I see Donnie

saying 'One way or the other we're going to take Greenland'

So then what's wrong with China taking Taiwan?

Gosh Hysteria you’re really onto something there….give us more!

Valid point Dense.

China has a much more legitimate claim to Taiwan (which they owned for over 200 years) than the USA has to Greenland which they've never owned, occupied or cared about until the discovery of rare earth minerals.

Everyone collectively craps their pants when China talks of reclaiming an island that they previously owned and is only 130km away, but when Bozo talks of invading an island that has no history at all with the USA and is 2900km away, then the Trumpanzees nod their heads and start chanting "USA. USA . . ."

Hope Denmark continues to tell Bozo to shove off and keep his grubby paws off Greenland.

They ‘owned’ Taiwan…waaaahahaha! But hold on, that was 130 years ago. Read and educate yourself:

The French ultimately withdrew, but Japanese interest grew. In 1894, Chinese and Japanese troops faced off in Korea; Japanese forces prevailed. In the resulting Treaty of Shimonoseki, China ceded claims to both Taiwan and the Pescadores Islands “in perpetuity.”²⁷ That Japanese control would continue through World War II, and it continues to imprint itself deeply on Taiwanese culture and society.

Put another way, Taiwan’s separation from China occurred a half century before the dissolution of most of the British and French Empires. From a Taiwanese standpoint, the notion of returning to Beijing’s control would be akin to Australia, which gained its independence in 1901, returning to the direct control of the United Kingdom or Algeria, which gained its independence from France in 1962, again becoming a French department. Every nation that colonized Taiwan left an imprint that, over the years, amplified Taiwan’s differences with mainland Chinese culture, especially as Western powers and Japan sought to modernize the country in ways different from the mainland’s development.

Ummm . . . Moffie, none of what you're saying changes the FACT I stated that Taiwan was part of China for over 200 years while Greenland was never part of the USA.

Sober up or smart up if you want to join an adult debate. Thanks in anticipation.

The shocking thing is you can justify the enslaving of 23 million Taiwanese by a nation that hasn’t ‘owned’ them for a 130 years.

"Enslaving" . . . what an emotionally charged and gullible term to use.

The point I made is that China has a more legitimate claim to Taiwan than the USA has to Greenland.

Now if you want to debate that statement like an adult, then go ahead and make your points. If you just want to behave like the childish and ignorant fool we've come to know, then rather don't waste my time.

And America will never send in forces to take Greenland….but China is very likely to seize Taiwan and enslave the people.

Well, that's not what your hero Bozo is saying.

Either way, my statement stands. China has a more legitimate claim to Taiwan/Formosa than the USA has to Greenland. They may have owned Taiwan more than 130 years ago but at least they owned it at some point in their history. That's more than the Yanks can say about Greenland. Also, as I pointed out above in case you missed it, it's a lot more understandable to annex an island just 130 km from your coast than it is to try and invade one that is nearly 3000 km away.

Do you have an argument against my actual statement or are you just being childishly contrary again?

Yes a very simple one…..the welfare of 24 million people is more important than the welfare of 56000 people. And the Greenlanders are currently part of Denmark. The people in Taiwan are totally free. So the nature of the change and the number of people affected is far more onerous in the case of Taiwan.

Neither America nor China have a right to either country, the difference is China will disregard the wishes of the people, they demonstrated that in Hong Kong. America could care less what the Greenlanders do, they are only interested in the strategic risk Greenland’s resources in the wrong hands poses,

Trump has handled this clumsily….but there is a legitimate geo political purpose and the capacity to make 56000 people very rich. They may not want that, but there might be cooperative models they do find attractive. It’s very unlikely the people in Taiwan will find anything attractive in a Chinese occupation.

I’m looking at it from the perspective of the inhabitants….not some flimsy historical right…..or proximity that is 5 times wider than the channel that has kept England free for a millennium.

I see . . . so you're basing your argument on the size of the respective populations.

So the conquest by the British Empire of . . . say, New Zealand or South Africa. . . was more legitimate than the conquest of India?

Is that what you're saying, Moffie?

And when you say Greenland's resources shouldn't end up in the wrong hands, are you saying the USA's hands are the right hands? Who or what determines what the right hands are?

It's a valid question. Please try to answer it without getting all childish and defensive.

….but there is a legitimate geopolitical purpose and the capacity to make 56000 people very rich. They may not want that, but there might be cooperative models they do find attractive. I

Recent polls show that only about 6% of Greenlanders support becoming part of the United States, while 85% are opposed. The 6% are McDonald's addicts... The rest have no wish to be American, especially not MAGA ones.

They would sell out future generations. They may allow America to mine, but that would be favourable to Greenlanders, and they can get rich that way, while also protecting their own culture and owning their own land.

------

Purpose? For whom, America? America wants to mine it. The Big Tech Oligarchs want cheap, rare earth.

Greenland falls under NATO protection. No one has ever tried to take it by military force, it is a freezing ice cube.

Taiwan also does not want to become part of China. Although, at least it is not MAGA.

Yes to some extent I am…..24 million lives carry more weight than 56000, especially when those lives are going to be wrenched from a free environment to the hands of the Communist Chinese .

But the principle does have separate weight.. .I attach more legitimacy to a negotiated arrangement than an invasion,

Call me old school but the wrong hands are those of societies that have ambitions beyond their borders and some missionary sense of changing the world. America tries to persuade, Russia and China have both shown no hesitation in coercing.

Another way of looking at it is the wrong hands are societies you wouldn’t ever move to voluntarily..

Those turn out to be intersecting sets.

In summary the American interest in Greenland is in the interests of Western civilization and will ultimately be conducted that way. The Chinese interest in Taiwan will destroy the culture of a productive and constructive nation.

The Dimwit is raw idiot supreme. He does not realize that no nation has a claim on any terrotiry 0 but in Grenlamnd's case the hiuge island has a population of circa 51 000 and is part of Denmark - a small country in Europe with no ability tp revet te take-over of Greenland. The territory is now protcted by he USA woth a majr army base in teh country, If any country send a few warships to G renland the takeover will take less than a day. The residents are too few to defend themselves.

As part of the EU Denamrk has ti comply with EU reulations and those have a direct and engotive impact on mining of minerals and drillin g for oi in Greenland.

Denmark dies nt have the capacity to defend any attack on Greenland. by any country and that is the sun=-total of the situation. After years of neglect the army base of the USA is being upgraded and strengthened to cater for the instability caused by weak US Governent under Biden/

So letds go to the issue of the Crimea. Until 1776 the crimea was a sultinate subsidiary to the Otoman Empire and at one stahe even attacked Moscow. However, the last straw was when Under the Empress Elizabeth of Russia peace was restored beteen the Ottoman Caliph and the Russians. Howeve by 1775 Catherine the Great sent her amies to conquer the Crimea Sultinate and it became part of Russia in 1776 - at that stage Ukriae was already paart of Russia - but an entrely different area seoarated from Ukraine by an area occupied by the Kossaks - which alsi became Russified,

At that stage the major component of the population of the crimea were Tartars = with the seind largest group being Russians. That situation prevailed until Stalin deported 3.5 million Tartars to slve camps in Siberia, After his death in 1953 the Tratars were a;;owed t return to teh crimea abd only 200 000 people suvived of the total Tartar opulation while the Rusian population grew/

Now back to Ukraine - in 1941 Hitler attacked Russia/ The Ukrinians hated the Stalin Regime and led y Banderas sided with the Germans against the Russians, With Rusia winning the wa the revenge of nthe Russians were terrible and millions of Ukrainians ended up in slve camps in Siberia, Under the leadership of Khrushchev rg Russian Communist Party decided on re-instatement of Ukraine as a Scviet Republic - but the distrust of the Ykruanians ciased a rethinking on how Russian control of the Ukraine Soviet Republic could be ensured, They then incoproated an area that never before in the hsitory was part of Ukraine into Ukraine and the Crimea was one of the areas so incorporated. into the Soviet Repblic of Ukraine - part of the USSR dicatorship.

For the Russian speaking people in wht wa a new Ukraine it emant no differences iwhatsoever, In 1991 a new constitution was compiled providing total human rights protection fr all people in rhat wuld become an Independent country of Ukraine. However in the Costitution were two particlar isues dealt wit ibnsofaras the Crimea is concerned and that was that the Crimea would ahe ther own Parliament with total control of internal affairs of the Crimean area and that Rusia would lease their naval basis from teh Crimean Government. The Cinstitution was to be approved by a referendum.

In 2013 there was an election held in terms of the Ukraine cnstitution. However, jr utcome was disputed in Kiev and the major Ukraine speaking area, With the help of the USA a coup took place in Ukraine in 2014 and the Constitutiion of Ukraine wa discarded ttally. That caused the star of a Civil Wat in Eastern Ukraine, Tje Criea Parliament called for a referendum for the area to decide what should be doone iro the future of he Crimea, With a Russian speaking population made up 85% of the population amd 10% Tartars the decision by 94,5% was t apply to Russia to become part of the Russian Federation.

So you claim that the Crimea is an integral part of Ukraine "conquered " by the Russians, and that it shuld be returned to Ukraine which effectively on paper govened the Crimea for 23 years, You are one of the dumbest idiots who makes claims on historical basis imaginable..

,