The NATO statement came amid new reporting from the New York Times that deal may include the U.S. being given “sovereignty over small pockets” of land in Greenland.

This is mine, that is yours, that’s yours too but only if there’s nothing valuable there. If there is, that’s mine too.

You mean America owns it?

NO ME!!!

  • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.worldEnglish
    4·
    2 days ago

    Don’t we already have the ability to put military bases on it? I don’t even understand the attempts at sanewashing this shit and making it about somehow being strategic for “us”.

    This just seems to be about dimbulb donnie and his ego wanting a “legacy” via adding more territory. He’s probably such a moron that he doesn’t realize the Mercator projection skews things as well…

    • facelessbs@lemmy.world
      2·
      2 days ago

      It is over mineral rights) oil and other commodities. If it was honestly about safety or security it would be a moot point because of nato and other treaties that allow what ever defense systems and bases are needed. It is the same thing in Venezuela. If he does anything it is about money, or getting people to stop paying attention to something else. When the news cycle is 24hr it is hard to stay on topic if there is always a new crazy thing going on.