XPost: alt.politics.trump, dk.politik, or.politics   
   XPost: sac.politics   
   From: flwp@in.valid   
      
   On Thu, 29 Jan 2026 12:42:18 -0800   
   Alan  wrote:   
      
   > 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.   
      
   False friends.   
      
   > Concluding a defence agreement with Denmark to allow US   
   > bases/stations in Greenland would be FAR easier.   
      
   We already have that, ya dumb cluck!   
      
      
   AI Overview   
   The United States holds the right to expand its military footprint in   
   Greenland under a 1951 U.S.-Denmark defense agreement, allowing for new   
   bases and increased troop presence to counter Arctic threats. While the   
   U.S. currently operates Pituffik Space Base, negotiations are underway   
   to secure unrestricted, long-term access, potentially enabling new   
   missile defense, surveillance, and deep-water port capabilities,   
   subject to Danish and Greenlandic consent.   
      
      
   > Did you know that in the past, the US had as many as 17 installations   
   > in Greenland?   
      
   All "subject to Danish and Greenlandic consent.   
      
   Fuck that, we take it now.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)