U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-24-2019, 05:55 PM
 
49,034 posts, read 45,940,524 times
Reputation: 15572

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by rjshae View Post
If Trump wants us to take Greenland he'll have to do it through bullying and threats of force; the same thing the US did when it "bought" the Virgin Islands from Denmark. I suspect that will end NATO.

Yes, Trump would have been quite at home in 1919. But it's 2019 and the age of imperialism is over.
Some people want the old days back, the days of 1919. I sure don't want those days back.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-24-2019, 05:57 PM
 
Location: Dublin, OH
2,596 posts, read 3,471,532 times
Reputation: 1622
The Danes are not going to sell Greenland...not to the US, not China, not Russia...it's in their best interest to keep it...plus I doubt the hardy folk who live on Greenland want to become US Citizens compared to Danish citizens.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2019, 05:57 PM
 
46,549 posts, read 18,425,184 times
Reputation: 19382
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
Some people want the old days back, the days of 1919. I sure don't want those days back.

This has nothing to do with 1919. But it has everything to do with leftist hyperbole. You guys know nothing else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2019, 06:00 PM
 
49,034 posts, read 45,940,524 times
Reputation: 15572
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohioaninsc View Post
The Danes are not going to sell Greenland...not to the US, not China, not Russia...it's in their best interest to keep it...plus I doubt the hardy folk who live on Greenland want to become US Citizens compared to Danish citizens.
I figured as much. And this is just my opinion. Some people want Trump to grab Greenland because they want America to go on an expansionist imperialist grab. To them, it will "make America great again". Some people say that Greenland's minerals are of note. Greenland has minerals and rare earth metals. So do we. I'm thinking they just want to go into someone else's back yard and take from them. What would happen if Greenland became independent?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2019, 06:01 PM
 
49,034 posts, read 45,940,524 times
Reputation: 15572
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaldoKitty View Post
This has nothing to do with 1919. But it has everything to do with leftist hyperbole. You guys know nothing else.
Really? You think I don't know anything but hyperbole?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2019, 06:08 PM
 
1,165 posts, read 359,810 times
Reputation: 2537
Scientists have been talking mining space for awhile now. Greenland is a whole lot closer.

"The first extraterrestrial mining operation in human history will likely start up on the moon, thanks to its ample and relatively accessible stores of water ice, experts say.

That was the majority view of a panel of scientists and engineers asked to consider where, beyond Earth, humanity should go first to extract resources.

The moon won out over asteroids and Mars, chiefly because it's so close to Earth and has so much water, as well as other resources like methane and ammonia.

While the moon appears promising for off-world mining, reaching out to asteroids is a bit trickier, the experts said.

Asteroids hold lots of iron, platinum and other valuable minerals — and, possibly, lots of water, too. But industrial extraction is not going to happen in the near future, several panel members argued.

There are thousands of known near-Earth asteroids — which come much closer to us than do space rocks in the main asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter. But even near-Earth objects are much farther away than the moon, and their eccentric orbits make them tough targets for multiple mining visits.

"You can't get back to the same asteroid all that frequently," said Jeff Greason, president of XCOR Aerospace."

https://www.space.com/9430-solar-system-start-moon.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2019, 06:12 PM
 
1,165 posts, read 359,810 times
Reputation: 2537
"That's why, according to the AP's account of the National Archives papers, President Truman's advisers prized the geographic advantage Greenland could afford to defend against Soviet strategic bombers that might fly over the Arctic Circle toward targets in North America.

The United States opened negotiations with Denmark about using Greenland, and at one point, the American side proposed buying the island outright for $100 million in gold and the rights to a patch of Alaskan oil.

All this took place in confidence but even then — as now — the idea shocked the Danes. Here's how the AP's W. Dale Nelson described the National Archive documents' account of the exchange:

Secretary of State James Byrnes made the offer to visiting Danish Foreign Minister Gustav Rasmussen in New York on Dec. 14, 1946, according to a telegram from Byrnes to the U.S. Legation in Copenhagen.

After discussing other security arrangements for Greenland, Byrnes said he told Rasmussen that perhaps an outright sale to the United States ″would be the most clean-cut and satisfactory.″

″Our needs ... seemed to come as a shock to Rasmussen, but he did not reject my suggestions flatly and said that he would study a memorandum which I gave him,″ he said."



And, we already bought land from Denmark before, in 1916 spending $25m on the Danish West Indies. Today, they’re known as the United States Virgin Islands.

Just saying. . .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2019, 06:28 PM
 
Location: North Carolina
3,493 posts, read 2,384,714 times
Reputation: 4627
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjshae View Post
If Trump wants us to take Greenland he'll have to do it through bullying and threats of force; the same thing the US did when it "bought" the Virgin Islands from Denmark. I suspect that will end NATO -- further speculation: the US will then have to withdraw from Europe, Russia will invade and conquer the Ukraine, and Germany will develop its own nuclear weapons.

Yes, Trump would have been quite at home in 1919. But it's 2019 and the age of imperialism is over.

He wanting to buy Greenland was just grandstanding BS, Just for attention and he got it. In the midst to detract from other news, thats how he works. What country or island will he try next.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2019, 06:32 PM
 
Location: Proxima Centauri
4,904 posts, read 2,040,586 times
Reputation: 5360
Don, I know that you want to be the first to put a hotel on Greenland's South coast, but I think that it will be chapter 11 all over again. The climate is just not changing fast enough.

Besides, you will be too busy filling sand bags at Mar a Lago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2019, 06:44 PM
 
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
9,355 posts, read 2,860,217 times
Reputation: 7122
From the OP's article:

Quote:
The story begins ... 1754 .. called back in 1775 ... 1783 ... 1803 ... 1812 ... 1835 ... 1845 ... 1846-48 ... 1853... 1898... 1946 ... 1917...
The entire notion that one needs to physically control land in order to acquire mineral and other riches is an archaic, 18th and 19th century idea (that lingered on into the 20th century).

It's not unlike the nationalistic notion that one must build things oneself ... for whatever reason.

Under nationalistic thinking, buying minerals from some other nation is to be avoided as much as is buying cellphones or children's toys from some other nation.

Why?

You would think that post-WWII Germany and Japan have taught everyone that you do not need to physically control natural resources in order to become prosperous. In fact, there is even an economic term called "Dutch Disease" whereby nations that do have control of natural resources begin struggling because they begin to rely too much on that natural resource.

If taking over Greenland is a good idea, why stop there? Why not invade Canada, Mexico and basically the rest of the world, and get it over with?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top