Satire has been proclaimed dead countless times in recent years but here we are again. I'm not sure what benefit this could possibly have for the US. If anyone can shed some light on that I'm...
Satire has been proclaimed dead countless times in recent years but here we are again. I'm not sure what benefit this could possibly have for the US. If anyone can shed some light on that I'm genuinely curious.
Trump really exemplifies the "broken clock right twice a day" thing; although he's more like a broken calendar that's right once a year. Trump's thinking there kind of screams to me that maybe he...
Trump really exemplifies the "broken clock right twice a day" thing; although he's more like a broken calendar that's right once a year. Trump's thinking there kind of screams to me that maybe he does understand that climate change is a thing.
Greenland would make for an amazing investment if it were actually up for sale at a workable price. Putting aside the intrinsic value of owning a huge island, a warmer Greenland would be a very attractive place to live in a planet where other countries are on fire. It wouldn't pay off in the next few years, but try to imagine what that might look like fifty years from now: Could Greenland's value ever go down? (And a quick reminder that country routinely should and sometimes do plan ahead 50, 100, 150 years ahead into their future. Countries live much longer than humans.)
If a significant amount of the ice melts, people will come. Greenland is fantastically-well located right between Europe and north america and has a massive amount of potential usable land. It's all mostly flat and there's no deforestation required to turn it into productive land, be it for drilling, mining, agriculture, or urbanization.
Don't get me wrong, I hate everything that makes this idea good. But the idea that Greenland will in the future be a huge asset, is not new. Denmark for sure knows it and that's why there's no price the US could pay that would make them sell it.
Invest in Denmark instead.
Edit: And to be clear, Greenland has a lot of mostly-strategic value today, despite the land being barren. But that's not what this is about.
Edit 2: Right after I wrote that, I just found this phenomenal reply-thread on the OOTL subreddit by reddit user /u/Portarossa:
The original WSJ article talks about it a little. It has a fair amount of natural resources, and value for military locations (but the US is already able to use it for that).
The original WSJ article talks about it a little. It has a fair amount of natural resources, and value for military locations (but the US is already able to use it for that).
For anyone curious, of course german has a compound word for that: Realsatire. It means exactly what you think it means and describes reality so... curious as to be basically satire. As to why...
For anyone curious, of course german has a compound word for that: Realsatire. It means exactly what you think it means and describes reality so... curious as to be basically satire.
As to why you'd want greenland? Geostrategic reasons (air/naval bases?) or access to oceanfloor resources come to mind. But who knows, maybe he's gonna save the climate by wrapping the glaciers there in tinfoil to keep them cool, stranger things have happened.
That's an interesting one - you've got me wondering as well now! It looks like there was some trading of border land by Jordan and Saudi Arabia in 1965, which is more of a barter than a sale but...
That's an interesting one - you've got me wondering as well now! It looks like there was some trading of border land by Jordan and Saudi Arabia in 1965, which is more of a barter than a sale but could sort of fit the bill. The same could perhaps be said of the 1997 handover of Hong Kong to China, although that's perhaps more tenuous.
In my very brief search I couldn't find any modern examples comparable to Louisiana or Alaska, where major chunks were sold for a cash price, but I'd be fascinated to hear from someone more knowledgable than me on the subject.
More recently India and Bangladesh traded land to get rid of some of their many enclaves. The handover was due to the expiration of a 99-year rent-free lease the UK forced upon China back in 1898.
It looks like there was some trading of border land by Jordan and Saudi Arabia in 1965, which is more of a barter than a sale but could sort of fit the bill.
Oh wow, I had no idea of the scale of the situation along the India/Bangladesh border - "102 enclaves of India, 21 counter-enclaves of Bangladesh, 1 counter-counter enclave of India" just on the...
Oh wow, I had no idea of the scale of the situation along the India/Bangladesh border - "102 enclaves of India, 21 counter-enclaves of Bangladesh, 1 counter-counter enclave of India" just on the Bangladeshi side.
The lease on Hong Kong is what brought it to my mind - tenuous because, exactly as you say, it wasn't exactly a good faith negotiation at the time - but still interesting in that sovereign territory was being passed around more like commercial property.
After a little research I've found a land purchase between nations newer than Alaska: Treaty of the Danish West Indies from 1916. Interestingly it involved the same two countries; Denmark selling...
After a little research I've found a land purchase between nations newer than Alaska: Treaty of the Danish West Indies from 1916.
Interestingly it involved the same two countries; Denmark selling to the USA. The Danish West Indies were renamed the US Virgin Islands, and was the last permanent territorial expansion of the USA. $25,000,000 were paid for the islands, which if this calculator is accurate translates to almost $500,000,000 in today's money.
If anyone knows any newer territorial sales between countries, I'd love to hear about it. :-)
Why does anyone treat his idea of the day with any credulity any more? I mean, yes, he's the president, but it's not like this one will go anywhere, and it seems better to laugh at him than to...
Why does anyone treat his idea of the day with any credulity any more? I mean, yes, he's the president, but it's not like this one will go anywhere, and it seems better to laugh at him than to take him seriously when he does this distraction stuff. There's plenty of more important issues surrounding him.
It's great TV. But honestly, these outrageous headlines get the most clicks which is of utmost importance to the companies most of us get our news from.
It's great TV.
But honestly, these outrageous headlines get the most clicks which is of utmost importance to the companies most of us get our news from.
Satire has been proclaimed dead countless times in recent years but here we are again. I'm not sure what benefit this could possibly have for the US. If anyone can shed some light on that I'm genuinely curious.
Trump really exemplifies the "broken clock right twice a day" thing; although he's more like a broken calendar that's right once a year. Trump's thinking there kind of screams to me that maybe he does understand that climate change is a thing.
Greenland would make for an amazing investment if it were actually up for sale at a workable price. Putting aside the intrinsic value of owning a huge island, a warmer Greenland would be a very attractive place to live in a planet where other countries are on fire. It wouldn't pay off in the next few years, but try to imagine what that might look like fifty years from now: Could Greenland's value ever go down? (And a quick reminder that country routinely should and sometimes do plan ahead 50, 100, 150 years ahead into their future. Countries live much longer than humans.)
If a significant amount of the ice melts, people will come. Greenland is fantastically-well located right between Europe and north america and has a massive amount of potential usable land. It's all mostly flat and there's no deforestation required to turn it into productive land, be it for drilling, mining, agriculture, or urbanization.
Don't get me wrong, I hate everything that makes this idea good. But the idea that Greenland will in the future be a huge asset, is not new. Denmark for sure knows it and that's why there's no price the US could pay that would make them sell it.
Invest in Denmark instead.
Edit: And to be clear, Greenland has a lot of mostly-strategic value today, despite the land being barren. But that's not what this is about.
Edit 2: Right after I wrote that, I just found this phenomenal reply-thread on the OOTL subreddit by reddit user /u/Portarossa:
https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/cqz0tw/whats_up_with_greenland/ex0sr6q/
To be fair, a broken calendar is right every 28 years... which is even more accurate to Trump.
The original WSJ article talks about it a little. It has a fair amount of natural resources, and value for military locations (but the US is already able to use it for that).
For anyone curious, of course german has a compound word for that: Realsatire. It means exactly what you think it means and describes reality so... curious as to be basically satire.
As to why you'd want greenland? Geostrategic reasons (air/naval bases?) or access to oceanfloor resources come to mind. But who knows, maybe he's gonna save the climate by wrapping the glaciers there in tinfoil to keep them cool, stranger things have happened.
I've been told that it's going to be a very well placed chunk of land after the ice melts.
When was the last time a country bought a chunk of land from another country? Does that still happen?
That's an interesting one - you've got me wondering as well now! It looks like there was some trading of border land by Jordan and Saudi Arabia in 1965, which is more of a barter than a sale but could sort of fit the bill. The same could perhaps be said of the 1997 handover of Hong Kong to China, although that's perhaps more tenuous.
In my very brief search I couldn't find any modern examples comparable to Louisiana or Alaska, where major chunks were sold for a cash price, but I'd be fascinated to hear from someone more knowledgable than me on the subject.
More recently India and Bangladesh traded land to get rid of some of their many enclaves.
The handover was due to the expiration of a 99-year rent-free lease the UK forced upon China back in 1898.
Oh wow, I had no idea of the scale of the situation along the India/Bangladesh border - "102 enclaves of India, 21 counter-enclaves of Bangladesh, 1 counter-counter enclave of India" just on the Bangladeshi side.
The lease on Hong Kong is what brought it to my mind - tenuous because, exactly as you say, it wasn't exactly a good faith negotiation at the time - but still interesting in that sovereign territory was being passed around more like commercial property.
Related humorous video: India/Bangladesh - The world's worst border | Man Men
After a little research I've found a land purchase between nations newer than Alaska: Treaty of the Danish West Indies from 1916.
Interestingly it involved the same two countries; Denmark selling to the USA. The Danish West Indies were renamed the US Virgin Islands, and was the last permanent territorial expansion of the USA. $25,000,000 were paid for the islands, which if this calculator is accurate translates to almost $500,000,000 in today's money.
If anyone knows any newer territorial sales between countries, I'd love to hear about it. :-)
Why does anyone treat his idea of the day with any credulity any more? I mean, yes, he's the president, but it's not like this one will go anywhere, and it seems better to laugh at him than to take him seriously when he does this distraction stuff. There's plenty of more important issues surrounding him.
It's great TV.
But honestly, these outrageous headlines get the most clicks which is of utmost importance to the companies most of us get our news from.