pull down to refresh

116 sats \ 6 replies \ @freetx 6 Jan \ on: Stephen Miller Says US Has The Right To Take Greenland Politics_And_Law

I'm neutral on the question, but I think the "NATO" angle is weak.

However I think this is better rhetoric:

"The real question is what right does Denmark have to assert control over Greenland? What is the basis of their territorial claim? What is their basis of having Greenland as a colony of Denmark?" Miller then questioned.

He should elaborate that geographically, Greenland is part of North America therefore its only natural we see it as part of our territory.

Trust me, its not lost of me that that question of "by what right" applies to every country on earth! (eg. they all just claim their land by 'might'). But its more effective rhetoric because once we go down that road, the mind naturally conjures up the image of "if Denmark is claiming Greenland purely because they can, then why can't a stronger nation simply claim it?"

I'm not arguing this is ethical or moral, its simply better rhetorical argument.

write
preview
57 sats \ 4 replies \ @siggy47 OP 6 Jan

Canada would seem like a more logical choice, but our president wants that too under the "Donroe Doctrine" (I love that)

reply
56 sats \ 1 reply \ @justin_shocknet 6 Jan
Canada would seem like a more logical choice,

Greenland is under the apogee of any ICBM's and where submarines can come across the arctic, not Canada

reply
23 sats \ 0 replies \ @justin_shocknet 6 Jan

reply
18 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 6 Jan

" Some people say Donroe Doctrine"

One of the funnest lines he's had in a while.

reply
36 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 7 Jan

Something is rotten in Denmark

Greenland is in North America, if Denmark wants war with USA then I say we give them what they want and more

reply
9 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 6 Jan

I imagine Denmark's claim traces back to the original European settlements. That doesn't make it the right arrangement, but it isn't entirely arbitrary either.

reply