XPost: dk.politik, or.politics, sac.politics
XPost: talk.politics.guns
From: nuh-uh@nope.com
On 2026-01-29 12:25, phoenix wrote:
> Alan wrote:
>> On 2026-01-29 12:02, Tal Yessen wrote:
>>> On Thu, 29 Jan 2026 13:33:29 -0600 phoenix
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Alan wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Fuck you straight to Hell, eugenicist trash.
>>>>>> You're attempting to demonize Denmark solely to make Trump's
>>>>>> threat to annex Greenland more acceptable.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nah, but it's just another brick in the wall, or dare I say
>>>>> golden some.
>>>>>
>>>>> You miserable pansy.
>>>>
>>>> He may have meant
>>>
>>> AI Overview President Trump is pushing for U.S. control of Greenland
>>> to base a "Golden Dome" missile defense shield, a proposed multi-
>>> layered system designed to protect North America, reported The Wall
>>> Street Journal and CNBC. While viewed as strategic for Arctic
>>> defense against threats, experts note that acquiring the territory
>>> is not essential for the system, notes DW News and The Los Angeles
>>> Times. Key Aspects of the Proposal (as of January 2026): Strategic
>>> Rationale: Trump considers Greenland's location vital for Arctic
>>> radar coverage and early warning systems against Russia and China,
>>> says DW News. The System: The "Golden Dome" is envisioned as a
>>> comprehensive shield, similar to Israel's Iron Dome, utilizing both
>>> space and ground technology, notes The Wall Street Journal and CBS
>>> News.
>>>
>>
>> Only, there is no need to annex Greenland in order to do that.
>
> Maybe not, but you have to agree that it would make the whole process
> easier all things considered.
Nope. It would definitely make things harder because it would shatter an
important alliance.
Concluding a defence agreement with Denmark to allow US bases/stations
in Greenland would be FAR easier.
Did you know that in the past, the US had as many as 17 installations in
Greenland?
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
