
I’m not a fan of the decision really, but it’s hardly a distraction or anything. Trump has mentioned this move since his first term. It’s the same reason we captured Maduro and invaded Iraq & Afghanistan. Strategic advantage plus economic benefits will always outweigh a simple strategic advantage
and i think this scenario is a lot different then venezuela, iraq, and afghanistan. An argument can be made that the political turmoil in those countries justified intervention. But greenland is facing no such issues and (as far as i know) is happy w its current status as a semiautonomous territory
I can’t think of one instance of U.S. history that would make me think that we would care about the sovereignty of 56k inuits. This is especially true if we purchase greenland and cause no true upheaval of their current life. Like I said, I disagree with the plan and think it would be wrong, but Trump hasn’t exactly proven to be our most considerate president
It’s different, but the argument is that a preemptive takeover of Greenland would have massive strategic benefits in the coming decades. China has already attempted to start mining contracts in Greenland, so if they succeed we could be in trouble. It’s the same reason we want to keep Venezuelan oil for ourselves instead of allowing it to go to russia and china