Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?
-
Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?
Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?
Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?
It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.
What do you get?
-
Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?
Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?
Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?
It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.
What do you get?
@futurebird as I understand it, due to the polar ice caps melting there will be a new viable sea trade route via the North West Passage.
But, like you say, I'm not sure why the US need to encroach on Greenland and not just, say, be allied to them. -
Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?
Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?
Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?
It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.
What do you get?
@futurebird mineral rights to exploit and sea passage to control
-
Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?
Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?
Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?
It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.
What do you get?
@futurebird IMO it's not even companies, it's just Trump and his cronies' running a vanity project. From the way they've been pitching Venezuela to oil companies, him and his gang will just hold the whole thing hostage and demand direct payments for access, as in actual tens of percent income to the gov.
He just now outright gave an interview saying he wants Greenland because "it's psychologically important for him"
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():focal(749x0:751x2)/Donald-Trump-American-Flag-Greenland-011226-643cb7146b2d4e60b0c6f7d7a796a503.jpg)
Donald Trump Says He Wants 'Ownership' of Greenland Because It's 'Psychologically Important for Me'
President Donald Trump said that taking full 'ownership' over Greenland, rather than just upping the United States' military presence there, is 'psychologically important' to him during a lengthy sit-down interview with 'The New York Times'
People.com (people.com)
-
Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?
Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?
Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?
It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.
What do you get?
@futurebird It's big on the world map, and somebody told him there might eventually be unexploited ressources under it, plus that he could get his money share for making it possible, so he wants it?
-
Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?
Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?
Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?
It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.
What do you get?
Probably extraction of minerals in a very harmful manner for the environment. Denmark and the EU does not give extractive industries free reign. @futurebird
-
Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?
Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?
Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?
It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.
What do you get?
@futurebird https://podcasts.apple.com/be/podcast/the-world-the-universe-and-us/id1496847791
Basically nothing ; he has no clue. Only reason could be to secure Northern land with the incoming global warming apocalypse.
-
@futurebird IMO it's not even companies, it's just Trump and his cronies' running a vanity project. From the way they've been pitching Venezuela to oil companies, him and his gang will just hold the whole thing hostage and demand direct payments for access, as in actual tens of percent income to the gov.
He just now outright gave an interview saying he wants Greenland because "it's psychologically important for him"
Donald Trump Says He Wants 'Ownership' of Greenland Because It's 'Psychologically Important for Me'
President Donald Trump said that taking full 'ownership' over Greenland, rather than just upping the United States' military presence there, is 'psychologically important' to him during a lengthy sit-down interview with 'The New York Times'
People.com (people.com)
I have a friend who used to work in commodities and he says the oil companies are not interested in Venezuela now. They were wary because of the government, but now they are MORE wary because it's less stable.
-
There is a theory that this move is designed to break up NATO.
I thought that was a little far fetched at first, NATO is really good for the US, it's like the birthday boy throwing a tantrum.
But some conservatives have a deep seated fear of "world government." So maybe that's it? Basically these are the guys who find it galling that there are notions like "international law" or "human rights" however unevenly applied.
@futurebird
Putin wants NATO gone. He's Donnie's puppeteer. -
@futurebird
Putin wants NATO gone. He's Donnie's puppeteer.Everyone wants to be a little big man instead of actually doing amazing big things. The lack of imagination depresses me.
-
Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?
Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?
Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?
It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.
What do you get?
@futurebird imho it's about having somewhere to live in a couple of decades when the majority of the continental US is uninhabitable due to climate change. Ditto the aspirations about Canada becoming the 51st state.
-
Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?
Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?
Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?
It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.
What do you get?
@futurebird Take away all indigenous rights and stripmine the bedrock that will be revealed as their climate decisions melt the ice caps.
-
There is a theory that this move is designed to break up NATO.
I thought that was a little far fetched at first, NATO is really good for the US, it's like the birthday boy throwing a tantrum.
But some conservatives have a deep seated fear of "world government." So maybe that's it? Basically these are the guys who find it galling that there are notions like "international law" or "human rights" however unevenly applied.
@futurebird I am sure it is the reason. These are the same type of people who orchestrated Brexit in the UK and sold it to the same type of "flag waving citizens" for support.
-
I have a friend who used to work in commodities and he says the oil companies are not interested in Venezuela now. They were wary because of the government, but now they are MORE wary because it's less stable.
@futurebird sounds about right. Impression I'm getting here and there is no one really asked for any of this outside the pres himself and his cronies looking to play modern day Alexander.
-
Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?
Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?
Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?
It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.
What do you get?
@futurebird
If the global warming that MAGA don't believe in turns out to be true after all then Greenland becomes a lot more attractive. By 2100 the Arctic could be the new Mediterranean. Though why this would interest a toddler who can't think beyond the next meal remains a mystery. -
@futurebird
If the global warming that MAGA don't believe in turns out to be true after all then Greenland becomes a lot more attractive. By 2100 the Arctic could be the new Mediterranean. Though why this would interest a toddler who can't think beyond the next meal remains a mystery. -
@futurebird set up weird slave cities for american billionaires
Like Trump, Silicon Valley wants Greenland, too - for a Big Tech utopia
Wealthy tech investors are promoting Greenland as the site for a libertarian utopia with minimal corporate regulation.
USA TODAY (www.usatoday.com)
@depereo @futurebird they will use it to figure out how to oppress people on Mars. Reminds me of this song:
-
There is a theory that this move is designed to break up NATO.
I thought that was a little far fetched at first, NATO is really good for the US, it's like the birthday boy throwing a tantrum.
But some conservatives have a deep seated fear of "world government." So maybe that's it? Basically these are the guys who find it galling that there are notions like "international law" or "human rights" however unevenly applied.
@futurebird that may be a factor in this
but we need to keep in mind that the set of people actually involved in trying to warmonger about Greenland is literally less than a dozen people. They've pushed away everyone who would have possibly pushed back on rank idiocy, they do not have the time in the day to come up with a coherent reasoning
-
Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?
Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?
Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?
It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.
What do you get?
@futurebird
The us wants to be able to be a free agent and so donald trump is cashing out all the us based international structure possible. I mean, its about a lot of stuff but also, Sometimes i think these idiots literally think like a big map game and want to get the continent bonus or some shit -
There is a theory that this move is designed to break up NATO.
I thought that was a little far fetched at first, NATO is really good for the US, it's like the birthday boy throwing a tantrum.
But some conservatives have a deep seated fear of "world government." So maybe that's it? Basically these are the guys who find it galling that there are notions like "international law" or "human rights" however unevenly applied.
In Denmark we feel the US is trying to kick in an open door, the only thing I can think of RE mineral rights is that we probably have stricter environmental protection laws then the US.
But overall it's not economical to mine in Greenland, the Greenland government has been desperate for investments for decades and yet there are no major mining operations in place.
I think it's just because it would Look Cool to have a new territory added to the US.
That said, the Greenlanders should decide who to associate with. They might dislike Denmark - and for mostly good reasons - but I doubt they're gonna look at their kin in Alaska and think "they look like they're having a great time!".
