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?

    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
                              • 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?

                                pthane@toot.walesP This user is from outside of this forum
                                pthane@toot.walesP This user is from outside of this forum
                                pthane@toot.wales
                                wrote sidst redigeret af
                                #27

                                @futurebird
                                If the global warming that MAGA don't believe in turns out to be true after all then Greenland becomes a lot more attractive. By 2100 the Arctic could be the new Mediterranean. Though why this would interest a toddler who can't think beyond the next meal remains a mystery.

                                futurebird@sauropods.winF frantasaur@mastodon.ieF ingalovinde@embracing.spaceI apophis@brain.worm.pinkA 5 Replies Last reply
                                0
                                • pthane@toot.walesP pthane@toot.wales

                                  @futurebird
                                  If the global warming that MAGA don't believe in turns out to be true after all then Greenland becomes a lot more attractive. By 2100 the Arctic could be the new Mediterranean. Though why this would interest a toddler who can't think beyond the next meal remains a mystery.

                                  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
                                  #28

                                  @pthane

                                  Do they think that far into the future?

                                  They won't be alive then.

                                  drmambobob@ecoevo.socialD 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/

                                    frantasaur@mastodon.ieF This user is from outside of this forum
                                    frantasaur@mastodon.ieF This user is from outside of this forum
                                    frantasaur@mastodon.ie
                                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                                    #29

                                    @depereo @futurebird they will use it to figure out how to oppress people on Mars. Reminds me of this song:

                                    https://youtu.be/_nnA-IBH8c8?si=uMPGJTDTY9VPwCXB

                                    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.

                                      unktheunk@social.yesterweb.orgU This user is from outside of this forum
                                      unktheunk@social.yesterweb.orgU This user is from outside of this forum
                                      unktheunk@social.yesterweb.org
                                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                                      #30

                                      @futurebird that may be a factor in this

                                      but we need to keep in mind that the set of people actually involved in trying to warmonger about Greenland is literally less than a dozen people. They've pushed away everyone who would have possibly pushed back on rank idiocy, they do not have the time in the day to come up with a coherent reasoning

                                      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?

                                        debbiedoomer@ni.hil.istD This user is from outside of this forum
                                        debbiedoomer@ni.hil.istD This user is from outside of this forum
                                        debbiedoomer@ni.hil.ist
                                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                                        #31

                                        @futurebird
                                        The us wants to be able to be a free agent and so donald trump is cashing out all the us based international structure possible. I mean, its about a lot of stuff but also, Sometimes i think these idiots literally think like a big map game and want to get the continent bonus or some shit

                                        virginicus@universeodon.comV 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.

                                          evilcartyen@mstdn.dkE This user is from outside of this forum
                                          evilcartyen@mstdn.dkE This user is from outside of this forum
                                          evilcartyen@mstdn.dk
                                          wrote sidst redigeret af evilcartyen@mstdn.dk
                                          #32

                                          @futurebird

                                          In Denmark we feel the US is trying to kick in an open door, the only thing I can think of RE mineral rights is that we probably have stricter environmental protection laws than the US.

                                          But overall it's not economical to mine in Greenland, the Greenland government has been desperate for investments for decades and yet there are no major mining operations in place.

                                          I think it's just because it would Look Cool to have a new territory added to the US.

                                          That said, the Greenlanders should decide who to associate with. They might dislike Denmark - and for mostly good reasons - but I doubt they're gonna look at their kin in Alaska and think "they look like they're having a great time!".

                                          futurebird@sauropods.winF billiglarper@rollenspiel.socialB 2 Replies 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