European NATO countries not moving troops to Greenland now, is what will tempt Trump to invade.
-
European NATO countries not moving troops to Greenland now, is what will tempt Trump to invade.
Once American forces occupy Nuuk, Europe will relive 2014, when Russian forces entered Sevastopol in Crimea: It will be over, because we were not there first to defend it, and the price of fighting our way back in is too high.
Those who look the other way now are accepting a repeat of Crimea — only this time it will be 57000 Greenlanders paying the price of being turned into subjects of a mad ruler.
@randahl yeah european "appeasement" will lead to quick escalation.
-
European NATO countries not moving troops to Greenland now, is what will tempt Trump to invade.
Once American forces occupy Nuuk, Europe will relive 2014, when Russian forces entered Sevastopol in Crimea: It will be over, because we were not there first to defend it, and the price of fighting our way back in is too high.
Those who look the other way now are accepting a repeat of Crimea — only this time it will be 57000 Greenlanders paying the price of being turned into subjects of a mad ruler.
@randahl Not sending troops to a place the most powerful military in the world has promised to invade is capitulation.
If NATO had sent troops to Ukraine instead of encouraging Zelenskyy to leave, Putin would not have invaded.
I guess everyone misses the Cold War.
-
A arbeitstitel@nrw.social shared this topic
-
European NATO countries not moving troops to Greenland now, is what will tempt Trump to invade.
Once American forces occupy Nuuk, Europe will relive 2014, when Russian forces entered Sevastopol in Crimea: It will be over, because we were not there first to defend it, and the price of fighting our way back in is too high.
Those who look the other way now are accepting a repeat of Crimea — only this time it will be 57000 Greenlanders paying the price of being turned into subjects of a mad ruler.
@randahl That would be the only appropriate response. Which is also why it won't happen.
-
European NATO countries not moving troops to Greenland now, is what will tempt Trump to invade.
Once American forces occupy Nuuk, Europe will relive 2014, when Russian forces entered Sevastopol in Crimea: It will be over, because we were not there first to defend it, and the price of fighting our way back in is too high.
Those who look the other way now are accepting a repeat of Crimea — only this time it will be 57000 Greenlanders paying the price of being turned into subjects of a mad ruler.
I get a headache currently with the defeatism by Europeans.
Each US garrison in the EU is outnumbered at least 1:10.
If the US attacks Europe, every US soldier becomes an enemy combatant. 100k US soldiers are endangered to be the first POWs!
Trump can't withdraw US troops from the EU fast enough without tipping Europe off.
This is unlike Crimea. What Europe is reluctant to accept is that the US is not only an unreliable ally, but it may be a potential enemy, dragging us into war.
-
I get a headache currently with the defeatism by Europeans.
Each US garrison in the EU is outnumbered at least 1:10.
If the US attacks Europe, every US soldier becomes an enemy combatant. 100k US soldiers are endangered to be the first POWs!
Trump can't withdraw US troops from the EU fast enough without tipping Europe off.
This is unlike Crimea. What Europe is reluctant to accept is that the US is not only an unreliable ally, but it may be a potential enemy, dragging us into war.
@silkester that is a good point. But this is probably also the reason Trump wants to pull out of Europe.
-
European NATO countries not moving troops to Greenland now, is what will tempt Trump to invade.
Once American forces occupy Nuuk, Europe will relive 2014, when Russian forces entered Sevastopol in Crimea: It will be over, because we were not there first to defend it, and the price of fighting our way back in is too high.
Those who look the other way now are accepting a repeat of Crimea — only this time it will be 57000 Greenlanders paying the price of being turned into subjects of a mad ruler.
@randahl
The coalition of the unwilling. -
@silkester that is a good point. But this is probably also the reason Trump wants to pull out of Europe.
@randahl Yes, and this is a major operation. Plenty of time to station troops in Greenland at the same time as the US pulls out.
Let's look at recent victories by Hegseth's military:
40 deaths by bombing an apartment building to "neutralize" 1 enemy combatant in Yemen.
Bombing fisher trawler with US warships.
Abducting the dictator of a failed state in chaos. Venezuela was completely mismanaged. Bombing civilian structures with no defense.The US Marines are stealing lollipops from toddlers
-
I get a headache currently with the defeatism by Europeans.
Each US garrison in the EU is outnumbered at least 1:10.
If the US attacks Europe, every US soldier becomes an enemy combatant. 100k US soldiers are endangered to be the first POWs!
Trump can't withdraw US troops from the EU fast enough without tipping Europe off.
This is unlike Crimea. What Europe is reluctant to accept is that the US is not only an unreliable ally, but it may be a potential enemy, dragging us into war.
@silkester @randahl The US troops in the EU are Trojan horses and create a very dangerous sutuation at the moment.
-
European NATO countries not moving troops to Greenland now, is what will tempt Trump to invade.
Once American forces occupy Nuuk, Europe will relive 2014, when Russian forces entered Sevastopol in Crimea: It will be over, because we were not there first to defend it, and the price of fighting our way back in is too high.
Those who look the other way now are accepting a repeat of Crimea — only this time it will be 57000 Greenlanders paying the price of being turned into subjects of a mad ruler.
@randahl Is there a request for military assistance from Denmark?
-
@silkester @randahl The US troops in the EU are Trojan horses and create a very dangerous sutuation at the moment.
Only if you eat the US propaganda about the prowess of US military. US military becomes very manageable when you look at their choices of war of aggression and their successes.
I'm not saying the US isn't capable. But so is the European army.
And it's been 80 years since the US fought anybody even close to an equal, and back then, they had help from a bunch of allies.
They're just as much of a bargaining chip, if not much, much more purely from a mathematical standpoint.
-
E elbtalpomeranze@mastodon.social shared this topic
