>We as a country are exposed to being attacked by Russia.

No you are not. First - no one can find you on a map. You are so tiny. Second for a conventional warfare Russia will have to go trough many many countries to get to you, no matter which road they take (also anyone that thinks Russia is a credible threat is smoking something strong - they don't have the capacity to subdue backwater as eastern Ukraine, let alone more developed and prepared countries as Poland, Germany or Finland, Sweden). And preparedness won't help you for nuclear.

▲

wojciii 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

A cyber attack is still an attack.

Sabotage by agents is an attack.

Russia is a terrorist state and will attack this country sooner or later. It's just a question of time.

▲

guappa 4 days ago | parent [-]

I don't think denmark has any moral high ground while holding greenland as a colony.

▲

olau 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Greenland can become independent if they wish. There would be some things to work out, but the legal framework has been in place since the 1970es. And they seem to be working towards the goal.

The reason it hasn't happened yet is that they'd either have to increase tax income greatly, or reduce public spending greatly with financial support from Denmark. As I gather, infrastructure up there is really expensive.

▲

ochrist 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Please check your history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Greenlandic_self-governme...

	▲	guappa 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		Oh since 2008 it is slightly less bad! (I knew). And? It's still bad.

▲

modo_mario 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Ridiculous imo but that aside. Do you think any other country involved here has a moral high ground? Russia, The US?

▲

wojciii 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Whatavoutism?

Good work.

▲

ochrist 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The distance between Kalilingrad (Russia) and the island of Bornholm (Denmark) is only about 300 km (or 200 miles). They don't have to go to 'many many countries' to get to Denmark. Please look at a map.

▲

ReptileMan 4 days ago | parent [-]

Ahh yes. The military powerhouse that is Kaliningrad - which to make any kind of buildup or resupply you have to trample trough two NATO countries. Or to sail Russia's nonexistent or pathetic (in best of times) fleet trough a lot of hostile waters.

	▲	mrguyorama 3 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		The west always assumed Russia would (attempt to) close the gap between Belarus and Kaliningrad at Poland's corner. >The military powerhouse that is Kaliningrad Kaliningrad actually does have a sizable (for Russia) military investment, which is why the west would expect them to defend it in that way. I don't think Russia COULD do that anymore, unless it was entirely a Belarus operation. But if they succeed at rushing that gap, current war "meta" is extremely defensive-sided. Russia may not have a meaningful "fleet" but they certainly have enough working and pretty good submarines to make hell for anyone trying to then supply Lithuania.
	▲	hnbad 3 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		You know where Kaliningrad is but you couldn't find Denmark (aka the country that includes that big piece of land next to Canada that Trump and Vance have been talking about annexing) on a map?

▲

Symbiote 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Denmark's kingdom includes Greenland. It's the 12th largest sovereign country.

	▲	vintermann 3 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Well, it's not Russia Greenland is worrying about currently.
	▲	wojciii 4 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Bingo.

▲

mordae 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Sorry, but Russia is a credible threat that keeps killing people in Ukraine and threatens going nuclear.

China is betting on us rather pivoting than engaging with Russian army. If we seem tough enough, we call it.

We can then also negotiate better rate for the US protection racket, becauss the US fuckers decided to more than double the rate recently and we are unhappy about that. Long term we will rearm ourselves on our own terms.

	▲	guappa 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		Of course they threaten going nuclear. Every country that has nuclear weapons has them because of the threat of using them. If a state would say "we will never, in no circumstance, ever use these weapons" then why spend the money to have them in the first place? USA, pakistan, russia, france, india and so on… they all have these weapons to threaten using them.