this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2025
588 points (99.3% liked)
Europe
3489 readers
1202 users here now
News and information from Europe πͺπΊ
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
Rules (2024-08-30)
- This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
- No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
- Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
- No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism.
- Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
- If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
- Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in [email protected]. (They're cool, you should subscribe there too!)
- Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
- No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
(This list may get expanded when necessary.)
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the mods: @[email protected], @[email protected], or @[email protected].
founded 8 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
could they hypotethically defend themselves?
Only with guerrilla tactics against the US army, like Vietnam or the Taliban. They would still be occupied. No army in the world can stop a US offensive. They invested a lot in order to make it so. Fighting the US on a conventional war style is suicide.
The real pain to the US would come in the form of trade sanctions and loss of military allies in the EU and elsewhere in the democratic world. It would take a few years, because the EU and the US are pretty interconnected. Nato would probably be dead in the water.
After that it's speculation that US enemies would seize the opportunity of their isolation. The lack of trade would severely impact revenues and Americans would be in for the wildest depression of US history, with a likely forecast of IRA style civil war between Democrats and Republicans. If Greenlanders kept at it, they would eventually take the region back.
The US isn't a dictatorship, it's a democracy. Democracies don't usually fare well on offensive land grab wars for very long. So the US would either let go of Greenland with a new, sane president or become a dictatorship eventually. Lots of ifs in this scenario but taking Greenland would cause a lot of hurt for the US undoubtedly.
i mean, eeeeeeeeeeh... its technically an oligarchy. which i wouldnt call a democracy at all.
They are part of Denmark and they could think about joining the EU.
I'm not quite sure if they are as a part of Denmark protected by the EU defense clause, but NATO article 5 should work for them.
isnt the US also a part of NATO? and a big contributor at that?
Yes and per article 5 the US would have to act as if they attacked themselves. Since this is quite silly, an attack of the US against Greenland would most probably either lead to the US having to leave NATO (I don't know, if there is a way to expel a country from NATO) or NATO dissolving completely.
I don't think they plan on following the rules for this one though. Dissolving NATO aligns with Trumps interests so I can see that happening.
Although they would probably find a diplomatic way of taking control of their minerals, similar to what they just did in Panama.
What happens according to article 5 if a NATO member attacks another NATO member?
Article 5
βThe Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.β
https://www.nato.int/cps/ie/natohq/topics_110496.htm
Guess the US had to provide help against themselves in that case. Probably either the alliance as a whole would dissolve or the US would have to leave it.