Skip Navigation
World News @lemmy.ml
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ @lemmy.ml

Trump’s invasion of Greenland would be ‘the shortest war in the world’

The U.S. has — by far — the world’s largest defense budget, spending $948 billion last year. Its armed forces have 1.3 million personnel — some of them currently stationed in Greenland. Denmark, for its part, last year spent $9.9 billion, has only 17,000 soldiers, and most of its heavy land-warfare equipment has been donated to Ukraine.

12 comments

  • If Trump starts an inter nato war or just dissolves nato due to America invading one of the other founding members, that’s going to be the biggest geopolitical win for America’s enemies who won’t have to lift a finger.

    • There's a certain logic to this from the US perspective actually. If the US is now accepting that the unipolar moment is over, then they will be retrenching and drawing a line around what they see as their sphere of influence. The world will be carved up between different powers, and US is staking claims now. Europe will be the biggest loser here since it is in an incredibly weak position both economically and militarily. I expect that the EU will collapse and different European countries will be absorbed into different spheres of influence.

      • What would US gain by doing this, they already have most of Europe in their sphere of influence, if they break up Europe, France, Germany, and maybe UK (if they fix their shit) will be major players with their own spheres, US won't have any, and I doubt US will be able to occupy and control Greenland even if they can win it quickly, Greenland is a big land mass and US troops have very little experience fighting in such a cold environment.

      • I have also heard this line of thinking, it’s very dark and does not paint a hopeful picture for the emancipation of humanity. But I kind of see the logic to it. Europe doesn’t have the martial strength to impose a European empire, especially not in the face of the American war machine. Nor does it have the economy to make one, especially with neoliberalism ripping the copper out the walls of European economies preventing reinvestment and industrialisation (see: the Bank Of England’s policy of quantitative tightening ruining the plans of the uk Labour Party, and all of Europe’s industrial capital looting its own assets).

        In this proposed reality Europe must look to the other powers, America being the default choice, but an increasingly unfriendly one, does Europe fancy itself being an extraction zone for an exploitative empire? The boot on the other foot for them. To look the other way, would BRICS even be interested in Europe coming cap in hand? Maybe, but certainly not with terms Europe wouldn’t be too proud to accept. However individual BRICS countries maybe. Russia - a weird one, some countries may be happy to side with them (Germany possibly would consider it in a role as Russias workshop?) but I don’t see other countries like Poland going that way without a fight. China - too remote, too far away and too hated by most of Europe, maybe some nations like Turkey could look to them though. Brazil? Surely too busy with the American empire to its north to have time for Europe. South Africa - who knows? It’s a very different future to the one we grew up in.

12 comments