What a bizarre description of what the US did.

Greenland has been inching towards independence since the seventies, because that's the common ambition of greenlandic peoples and it's slow because there are rather deep ties between Denmark and Greenland. These ties are to some extent very negative for the greenlanders, they're generally discriminated against and have been viciously mistreated at times, but a quick clean cut would also be quite painful for them.

In the seventies Greenland joined the EU predecessor EEC with Denmark, quickly realised that europeans were emptying their fishing waters and in the early eighties left the union. It's the only entity to have done so. Then the independence process trudged on, they self-manage in many areas now, even more since a 2008 referendum where some 75% or so voted in favour of independence. Since 2009 there is a law that says that Greenland can become independent whenever they want, as long as it's approved by greenlander referendum and the danish parliament.

To the extent they're a colony international law also clearly gives them the right to unilaterally declare independence. A majority of greenlanders are likely still in favour, but a majority also would prefer to postpone it if it would result in worse living conditions, since that's what polls usually conclude.

Ignoring half a century of rather delicate politics and independence ambitions the US shat all over it and said that they wanted to buy it, and then several years later said that they might just annex instead. This is quite belligerent and nasty behaviour, which in my opinion should have caused european countries to start dumping US bonds and stop answering calls from the White House.

> if it would result in worse living conditions

Well nobody is forcing Denmark to be a dick about decolonization, nor a dick to all the people it never colonized. That's a choice.

> This is quite belligerent and nasty behaviour

So was colonizing, well, anywhere. Europe still hasn't been appropriately punished for this. And yes, the US deserves to be punished severely for its own brutal conquests.

Denmark isn't "being a dick about decolonization", it's just that they happen to be very kindly subsidising half of Greenland's budget, which causes even many enthusiastic about the idea of an independent Greenland cause to think that leaving might be a mistake.

Conversely, the leader of the present day United States threatens to colonising Greenland by force to show off how powerful he is. Ergo Europeans, particularly Greenlanders, have little reason to trust the US

> Denmark isn't "being a dick about decolonization", it's just that they happen to be very kindly subsidising half of Greenland's budget, which causes even many enthusiastic about the idea of an independent Greenland cause to think that leaving might be a mistake.

Brother, spread this pro-colonization propaganda elsewhere.

> Conversely, the leader of the present day United States threatens to colonising Greenland by force to show off how powerful he is. Ergo Europeans, particularly Greenlanders, have little reason to trust the US

Conversely? Brother, they are the same thing.

Fine, be that American whose ignorance of world affairs is exceeded only by faith that anything its government does, dastardly foreigns do worse...

I am no liberal

You know nothing about this, so stop spreading your made up lies. A roadmap for Greenlandic independence is in place. The Greenlandic parliament is controlling the speed of this process.

[flagged]

It is European right now. It's under European sovereignty.

No, it's a colony. Calling it european is an affront to everyone with the ability to read

A European colony is European.

You can call anything anything you want. Why not call greenland australian?

Of course you'll look ridiculous regardless

That's just silly. Is a Frenchman French, even if he lives in the US?

This is an asinine comparison. You need to inquire about the identity of the french man's slave

It's not. European is a descriptor of sovereignty here, not one of geography.

Is your wallet yours, even if you leave it somewhere?

So use the right words: "greenland is the property of denmark"

That's what the possessive descriptor "European" means, yes. Which is why it's weird you're so against it. I'm not really sure what you're arguing at this point.

"European" is a geographic adjective. It does not apply to domination of other places. No amount of willpower will make the places that europe chooses to rape "european".

It's not purely geographic. It's possessive, it's cultural.

A Spanish dish is Spanish outside of Spain as well, as is a French song or a Danish person (the relevant one in this case!).

> It's possessive, it's cultural.

So you admit that the relationship between denmark and greenland is one of violence, not affection?

It's one of ownership. That's what possessive means.

Yes. You're talking about a relationship born of violence. Who would ever endorse this?

Thats how literally all state sovereignty everywhere in the world works.

Ok, so why cry over greenland when you know how this works?

Who's crying? We're defending our interest.

Why do you want to punish the Greenlanders? They would rather be a Danish colony than an American.

Look the danish punished greelanders many generations before us. Pretending this is justice is just evil

Currently Denmark participates in financing Greenland, pulling the rug on it would likely not be pleasant for the greenlanders and if they did I'd count that as rather dickish unless the greenlanders had a near consensus on the issue and asked the danish parliament to do it.

Well, some justice have been sought and won, but a lot remains. To me it seems like an attempt at distraction to clump together the treatment of the Mau Mau and the nuking of Algeria with Denmark's relation with Greenland.

Besides economic relations, independence for Greenland would also mean that they would need to seek justice to a larger extent through international courts and in at least some cases it's likely easier for greenlanders to find justice in danish courts.

Ok, why doesn't denmark finance birundi?

> Well, some justice have been sought and won

And yet denmark hasn't burned. How do you remediate this contradiction?

> To me it seems like an attempt at distraction to clump together the treatment of the Mau Mau and the nuking of Algeria with Denmark's relation with Greenland.

Believe me, britain deserves far worse than just being burned down. But denmark still must face justice

You make it sound that the brits were the bad guys, when it was an elite top % pulling the strings and the rest were mostly trying to make ends meet.

But yes agree, the elite extracting wealth from the colonies back in the days, and still are extracting wealth from your average Joe, deserves far worse.

Colonies can only address this at the granularity of the nationalism with which they were presented. If every-day brits don't want to be blamed, they need to make their own rebellion to show they aren't party to the evil done in their name.

I think this is true of my own country (the US), and it's hopeless. I think most americans are ok with the evil done in their name. I wish I had better advice or insight.

But pretending like two imperial powers arguing over greenland is some great injustice just spits in the face of humanity. Have some fucking dignity. Greenland deserves better than to be treated like a piece of property

It does, through NGO:s, humanitarian aid and african development and investment funds.

If you think a war for liberation is appropriate for the greenlanders I suggest you move there and agitate in local languages for this.

> It does, through NGO:s, humanitarian aid and african development and investment funds.

Oh? so you're pro continued rape of africa? How has that worked out? Which african peoples are asking for this at this point?

Christian charity failed generations ago and it's pathetic to see people still voicing support for it