're not going to do anything. -
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: