Hacker News Reader

Comment by pfannkuchen | Hacker News Reader

I don’t understand where Denmark’s claim to Greenland comes from in the first place.

Can someone who is unhappy about this fill me in on why Denmark should have it?

Fairly simple really. Greenland decided they wanted it and that they still want it. They are sovereign and free to decide otherwise. It is not a claim.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_and_the_European_Uni...

Okay China decided they want Taiwan and they still want it, but for some reason they don’t have it.

I think your framing may not model how territory ownership actually works…

I don't think China decided they want to be a part of Taiwan.

Ha, I misread because what was written made even less sense than flipping the order.

Greenland is clearly not sovereign! What does that even mean? They are a colonial territory of Denmark.

Did you follow the link?

“Greenland joined the then European Community in 1973 with Denmark, but after gaining autonomy in 1979 with the introduction of home rule within the Kingdom of Denmark, Greenland voted to leave in 1982 and left in 1985, to become an OCT.”

It is very easy to read about Greenland gaining autonomy also in more detail. I don’t know what is happening on your end that you have trouble with it?

Yes, absolutely.

Even more on it but Greenland right now is unsustainable and funded by Danish govt. who is willing to fund it because it sees potential in the Area

But its still Greenland's which is sovereigen/autonomous. Trump/America right now are the opposite of it.

Also all the points trump makes is bullshit and danish govt and everyone is always willing to help since they dont want russia either in the area but yeah I do feel as if this is just a smokescreen.

> willing to fund it because it sees potential in the Area.

This is a very transactional point of view that you put on them. I would rather guess that Denmark funds Greenland because the citizens are part of the kingdom. Not because the "see potential".

Not everything is about money. Money is just means.

I am not saying that they are doing it for the money. Of course the national identity is something which can't be expressed within words but my point was that Greenland and Denmark have a healthy relationship (unlike other colonies) and Greenland is happy being part of Denmark for multitude of reasons and Denmark's happy too.

So if the sovereign people of Greenland chose denmark and think its right for their country (and they are given autonomy as well by Denmark)

I just don't see how America gets any right in Greeland and wanted to debuke the claim that Denmark can get the claim as well.

Y'know the thing is America effectively tried to bribe the average Greelander to get away from Denmark but they still don't think its worth it to get into the mess, that's how happy Greenland is with Denmark and prides themselves to be part of Dane culture and neither is Denmark interested in selling Greeland (quite the contrary)

In all of these cases, as such America got literally zero argument ever and that was what I was trying to say. It's got the same argument as that of "mine" or just bullying

Denmark has sold virgin islands to America once and also for greenland, they could've gotten complete support of Danish govt/Greenland govt to make bases/mineral deals even in diplomatic ways and they literally tried to say that

Up until now. I don't see why America would want to do such a blunder not unless they just want to have the flag show Greenland as part of America just for the sake of it which is such a crazy thing when you think about it.

Also Greenland's as close to Denmark (around 2000 miles) as it is to America, so saying its in America's backyard because the map makes one think so is a crazy statement too.

Are we 100% sure that these guys didn't just look at mercator map and decided all this stupidness in it with 0 reason? This seems so silly even a teenager can tell this so much.

> America effectively tried to bribe the average Greelander to get away from Denmark.

When did they do that? Since I believe approaching individual citizens to pay them for opposing the country they belong to would be seen as an act of war.

Yup I agree it can be seen as an act of war too (and also as a bribe too)

So can we then agree than it never happened as you claimed?

It’s a tiny country with very few people, it’s obviously not “sovereign” under the classical definition of sovereign. I no longer subscribe to the modern definition because I believe it is a twisting of language to make it appear that many nations are not in fact vassals of the American empire (Germany, for example).

To illustrate, if Greenland wanted to leave Denmark but Denmark didn’t want it to, could it? No, therefore it isn’t sovereign.

Huh? I think you are confusing sovereignty and autonomy.

And, yes, currently, on legal basis (sovereignty), Greenland could decide to leave Denmark.

What does the Chinese civil War have to do with this?

China (PRC) wants to be one with China (RoC)

It was settled by Scandinavians in 986 and with a bit of reorganisation Norway transferred it to Denmark in 1933.

They signed an agreement with the US in 1951, that the US military could freely use and move between defence areas, but was not to infringe upon Danish sovereignty.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_the_Danish_West_Indi...

The Danes should ask Trump if they get the Virgin Islands back if Trump renegs on the Treaty.

Check out the treaty of the Danish West Indies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_the_Danish_West_Indi...

Why should USA have Hawaii or California?

You can read up on it yourself.

Well personally I don’t think the USA has a strong claim to Hawaii. It’s basically a strategic military outpost that got retconned into being a state after the war.

It’s kind of weird, like sure Wikipedia articles exist but it’s not as if people who have some position are basing their position entirely on the Wikipedia article and I can infer the structure of their position from the Wikipedia article. So I’m asking about what people think, and all I hear back is “reeeeeee”.

It caused reactions because it was the wrong thing to ask in this thread.

"Woman raped" - Tell me again why did she like mini skirts?

"American citizen kille by ICE' - Tell me again why did he look like he came from Nicaragua?

By themselves the may have been somewhat ok, but in this context, asking these questions give them a whole different meaning.

That would only justify Greenland‘s independence but not Trump’s bullying to get Greenland.

What next? Sicily?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com