139

cross-posted from: https://quokk.au/c/world/p/1191953/us-to-build-two-military-bases-in-greenland-under-new-deal-with-denmark

The defence deal signed at the UN General Assembly also re-affirms Denmark's sovereignty over its semi-autonomous Arctic territory.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] agent_nycto@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Ah yes, Donald Trump and the US government, both historically known for not violating agreements and keeping to boundaries.

[-] SmoothOperator@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Indeed. The main victory is less the document and more the fact that there's been no invasion, and that there likely won't be any further threats of invasion for a while, leaving the Inuit and Denmark to pursue real political issues instead of preparing a defense.

[-] agent_nycto@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

installs military base totally not an invasion guys don't worry.

If anything these people now have to make more of a defense because the people who threatened to invade them are building military bases on their land.

[-] SmoothOperator@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago

I would agree in an absence of historical and military context.

But they

  • already had a serious military base outnumbering the Danish troops on the island (since the fifties),
  • could invade the island with immense military superiority more or less equally easy with one, three or no bases
  • build and use the current base (and by all indications future bases) to cover the Arctic, not to project power against Denmark and the Inuit.

Yes, if this was a Civ game, your logic might apply. But the real situation is more nuanced.

[-] Danquebec@sh.itjust.works 1 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Immense military superiority is kinda moot if only 1% of the ships can cross the ice, most of the helicopters fail, and most of the soldiers get frostbite.

I'm not saying that it would be easy for Denmark and allies, but I'm not sure it would be easy for the US either.

[-] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

and that there likely won't be any further threats of invasion for a while

And why would you ever think that? We're installing military bases there, dude. The entire point is future threats of invasion.

[-] SmoothOperator@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

We're installing military bases there, dude.

The US already has a base and dominant military presence on the island. They have been allowed to establish new bases since 1951. Their military presence since WW2 has clearly not been about preparing an invasion.

If the reason to invade was to build more military bases to cover the Arctic, they now have that with no reason to invade.

If there is another reason to invade, the difference between

  • a vastly superior military with one base, the permission to build more, and an intention to invade
  • a vastly superior military with three bases, the permission to build more, and an intention to invade

is not that great.

Finally, if the point of the bases is to make an invasion easier, the invasion likely won't happen until the bases are finished, giving peace and possibly a regime change in the meantime.

this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2026
139 points (98.6% liked)

World News

58158 readers
2646 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Ask Historians !askhistorians@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS