@dh4ever87@johnnytubesocks@NASCAR26TheGame Isn't it tiring being so annoyed that you can't accept people not knowing all the numbers by heart. Just thinking about it is tiring
@DanielSprarc Just wait till you hear Trump didn't get Greenland. And it's gonna be wild when you guys find out it's more or less just the 1951 agreement
@GunEagleFreedom@bjork@Erling Why are you so dumb? No legitemately . . . why so dumb? Did your father abandon you as a child. Did you not suck your mothers teat enough. Are you mentally impaired. When you wrote that, did you think "should i educate myself about Greenland, before writing something really dumb?
@mondorique@Corey_Peters@texaggie9325@HotSotin 3: And what do you mean by "veto powers over the economy" it sounds like you're saying the US could stop Greenland if they wanted to build a hospital or even control the Greenlandic economy. Or even tell Denmark they can't send Greenland money. Again they wouldn't sign that
@mondorique@Corey_Peters@texaggie9325@HotSotin 2: And what you're kind of saying is that if the US decided to tear down Nuuk, and build a base, it could. And i'm sorry but neither Denmark nor Greenland would never sign an agreement giving the US so much power. That kind of crosses the sovereignty line
@mondorique@Corey_Peters@texaggie9325@HotSotin 1: I think you're being a bit optimistic over how much power the US gets in Greenland. First, as i have said, the US can already build as many bases as it wants. Before the agreement they would have to ask nicely, and we would say yes
@mack_a_d00 You guys used to have 17 bases in Greenland, and now it's just one. In words a dingus like you can understand, you HAD a military presence, and then YOU took it away. This agreement does not make Greenland part of the US, it just continues the one that was made in 1951
@mondorique@Corey_Peters@texaggie9325@HotSotin 2/2 It wasn't Denmark forcing the US to ditch 16 of the bases, it was all America. Which is also why i laugh when the US complains about the lack of military presence on Greenland. And with regards to minerals, then again America have always been prefered to dig for minerals
@mondorique@Corey_Peters@texaggie9325@HotSotin 1/2 So the same deal then. Everytime America build one of it's 17 bases it used to have, the whole getting permission from Denmark was as simple as "can we build, yes you can" in other words purely a friendly formality.
@mondorique@Corey_Peters@texaggie9325@HotSotin No, but from a Danish perspective, the deal is mentioned in the news, but there's kind of a "scrugged shoulder" attitude. To me and many others it's seems like it's probably more or less the same deal, and then everybody pretends that Trump won
@mondorique@Corey_Peters@texaggie9325@HotSotin 2/2 And do you remember the last time there was a deal. Trump was declaring a victory over a deal that was more or less identicle to the 1951 agreement. So again how do you know?
@mondorique@Corey_Peters@texaggie9325@HotSotin 1/2 Can i just ask how you know what's in the deal, that isn't signed yet. The danish politicians who have read the deal are not saying what's in it. Greenlandic politicians say it's a good deal for all three parties. Trump is saying Trumpy things, which are always questionable
@JoshuaBarzon Denmark have always been called Denmark. Before that there was a lot of different small kingdoms, but none of them can really claim to be Denmark before Denmark
@gadashi22@sikohund@pelledragsted Jeg prøvede da helt klart at få ham til at fremstå hyklerisk, fordi han er lige så hyklerisk, som du er nedladende. Og du kan da ikke været helt intelligent, hvis du ikke er klar over at folkepensionen er meget lav, og huslejer kan være dyre.