this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2026
94 points (100.0% liked)

Chapotraphouse

14243 readers
667 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I really do not understand his infatuation with Greenland.
Also shot (pictured above)
Chaser:

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] darkcalling@hexbear.net 8 points 6 days ago

I think it could just be simple "if we actually own it we have an absolute say on ANYTHING that goes on and our mineral extraction and military assets cannot be kicked out EVER" whereas there's this fear that China will give them a better deal and they'll down the road in 5 years, 10 years, 15 years when the US is weaker make a deal with them, push the US out and that'll be it. But if the US seizes it, buys, etc, digs in like a tick then in 10 years, 20 years when the US is weaker they still have absolute control of the minerals and their exploitation strategy. They still have absolute control of it for military uses in missile interception against Russia and China over the north pole.

So it's consolidation of assets, power, land, the great climate fortress while the US still has maximum power. The time to build a fortress and defenses is not when you're already under attack and flagging but when you're strongest and can make your boundaries as big as possible. Critically for the US strategy to control China it's part of ensuring they have control of key raw minerals on top of markets that they can be gatekeeper for and force China to play by their say-so or else they turn off the supplies and turn off China's manufacturing economy.