2 comments

  • SilverElfin 35 minutes ago

    Good. America has shown itself to be a risk. The EU must take the threat of an unstable and unpredictable America seriously. And at this point no one should assume Trump is joking when he says he will invade Greenland or cancel elections or whatever.

    On the other hand, even if the EU heads towards anti coercion acting, it seems they may act too slowly:

    > The whole process could take a year, but could be sped up.

    This slowness is already apparent. The recent troop deployment to Greenland just looks like theater since there were like 25 people sent. What does that achieve? It’s neither a deterrent or a serious defensive force. It’ll be hard to counter a fast moving executive branch (Trump) through these slow group based processes.

      Someone 8 minutes ago

      Given its size, population density (it has about 35 km² per person), and remoteness I think posting a large permanent defense force on Greenland to guard against an US raid would be prohibitively expensive.

      The best one could do probably would be navy patrols (also expensive, but patrolling there instead of closer to home doesn’t add that much), but even then, the US has a more powerful army and navy, Greenland is closer to the US than to the EU, and the US already has a military base on Greenland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pituffik_Space_Base)