@lokapix.bsky.social
Reposted
There is nothing from a security perspective that “owning” Greenland would enable the U.S. to do *that we cannot already do now through NATO.*
This is the same as the east wing ballroom and the Kennedy Center: an attempt to leave a visible legacy from someone who senses their time is running out.
This is the same as the east wing ballroom and the Kennedy Center: an attempt to leave a visible legacy from someone who senses their time is running out.
If Greenland is so vital, and under such imminent Chinese and Russian threat, and if Denmark is unable to defend it alone, then
I have a wild idea
Denmark could team up with other countries…maybe sign a treaty, or form an organization with 30 or so other states with North Atlantic security intere
I have a wild idea
Denmark could team up with other countries…maybe sign a treaty, or form an organization with 30 or so other states with North Atlantic security intere
January 10, 2026 at 2:13 PM
There is nothing from a security perspective that “owning” Greenland would enable the U.S. to do *that we cannot already do now through NATO.*
This is the same as the east wing ballroom and the Kennedy Center: an attempt to leave a visible legacy from someone who senses their time is running out.
This is the same as the east wing ballroom and the Kennedy Center: an attempt to leave a visible legacy from someone who senses their time is running out.
Reposted
Trump claims that the US has to take Greenland because Russia or China will take it, but Greenland is defended by all of NATO including the US. Nobody is taking Greenland and we can put as many troops, bases and missiles there as we want. US companies are free to do business there.
January 10, 2026 at 2:30 PM
Trump claims that the US has to take Greenland because Russia or China will take it, but Greenland is defended by all of NATO including the US. Nobody is taking Greenland and we can put as many troops, bases and missiles there as we want. US companies are free to do business there.