Europe will fight USA if they invade Greenland

[Sugar Baby 1,002]

Not TRUMP trying it with Europe out of all people

europeans are literally his strongest allies wtf 

[Ayesha Erotica 1,924]

13 minutes ago, Economy said:

This is a very big if scenario tho and i still dont see it as the base case or most likely scenario. Id be a bit surprised if US actually follows thru attacking Greenland

California, New Mexico, Florida, Nevada were also once part of the Spanish-Mexican empire and US annexed them step by step. 

Hawaii was ruled by a dark-skinned Queen -she was dethroned.

I dread future American politicians will look at the map and increasingly think "Canada is a missing puzzle piece on the map", because it will be surrounded by 3 sides by America. Then US might annex gradually one Canadian province after another like it did with Spanish Mexico. 

Alaska should have never become American, it should have become a buffer state on its own between Russia and America (and Canada in between). Louisiana and Québec should have become a francophone states on their own, too. New Mexico should have become a bilingual buffer state between Mexico and America.  There is a lack of nation-states in North America.

The problem is, America has become so big that it became a monster, too imperial. Likewise Russia became too big, too. The world should have existed made of more even nation-states. 

[PunkTheFunk 125,703]

So we're doing WWIII this year...got it 

[27monster27 15,857]

1 hour ago, Ayesha Erotica said:

Denmark represents 1% of Europe's population, and if it fights, it will fight alone - and the fight will be short-lived. Some countries may send weapons, but not aircraft and ground troops.

Furthermore, Wadepul is wrong, because while Denmark can attempt to activate the mutual defense clause, it will not be invoked because it requires unanimity within NATO, and the US, as a NATO member, will vote against it. NATO does not provide COLLECTIVE assistance in conflicts between NATO members because ALL members must agree.

I wish the indigenous population of Greenland the best, especially after the indigenous women were forcibly sterilized by the Danish government in the 20th century, preventing them from having children, and now they are soon to be exploited and corrupted by US-Americans, which is immoral, too.   A tragic fate has befallen this people. 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5yelp5466no

This is why I agree with your statement that (while not with Denmark because China would never support NATO) China needs to get involved somehow. China needs to guarantee the independence of a country like Cuba for example to get Trump to back off. I don't think making a military base or anything of the sort would be a good idea unless absolutely necessary because I feel like the hands MAGA enough support for guaranteed election wins.

[Morphine Prince 109,655]

I fear European countries will give up Greenland because NATO is nothing without the USA. 

If the USA backs out of NATO and destabilizes it, Putin is going to have a free for all in European countries it wants to annex. Ukraine is just the beginning. 

[PartySick 172,504]

It'd be a battle but not a war.

Denmark, hell all of Europe combined, has no chance against the American military.

The way they retaliate is by cutting diplomatic ties, removing US military bases from their countries, severing trade agreements, and dumping the dollar as the global currency.

If "we" want Greenland, "we'll" take it. But it'll cost us everything. The US will become economically unstable and as soon as the consequences of isolation hits Americans, it's really over for whoever's in power.

The US won't survive as a rogue state and I have a feeling our military won't let Trump destroy us.

[monstertoronto 11,743]

These feels like the most random, unprovoked and unnecessary potential world war ever.  It’s unbelievable how quickly things have escalated in the short time he’s been in office again. How will we all survive a full term and the extremely real possibility he’ll never leave. 

if he decides to attack Canada who would defend us?

[PartySick 172,504]

47 minutes ago, monstertoronto said:

These feels like the most random, unprovoked and unnecessary potential world war ever.  It’s unbelievable how quickly things have escalated in the short time he’s been in office again. How will we all survive a full term and the extremely real possibility he’ll never leave. 

if he decides to attack Canada who would defend us?

I wouldn't worry about that. The US could steamroll basically any nation but if the past 20 years have taught us anything it's that occupation is an entirely different creature. Especially when Americans and Canadians share so much of our culture and a massive border.

It'd be total political suicide by Trump and diplomatic and economic suicide for the US.

It'd also leave the US wide open 'cause most NORAD radar systems are on Canadian soil. US and Canadian military defenses are joined at the hip, if y'all cut us off that leaves us significantly less defended than before WHILE the world decides we've gone nuts and need to be quarantined.

So like...the US could defeat Canada's military but the ensuing occupation would just leave us with a pyrrhic victory. It'd effectively destroy the US too.

There really is no scenario where the US survives invading any other nation, especially Canada though.

 

Edit (adding more since I'm actively reading about it lmao):

The American military swears allegiance to our constitution, not the president. And you might wave that off initially but consider that military leadership has been in their position for decades cultivating a culture of legality and honor. 

If Trump ordered an invasion of, say, Cuba, they'd likely comply while congress freaks tf out.

But to order an attack on Canada or any other NATO ally would be unconstitutional and illegal. 

Military officers are legally required to disobey "manifestly unlawful" orders. Attacking a NATO ally (like Canada or Denmark) without provocation would violate the North Atlantic Treaty, which, under the US Constitution (Article VI), is the "supreme Law of the Land."

Leadership would refuse and probably leak the plans to the media and testify to congress that the orders are illegal. The Pentagon would tie those orders in so much bureaucratic slime they wouldn't move.

And if Trump tries to circumvent leadership to give orders directly to the troops, two things would happen:

1. Congress would pull the funding. That's what ended the Vietnam war. Congress controls the budget, once they refuse to fund a military operation it stops.

2. Military leadership would resign en masse and a military can't function if it decapitates itself. And these are people with decades of training and experience in their positions, virtually impossible to replace, especially with loyalists to the president 'cause by definition, you cannot be loyal to one man AND competently work high on the chain of command.

All this to say, Trump might have us do something incredibly stupid, but it'd be akin to suicide for the US as a nation.

That's why he's sending Rubio to Denmark to wave his d*ck around and make empty threats. He wants Denmark to cave to the threats and just sell Greenland 'cause he knows an invasion would be the single most stupid f*cking thing any American president has ever done ever.

Edited January 8 by PartySick

[Shadow 6,697]

Trump might do more damage to NATO by this wild game on Greenland than Putin could....

 

Edited January 8 by Shadow

[Marilyn MonHoe 11,011]

11 minutes ago, PartySick said:

I wouldn't worry about that. The US could steamroll basically any nation but if the past 20 years have taught us anything it's that occupation is an entirely different creature. Especially when Americans and Canadians share so much of our culture and a massive border.

It'd be total political suicide by Trump and diplomatic and economic suicide for the US.

It'd also leave the US wide open 'cause most NORAD radar systems are on Canadian soil. US and Canadian military defenses are joined at the hip, if y'all cut us off that leaves us significantly less defended than before WHILE the world decides we've gone nuts and need to be quarantined.

So like...the US could defeat Canada's military but the ensuing occupation would just leave us with a pyrrhic victory. It'd effectively destroy the US too.

There really is no scenario where the US survives invading any other nation, especially Canada though.

Not to mention the fact that every regime change the US has ever done has been a total disaster

Nuremberg 2.0 can’t come fast enough 

[PartySick 172,504]

4 minutes ago, Marilyn MonHoe said:

Not to mention the fact that every regime change the US has ever done has been a total disaster

Nuremberg 2.0 can’t come fast enough 

Yeah, we're excellent weapons. Great killers. But ask us to do something that isn't entirely destructive and we fumble 99% of the time.

[Concertaholic 6,578]

When was the last time Trump actually did something good to benefit the American people? Americans who support him literally defy logic.

[monstertoronto 11,743]

31 minutes ago, PartySick said:

I wouldn't worry about that. The US could steamroll basically any nation but if the past 20 years have taught us anything it's that occupation is an entirely different creature. Especially when Americans and Canadians share so much of our culture and a massive border.

It'd be total political suicide by Trump and diplomatic and economic suicide for the US.

It'd also leave the US wide open 'cause most NORAD radar systems are on Canadian soil. US and Canadian military defenses are joined at the hip, if y'all cut us off that leaves us significantly less defended than before WHILE the world decides we've gone nuts and need to be quarantined.

So like...the US could defeat Canada's military but the ensuing occupation would just leave us with a pyrrhic victory. It'd effectively destroy the US too.

There really is no scenario where the US survives invading any other nation, especially Canada though.

 

Edit (adding more since I'm actively reading about it lmao):

The American military swears allegiance to our constitution, not the president. And you might wave that off initially but consider that military leadership has been in their position for decades cultivating a culture of legality and honor. 

If Trump ordered an invasion of, say, Cuba, they'd likely comply while congress freaks tf out.

But to order an attack on Canada or any other NATO ally would be unconstitutional and illegal. 

Military officers are legally required to disobey "manifestly unlawful" orders. Attacking a NATO ally (like Canada or Denmark) without provocation would violate the North Atlantic Treaty, which, under the US Constitution (Article VI), is the "supreme Law of the Land."

Leadership would refuse and probably leak the plans to the media and testify to congress that the orders are illegal. The Pentagon would tie those orders in so much bureaucratic slime they wouldn't move.

And if Trump tries to circumvent leadership to give orders directly to the troops, two things would happen:

1. Congress would pull the funding. That's what ended the Vietnam war. Congress controls the budget, once they refuse to fund a military operation it stops.

2. Military leadership would resign en masse and a military can't function if it decapitates itself. And these are people with decades of training and experience in their positions, virtually impossible to replace, especially with loyalists to the president 'cause by definition, you cannot be loyal to one man AND competently work high on the chain of command.

All this to say, Trump might have us do something incredibly stupid, but it'd be akin to suicide for the US as a nation.

That's why he's sending Rubio to Denmark to wave his d*ck around and make empty threats. He wants Denmark to cave to the threats and just sell Greenland 'cause he knows an invasion would be the single most stupid f*cking thing any American president has ever done ever.

Thank you for this. This does make me feel better. 

[PartySick 172,504]

Just now, monstertoronto said:

Thank you for this. This does make me feel better. 

I felt better after some research too. There are safety measures in place within our government that allows us to do things like abduct the president of Venezuela and deal with the world's sideeye but absolutely prohibit a real invasion of an ally, especially Canada. And even Greenland.

Europe would kick us out, China and Russia would win the geopolitical century by default, we'd trade our centuries of global power for a block of damn ice that we already have military bases on and economic ties to  

It just wouldn't happen. Trump is bluffing. And I hope nobody can come back to this thread and quote me later

[PartySick 172,504]

An interesting thought for the whole "invade Greenland" thing. I think Trump would immediately be impeached AND removed.

One Democrat, literally any of them, can push a privileged resolution to force a floor vote on impeachment right now. They're likely saving impeachment for after the midterms but still. Johnson would have to get enough votes to kill that measure, which he wouldn't be able to do, and we'd only need 4 Republicans to defect. That'd be easy.

When it gets to the senate though? I think Republicans might take the bait this time. Especially if it's a blind vote. Thune has already said the Greenland invasion plan isn't a real option and the senate isn't as loyal to MAGA as the house is. A lot of senators are institutionalists who have national security backgrounds and view NATO as the holy grail of American security.

Without NATO, we can no longer project power in the Middle East. We can't check Russia, we can't check China, we become significantly weaker, isolated, and our economy becomes ruined. And for what? A glacier that we'll spend decades fighting locals for?

I genuinely believe at least 20 Republicans would sign on to the motion to convict and remove Trump in favor of JD Vance and keeping the Republican legacy of foreign policy alive.

Or at the very least they'd vote to defund the invasion and push for the 25th amendment.