Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?

Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
112 Indlæg 75 Posters 0 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

    Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?

    Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?

    Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?

    It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.

    What do you get?

    jamey@toot.catJ This user is from outside of this forum
    jamey@toot.catJ This user is from outside of this forum
    jamey@toot.cat
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #7

    @futurebird I've certainly seen claims that the natural resources are the significant thing (e.g. https://theconversation.com/greenland-is-rich-in-natural-resources-a-geologist-explains-why-273022), though I doubt it's quite so simple as having just one reason

    frantasaur@mastodon.ieF 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

      Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?

      Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?

      Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?

      It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.

      What do you get?

      catherineflick@mastodon.me.ukC This user is from outside of this forum
      catherineflick@mastodon.me.ukC This user is from outside of this forum
      catherineflick@mastodon.me.uk
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #8

      @futurebird apparently there are a lot of unexploited natural resources there

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

        Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?

        Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?

        Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?

        It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.

        What do you get?

        futurebird@sauropods.winF This user is from outside of this forum
        futurebird@sauropods.winF This user is from outside of this forum
        futurebird@sauropods.win
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #9

        There is a theory that this move is designed to break up NATO.

        I thought that was a little far fetched at first, NATO is really good for the US, it's like the birthday boy throwing a tantrum.

        But some conservatives have a deep seated fear of "world government." So maybe that's it? Basically these are the guys who find it galling that there are notions like "international law" or "human rights" however unevenly applied.

        eugestshirley@m.ai6yr.orgE nicksalt@mas.toN unktheunk@social.yesterweb.orgU evilcartyen@mstdn.dkE G 15 Replies Last reply
        0
        • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

          Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?

          Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?

          Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?

          It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.

          What do you get?

          wakame@tech.lgbtW This user is from outside of this forum
          wakame@tech.lgbtW This user is from outside of this forum
          wakame@tech.lgbt
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #10

          @futurebird
          In the next 20 years, due to climate change, Greenland will become an interesting place, because:
          a) everything will be warmer and
          b) it's easier to physically defend from "immigrants" and e.g. the US or Europe

          And since I believe that the US wants to cool the planet temporary using nuclear explosions in South America or Africa (as part of a "war"), it makes sense to have a place far away from those regions.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

            Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?

            Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?

            Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?

            It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.

            What do you get?

            catherineflick@mastodon.me.ukC This user is from outside of this forum
            catherineflick@mastodon.me.ukC This user is from outside of this forum
            catherineflick@mastodon.me.uk
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #11

            @futurebird also port cities that can open up when the arctic ice retreats (yay! Climate change!)

            funkula@goblin.campF 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • depereo@mastodon.socialD depereo@mastodon.social

              @futurebird set up weird slave cities for american billionaires

              https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/04/10/greenland-trump-silicon-valley-tech-utopia-mars/83025685007/

              futurebird@sauropods.winF This user is from outside of this forum
              futurebird@sauropods.winF This user is from outside of this forum
              futurebird@sauropods.win
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #12

              @depereo

              Why can't they just do that now?

              notsoloud@expressional.socialN apophis@brain.worm.pinkA 2 Replies Last reply
              0
              • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?

                Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?

                Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?

                It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.

                What do you get?

                bweller@mstdn.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                bweller@mstdn.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                bweller@mstdn.social
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #13

                @futurebird https://theworlddata.com/greenland-rare-earth-minerals/

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                  Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?

                  Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?

                  Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?

                  It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.

                  What do you get?

                  grahamdunning@post.lurk.orgG This user is from outside of this forum
                  grahamdunning@post.lurk.orgG This user is from outside of this forum
                  grahamdunning@post.lurk.org
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #14

                  @futurebird as I understand it, due to the polar ice caps melting there will be a new viable sea trade route via the North West Passage.
                  But, like you say, I'm not sure why the US need to encroach on Greenland and not just, say, be allied to them.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                    Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?

                    Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?

                    Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?

                    It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.

                    What do you get?

                    mamalake@beige.partyM This user is from outside of this forum
                    mamalake@beige.partyM This user is from outside of this forum
                    mamalake@beige.party
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #15

                    @futurebird mineral rights to exploit and sea passage to control

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                      Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?

                      Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?

                      Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?

                      It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.

                      What do you get?

                      naturepoker@genomic.socialN This user is from outside of this forum
                      naturepoker@genomic.socialN This user is from outside of this forum
                      naturepoker@genomic.social
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #16

                      @futurebird IMO it's not even companies, it's just Trump and his cronies' running a vanity project. From the way they've been pitching Venezuela to oil companies, him and his gang will just hold the whole thing hostage and demand direct payments for access, as in actual tens of percent income to the gov.

                      He just now outright gave an interview saying he wants Greenland because "it's psychologically important for him"

                      https://people.com/donald-trump-wants-ownership-greenland-psychologically-important-11883940

                      futurebird@sauropods.winF 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                        Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?

                        Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?

                        Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?

                        It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.

                        What do you get?

                        transcendentempress@eldritch.cafeT This user is from outside of this forum
                        transcendentempress@eldritch.cafeT This user is from outside of this forum
                        transcendentempress@eldritch.cafe
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #17

                        @futurebird It's big on the world map, and somebody told him there might eventually be unexploited ressources under it, plus that he could get his money share for making it possible, so he wants it?

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                          Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?

                          Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?

                          Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?

                          It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.

                          What do you get?

                          O This user is from outside of this forum
                          O This user is from outside of this forum
                          oyvindbs@nerdculture.de
                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                          #18

                          Probably extraction of minerals in a very harmful manner for the environment. Denmark and the EU does not give extractive industries free reign. @futurebird

                          stevejb@beige.partyS 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                            Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?

                            Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?

                            Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?

                            It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.

                            What do you get?

                            bubblegumyeti@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                            bubblegumyeti@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                            bubblegumyeti@mastodon.social
                            wrote sidst redigeret af
                            #19

                            @futurebird https://podcasts.apple.com/be/podcast/the-world-the-universe-and-us/id1496847791

                            Basically nothing ; he has no clue. Only reason could be to secure Northern land with the incoming global warming apocalypse.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • naturepoker@genomic.socialN naturepoker@genomic.social

                              @futurebird IMO it's not even companies, it's just Trump and his cronies' running a vanity project. From the way they've been pitching Venezuela to oil companies, him and his gang will just hold the whole thing hostage and demand direct payments for access, as in actual tens of percent income to the gov.

                              He just now outright gave an interview saying he wants Greenland because "it's psychologically important for him"

                              https://people.com/donald-trump-wants-ownership-greenland-psychologically-important-11883940

                              futurebird@sauropods.winF This user is from outside of this forum
                              futurebird@sauropods.winF This user is from outside of this forum
                              futurebird@sauropods.win
                              wrote sidst redigeret af
                              #20

                              @naturepoker

                              I have a friend who used to work in commodities and he says the oil companies are not interested in Venezuela now. They were wary because of the government, but now they are MORE wary because it's less stable.

                              naturepoker@genomic.socialN 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                                There is a theory that this move is designed to break up NATO.

                                I thought that was a little far fetched at first, NATO is really good for the US, it's like the birthday boy throwing a tantrum.

                                But some conservatives have a deep seated fear of "world government." So maybe that's it? Basically these are the guys who find it galling that there are notions like "international law" or "human rights" however unevenly applied.

                                eugestshirley@m.ai6yr.orgE This user is from outside of this forum
                                eugestshirley@m.ai6yr.orgE This user is from outside of this forum
                                eugestshirley@m.ai6yr.org
                                wrote sidst redigeret af
                                #21

                                @futurebird
                                Putin wants NATO gone. He's Donnie's puppeteer.

                                futurebird@sauropods.winF mxspoon@tech.lgbtM 2 Replies Last reply
                                0
                                • eugestshirley@m.ai6yr.orgE eugestshirley@m.ai6yr.org

                                  @futurebird
                                  Putin wants NATO gone. He's Donnie's puppeteer.

                                  futurebird@sauropods.winF This user is from outside of this forum
                                  futurebird@sauropods.winF This user is from outside of this forum
                                  futurebird@sauropods.win
                                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                                  #22

                                  @EugestShirley

                                  Everyone wants to be a little big man instead of actually doing amazing big things. The lack of imagination depresses me.

                                  dubiousblur@social.treehouse.systemsD apophis@brain.worm.pinkA 2 Replies Last reply
                                  0
                                  • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                                    Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?

                                    Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?

                                    Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?

                                    It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.

                                    What do you get?

                                    psychonaut@mastodon.onlineP This user is from outside of this forum
                                    psychonaut@mastodon.onlineP This user is from outside of this forum
                                    psychonaut@mastodon.online
                                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                                    #23

                                    @futurebird imho it's about having somewhere to live in a couple of decades when the majority of the continental US is uninhabitable due to climate change. Ditto the aspirations about Canada becoming the 51st state.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                                      Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?

                                      Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?

                                      Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?

                                      It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.

                                      What do you get?

                                      androcat@toot.catA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      androcat@toot.catA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      androcat@toot.cat
                                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                                      #24

                                      @futurebird Take away all indigenous rights and stripmine the bedrock that will be revealed as their climate decisions melt the ice caps.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                                        There is a theory that this move is designed to break up NATO.

                                        I thought that was a little far fetched at first, NATO is really good for the US, it's like the birthday boy throwing a tantrum.

                                        But some conservatives have a deep seated fear of "world government." So maybe that's it? Basically these are the guys who find it galling that there are notions like "international law" or "human rights" however unevenly applied.

                                        nicksalt@mas.toN This user is from outside of this forum
                                        nicksalt@mas.toN This user is from outside of this forum
                                        nicksalt@mas.to
                                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                                        #25

                                        @futurebird I am sure it is the reason. These are the same type of people who orchestrated Brexit in the UK and sold it to the same type of "flag waving citizens" for support.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                                          @naturepoker

                                          I have a friend who used to work in commodities and he says the oil companies are not interested in Venezuela now. They were wary because of the government, but now they are MORE wary because it's less stable.

                                          naturepoker@genomic.socialN This user is from outside of this forum
                                          naturepoker@genomic.socialN This user is from outside of this forum
                                          naturepoker@genomic.social
                                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                                          #26

                                          @futurebird sounds about right. Impression I'm getting here and there is no one really asked for any of this outside the pres himself and his cronies looking to play modern day Alexander.

                                          mdziemann@genomic.socialM 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Svar
                                          • Svar som emne
                                          Login for at svare
                                          • Ældste til nyeste
                                          • Nyeste til ældste
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Log ind

                                          • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          Graciously hosted by data.coop
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Hjem
                                          • Seneste
                                          • Etiketter
                                          • Populære
                                          • Verden
                                          • Bruger
                                          • Grupper