Nato 'might have to get involved' in US takeover of Greenland, says Trump – video (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 3 weeks ago by humanspiral@lemmy.ca to c/endlesswar@lemmy.ca

3 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The only reason US needs to control Greenland instead of a NATO ally is to threaten Europe.

Greenland is far away from Russia. BS that Russia and China have a presence in Arctic is that they are cooperating on projects in Russian waters. Any use of Greenland waters for shipping will be to deliver to eastern North America from China, and so inherently welcome.

There will be zero resource development projects in Canada or Greenland by countries that have enemy status with NATO, because of extreme expense of shipping resources back to Russia, and extreme risk of sabotage of projects.

all 4 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] HK65@sopuli.xyz 6 points 3 weeks ago

I don't understand, in the case of a US attack on Greenland, wouldn't NATO need to be on the defensive side?

[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 weeks ago

There is unanimous opposition among NATO members, except perhaps bitch Canada, to US takeover of Greenland. Rutte is saying here, that opposition would not be a NATO operation. Greece and Turkey fight regularly (both NATO members) and NATO doesn't say shit.

Expelling US from NATO would change NATO response. But all NATO representatives are CIA appointed.

[-] skozzii@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 weeks ago

Where are all those Trump supporters claiming he is going to end all wars and violence globally. Seems to be doing the opposite now? New countries looking for nukes, military spending globally is going to be at record levels.

this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025

17 points (100.0% liked)

Endless War

104 readers

12 users here now

Community critical of US Empire's thirst for endless war, its military and oil oligarchies and colonization of allies.

founded 5 months ago

MODERATORS

humanspiral@lemmy.ca