Fair enough. I posted this rather long comment elsewhere, but what I said there pretty much explains a lot of my thoughts on the situation.

I wouldn't put much past the current American administration. I haven't been able to shake this impression that we might really be looking a the telegraphing of an invasion. From what we know and have seen, the administration is very much itching to apply the fullest extent of its powers. It's defined by unprecedented and extraordinary use of extralegal action and complete disregard for how it might be seen by the world at large.

They said for years that Russia wouldn't move on Ukraine, and then green men marched in and took over Crimea. It's no secret how much America is becoming increasingly like Russia in every way. US already has significant military presence in Greenland — a green men play would be really easy. And Greenland also has a surprising number of politicians who openly say that they prefer the security offered by Trump's America over Denmark, even as they declare that they want independence (experts argue that independence might make them even more vulnerable to takeover right now). It's easy to assume that at least some Greenland doors would open up to an American green man advance.

Also, as far as consequences for taking over Greenland, we seem to be primarily looking at a breakup of NATO — something that is also on this US administration's longstanding wish list. Experts don't seem to think it's ultimately likely to result in an actual war so much as make it crystal clear that the old rules no longer apply, and that the US isn't a friend (the Article 5 debate is shaky, especially against the prospect of actually going to war against America, and especially while NATO is also dealing with the Russian war in Ukraine). On paper it kind of reads like a win-win-win situation for the current brazen, imperialist, and isolationist American kleptocracy.

I'd say we at least need to take this stuff seriously.

[Edited for formatting]

Look, I dont think the US will launch an all-out military invasion of Greenland. But there are two or three other ways how they could try to gain control over Greenland's natural resources, and I absolutely believe that they will try that.

They’re taking Greenland this year. Source: 1936-38ish

Stay away from games of Risk. Greenland becomes prime real estate as global warming advances; making mining easier, opening Artic shipping lanes.

Also, this action gets America kicked out of NATO, a goal of both the administration and Putin. Win win.

That means we need nukes on EU level.

I wait for the day when the Green party in Germany realizes that it is a good idea to restart the nuclear reactors to build nuclear bombs for European safety.

I don't follow the reasoning here…

Man, I’ve read all of your comments. You sound like a young US veteran who lapped up the cool aid.

Military prowess is one thing. The yanks key role is to be a deterrent force. The forward bases and carrier groups, are all part of a logistics network to allow for rapid response in case of (mostly article 5).

It is not a standard base or pre deployment for an attack. It would be the most foolish thing they can do, and if they did it, they would seriously damage reputation, strategic positioning, not to mention lose key assets, key allies and troop morale.

To give you some counter koolaid: the yanks haven’t won a war since Japan and they needed a nuke for that. All other victories were allied with wait for it… European nations.

All the yanks and especially under Drunk Pete are good at, is hi tech hit and runs like Iran and Venezuela.

A US attack on EU would basically instantly make a USE, military and everything, and they would (give them some time) bomb DC and make sure that sick pedophile shoots himself in the bunker.

Are these really pure US bases though? My understanding is they are mainly NATO bases where the US is present as well.

The footnote even says it: "at which DOD exercises some degree of operational control"

It very much depends on the base.

For instance, Ramstein AFB is a whole different story from the nearby Germersheim DLA distribution center. The former is a formidable threat to central and western Europe. The latter could be taken over by a particularly enthusiastic riot police unit (but probably won't because there's nothing of interest there).

There's a bunch of bases that would pose a real threat and would be prime targets for immediate missile strikes. There's a bunch that can be dealt with by having traffic cops close off the entrance. There's a bunch in between. It's very much a mixed bag.

So is every other developed nation.

Its a decision that should be left to the people of Greenland.

What I don't agree with is doing it at a time the country's sovereignty is under direct threat. Trump has signaled he isn't against boots on the ground, and the only thing holding him back from doing the same to Greenland, as what he has done to Venezuela, is the larger alliances they're a part of.

But you already know this; it's why you're advocating so fervently for their independence at a time when the US is drooling over them. I'm 100% convinced that your goal here is to sow discord to enable an unquestioned takeover of a newly independent and unprotected Greenland.

Basically, your breath stinks of cheeto dick pal.

Yes because whataboutism whilst the world's strongest military is lapping it's lips over taking the territory is such a strong argument.   

If Greenland were to gain independence now, they would forfeit their position in both NATO and the EU; and open the doors for an unquestioned American invasion... But sure, I'm the idiot here.