Posted on 01/01/2025 2:10:39 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
To imagine the kind of future a hotter, dryer climate may bring, and the geopolitical challenges it will create, look no farther than two parts of the world that Donald Trump wants America to control: Greenland and the Panama Canal.
The president-elect in recent days has insisted that both places are critical to United States national security. He’s called to reclaim control the Panama Canal from Panama and acquire Greenland from Denmark, both sovereign territories with their own governments.
They have something else in common as well: Both are significantly affected by climate change in ways that present looming challenges to global shipping and trade.
Because of warming temperatures, an estimated 11,000 square miles of Greenland’s ice sheets and glaciers have melted over the past three decades, an area roughly equivalent to the size of Massachusetts. That has huge implications for the entire world. If the ice melts completely, Greenland could cause sea levels to rise as much as 23 feet, according to NASA.
Greenland’s retreating ice could open up areas to drill for oil and gas and places to mine critical minerals, a fact that has already attracted international interest and raised concerns about environmental harms. And, ship traffic in the Arctic has surged 37 percent over the past decade, according to a recent Arctic Council report, as sea ice has declined. More melting could open up even more trade routes.
Amanda Lynch, a professor at Brown University who has studied climate change in the Arctic for nearly 30 years, said the new trade routes created by ice melt could also heighten the risk of environmental disasters. Ships from some countries, she said, are not designed to withstand Arctic conditions.
“An oil spill or some other toxic accident on that route is inevitable and could already have happened and we...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Greenland..perfect place to deport the illegals
Because outside of the "Manifest Destiny" of taking our nation from the east coast to the west coast, America is not meant to be an imperialist nation.
If Greenland is threatened by Russia, then maybe America’s legitimate self-interest is in play for us to stop that. But that is far different from America trying to take over Greenland.
America is supposed to be the protector not violator of national sovereignty.
False dilemma.
And also presumption of no danger from Europe in earnest.
It would potentially be a deal like the purchase of Alaska from Russia.
Denmark simply cannot defend Greenland. As usual, the USA pays for a lot of the defense of Greenland.
They’ll need a White Castle.
Don’t second guess Trump the Titan.
If necessary, the strong protecting the weak. Sometimes that happens. It doesn't mean the strong should take over the weak.
America is about freedom from gov't coercion not the dispenser of more gov't coercion.
I'm sure we can find a reason. something to do with Russia, perhaps?
“The other half the time, conservatives are pushing to expand the empire because ... Merica!”
Who said anything about taking it? We’ll buy it fair and square.
Propaganda.
Denmark's PM has stated very plainly that Greenland is not for sale.
So that should be the end of it.
Columbia also didn't want to accept the terms offered to build the canal in its Panamanian province. So the U.S. supported Panamanian revolutionary groups, and after Panama broke away from Columbia, made a deal with the new nation.
It's an old imperial trick. If a foreign government would do your bidding, install a more friendly government. Today of course, it's called a color revolution.
Denmark is not an independent country, having been a member of the EUSSR since the early 70s. It’s the EUSSR who is imperialistic here, encroaching on the US by proximity.
Gee, that's what Putin said about Ukraine.
I guess if you want to steal Greenland, any excuse will do.
Oh, so you subscribe to the Democrats’ theory of Trump = Putin?
False comparison.
False comparison.
Your comparison.
You said Greenland is "encroaching" on us because it's allied with the "EUSSR."
That is indeed the same argument Putin made. That Ukraine was encroaching on Russia by flirting with NATO.
Nope; you made the false comparison between Trump/Greenland and Putin/Ukraine. When was it ever the case that Ukraine was paying Russia for its defense and Russia was getting nothing in return? which is the case of Trump/Greenland, which Trump offered to buy and not invade.
Opus?
Reverse that, to wit “When was Russia ever paying for Ukraine’s defense” etc.
So since Trump merely “offered to buy” Greenland, and Denmark’s PM said that Greenland is definately not for sale, that should be the end of it, yes?
No imperialist arm twisting coming up? For Greenland own “protection”?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.