Europe will fight USA if they invade Greenland

[PunkTheFunk 125,703]

1 hour ago, Sepsami said:

I'll meet you on the battlefield where I will finally rectify the injustice done by you to Joanne & Enigma 

Prepare yourself henny!

Oh it's on

[DopeEnigma 1,774]

12 hours ago, Ayesha Erotica said:

I think Trump wants to have a long-term legacy and this will be Greenland. Venezuela cannot be a long-term legacy because well, in 30-40 years Venezuela might "disobey" and become truly independent again. 

Have you heard about the "Wall of Fame/Shame of Presidents" in the White House, where Biden is with his auto-pen? Trump highlighted all the presidents who annexed new territories. I think he wants to be credited for Greenland. 

Also even if people don't like that idea, he can't be re-elected, so why should he listen to the people who don't want it to be annexed? 

Also if Greenland becomes US-American, USA will be larger in size than Canada and also significantly larger than Land-area-China, which will have a negative psychological effect because so far we recognize US is stronger by population, but not by size (compared to CA). 

I think you’re failing to recognise that if Trump did anything of the sort, Europe could cripple the US economy quite easily by dumping US treasuries, yes Ukraine is a problem and we do need the US support but if he actually goes ahead with it, it’s time to make it very clear to America how much damage they would cause to their country and to be more united as Europe. It doesn’t necessarily need to be a military conflict but a package would be sent showing the significance of attacking a NATO state and the severe financial consequences.

Trump is a coward and his minders would naturally be worried about this. What would his legacy be then, an impoverished and severely isolated US for several many decades to come?

Edited January 8 by DopeEnigma

[insight 2,479]

10 hours ago, Morphine Prince said:

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. 

Ditto...but not right away.

[Ladle Ghoulash 52,610]

5 hours ago, dynamite said:

Omg lmao I thought he lived in the White House 

Diva, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave is the WH 

[Ziggy 14,015]

11 hours 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

Yeah I skeptical when I read the German minister say they will “in principle” be subject to nato defense. A very tricky qualifier. That said, if this were to happen, I don’t think it’ll fall on terms of NATO and the U.S. agreeing or not since the deal is basically moot

[BornAsUnic0rn 2,245]

4 hours ago, Sepsami said:

Realistically, we don't have a chance 

Realistically that is our only chance. Either rise up now as a united Europe, and fight, with the chance of losing, or giving up now and have China, the US & Russia make us take it and eat their ****. 
 

Not standing up against Trump is basically waving the white flag without a fight.  

[PartySick 172,474]

2 hours ago, Ziggy said:

Yeah I skeptical when I read the German minister say they will “in principle” be subject to nato defense. A very tricky qualifier. That said, if this were to happen, I don’t think it’ll fall on terms of NATO and the U.S. agreeing or not since the deal is basically moot

Since the US is part of NATO we would be legally obligated to fight ourselves.

Civil War 2: The Remix coming to a failing state near you (if you live in this hemisphere)

[Ziggy 14,015]

1 hour ago, PartySick said:

Since the US is part of NATO we would be legally obligated to fight ourselves.

Civil War 2: The Remix coming to a failing state near you (if you live in this hemisphere)

Easter Island watching this go down like 

[LOVEDRUG 11,254]

14 hours ago, PartySick said:

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.

I don't agree. America has numbers on their side, but the British, French, Italian and German militaries are amongst the most well-trained and well-equipped in the world. The US may have the strongest military in the world, but Europe has the sixth, seventh, tenth, fourteenth, seventeenth and twenty-first strongest militaries combined, which makes for a pretty formidable opponent when combined with some of the most advanced and capable intelligence agencies and special forces units in the world.

Thanks to the French and their defence industry, European powers don't even need American weapons and equipment anymore. The US couldn't win offensive wars against North Vietnam or the Taliban. They stand no chance of a quick victory of Europe. Both the States and Russia thinks wars are won in numbers. Look at how that's working out in Ukraine.

[Ayesha Erotica 1,924]

4 hours ago, DopeEnigma said:

I think you’re failing to recognise that if Trump did anything of the sort, Europe could cripple the US economy quite easily by dumping US treasuries, [...] It doesn’t necessarily need to be a military conflict but a package would be sent showing the significance of attacking a NATO state and the severe financial consequences. [...]What would his legacy [Trump] be then, an impoverished and severely isolated US for several many decades to come?

The key word is "could" and the lack of self-confidence among Europeans.

Despite everything, it is primarily a problem for Denmark, not for Italy, Greece, or Portugal.

Europe is not a unified actor, even if it presents itself as such through the EU. It is a collective of diverse interests. Theoretically, it would have the power to impose economic sanctions and could certainly counter the US, at least financially and in terms of goods. But Europeans shy away from retaliation - that is, they fear US counter economic sanctions - no one wants to antagonize the US, too much. The Baltic states have to choose between Greenland, which doesn't belong to them, or the possibility that Russia could invade the corridor to Kaliningrad and the US would then refuse aid because the Baltic states have been "disloyal." The same applies to Greece - Turkey has expressed interest in Greek islands located off the coast. It sucks for Eastern Europe, which is so dependent on the US that knows how to exploit the crisis. Greece is dependent on US aid, should Turkey attack it – it cannot afford to antagonize the US for Greenland, a hugeisland far away from Greece. The US will divide and paralyze Europe, rendering it incapable of action, because Europe will not be able to form a majority that reacts with more than a symbolic gesture.

Furthermore, the EU was a slightly larger economic power than the US in 2008, but has since fallen back to only two-thirds of the US GDP. And even if you include the UK extra, the EU+UK GDP has fallen behind the USA - the USA has become richer compared to Europe and a trend reversal is not in sight.

https://econofact.org/factbrief/fact-check-has-the-economic-gap-between-europe-and-the-united-states-increased-in-the-past-decade

[PartySick 172,474]

27 minutes ago, LOVEDRUG said:

I don't agree. America has numbers on their side, but the British, French, Italian and German militaries are amongst the most well-trained and well-equipped in the world. The US may have the strongest military in the world, but Europe has the sixth, seventh, tenth, fourteenth, seventeenth and twenty-first strongest militaries combined, which makes for a pretty formidable opponent when combined with some of the most advanced and capable intelligence agencies and special forces units in the world.

Thanks to the French and their defence industry, European powers don't even need American weapons and equipment anymore. The US couldn't win offensive wars against North Vietnam or the Taliban. They stand no chance of a quick victory of Europe. Both the States and Russia thinks wars are won in numbers. Look at how that's working out in Ukraine.

Well...the US military is bigger than all of them combined  never said it'd be an easy victory but in a straight head to head, the US wins.

That's not to say Europe is weak by any means. I don't think Americans realize how codependent the US really is on the rest of the world, especially Europe. Europeans wouldn't even have to fire a single shot. Just reclaim US military bases and we've basically already lost.

As a matter of force and state of the art tech, the US dominates. But strategically? No way we'd come out the winner.

.......basically, we're both right  

[dit 46,738]

Why do I feel like this will just be a coordinated song and dance to appease the European general public who will be extremely angry at this action so it seems like they put up a fight with maybe a casualty or two and then they capitulate and let the US take it. That Danish leader lady is VERY soft on Trump for all the ish he says about her country and taking Greenland so I HIGHLY doubt she'd execute a full on defensive war against the US. This seems staged. I wish European leaders had more of a spine and acted like the force they actually are when united but they aren't and won't. 

[dit 46,738]

16 hours 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

Denmark is beyond digsuting for what it did in Greenalnd to the Inuit Indigenous people there and now the US will also exploit these people....hate the way of the world...

[DopeEnigma 1,774]

21 minutes ago, Ayesha Erotica said:

The key word is "could" and the lack of self-confidence among Europeans.

Despite everything, it is primarily a problem for Denmark, not for Italy, Greece, or Portugal.

Europe is not a unified actor, even if it presents itself as such through the EU. It is a collective of diverse interests. Theoretically, it would have the power to impose economic sanctions and could certainly counter the US, at least financially and in terms of goods. But Europeans shy away from retaliation - that is, they fear US counter economic sanctions - no one wants to antagonize the US, too much. The Baltic states have to choose between Greenland, which doesn't belong to them, or the possibility that Russia could invade the corridor to Kaliningrad and the US would then refuse aid because the Baltic states have been "disloyal." The same applies to Greece - Turkey has expressed interest in Greek islands located off the coast. It sucks for Eastern Europe, which is so dependent on the US that knows how to exploit the crisis. Greece is dependent on US aid, should Turkey attack it – it cannot afford to antagonize the US for Greenland, a hugeisland far away from Greece. The US will divide and paralyze Europe, rendering it incapable of action, because Europe will not be able to form a majority that reacts with more than a symbolic gesture.

Furthermore, the EU was a slightly larger economic power than the US in 2008, but has since fallen back to only two-thirds of the US GDP. And even if you include the UK extra, the EU+UK GDP has fallen behind the USA - the USA has become richer compared to Europe and a trend reversal is not in sight.

https://econofact.org/factbrief/fact-check-has-the-economic-gap-between-europe-and-the-united-states-increased-in-the-past-decade

The fact of the matter is, yes it would hurt Europe too but if at any stage Trump would do something so pointlessly stupid, we would have no choice but to act and ironically these sorts of events force countries to work closer to make a firm point. I wouldn’t underestimate Europe at all if this happens.
 

I do think you give Russia a bit too much credit. They’re incredibly weak, invading Kaliningrad would be suicidal for them, their economy is in the toilet, they can’t afford the current war in Ukraine which in itself has proven how useless Putin and Russia really is. Putin is great at stiring the pot which has led to things like Brexit and Trump with his meddling. But, it isn’t as impressive as it once was, look at Moldova. Here in the UK, we are likely going to rejoin Europe and from then on Europe needs to be a stronger unit. Even if the Democrats win the midterms and the presidency in 2028, we need guarantees a Trump-like situation can never happen again or they will lose a great deal of investment and custom for that matter from one of their biggest trading partners. 
 

The US has become richer because of us buying its debt. If we were to liquidate it and our other European allies it would be catastrophic for the US. Those arguing it would make American goods cheaper to sell elsewhere are foolish, what is so appealing about what they export? Chlorinated chicken and poor quality food nobody wants and even modern technologies like Tesla everyone is trying to sell and no longer buying because of who is associated with it. Even hard line MAGA politicians like Senator Tom Tillis has had to stand up in the senate and say Miller is an imbecile and Trump better not sacrifice the NATO alliance or his legacy would be even worse than it already is.

He won’t do it, he’s a coward and the consequences would be severe. Even China who want to avoid global conflict like the plague have said this would be a disaster. Not worth it, and if he does it the US would pay a massive price for decades to come and erode trust from key allies for a very long time. 

Edited January 8 by DopeEnigma

[Ayesha Erotica 1,924]

1 hour ago, LOVEDRUG said:

I don't agree. America has numbers on their side, but the British, French, Italian and German militaries are amongst the most well-trained and well-equipped in the world. [...]

Excuse me, but the British are - apart from perhaps Canada and Isráel - the most loyal countries to the USA. The British, together with the USA, have waged so many wars and interventions in violation of international law and are often in cahoots, as was the case just yesterday when the USA, with UK assistance, arrested a Russian tanker. The British are extremely closely intertwined with the USA militarily, financially, economically, and culturally, so that it is inconceivable that they would militarily oppose the USA in 2026.

In the 1960s, the British annexed an island called Diega Garcia, expelled the population, and then gave it to the USA as a military base. In the 1990s, the British dropped uranium bombs in the Yugoslav Wars, an act of war in Europe from which the population, iin Kosovo and the surrounding area, continues to suffer to this day.

We should stop thinking of the UK as noble and pure and the US as dirty, the UK has a dirty face, too.

Spoiler

But we can continue to think of the US as dirty

Also the UK and Norway are not EU members, they are not under EU pressures and EU military decisions do not affect the UK. Iceland isn't in the EU either. So the closest countries in Europe to Greenland aren't even in the EU, which is favor unforable if the EU were to take any meaningful military intervention.

I expect the UK to condemn the takeover symbolically and nothing more, no military reaction, neither financially. Behind the scenes, a few decades later, the Brits will cooperate with the US in the exploitation of Greenland's raw materials.

I would even dare to say, that if the EU were to take military action (I highly doubt it), that the UK will not allow the EU to trespass its territory.

 

Edited January 8 by Ayesha Erotica