‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Agreement between the USA and Denmark (1951,2004) [pdf]

37 points · 61 comments · closingreunion

  1. 21921276 · · focus · HN ↗
    I get that this is posted to show that the "Art of the deal" has produced little novelties in the recent US-Denmark agreement:

    <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;articles&#x2F;c63d7lexyym1o" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;articles&#x2F;c63d7lexyym1o

    It does have the novelty that even under independence the US will continue to operate the bases. I&#x27;m not sure if Denmark thinks this is a poison pill for any independence movement.

    The Golden Dome bases in Greenland are such a stupid pretext:

    1) Russia has the Sarmat missile that flies over the South Pole and completely evades all northern installations.

    2) Russia has the Poseidon nuclear torpedo that threatens the vast coastal areas of the US and is immune all that as well.

    1. nonethewiser · · focus · HN ↗
      Also, the previous deal didn’t let the U.S. expand its military presence without Denmark approval. And it was contingent on the North Atlantic Treaty. The new deal is permanent.

      I dont know why people think this isnt more permissive for the US.

      1. silvestrov · · focus · HN ↗
        Denmark never denied an approval, so it has no meaningful difference.

        At one point the US had 17 small bases in Greenland. Almost all have been abandoned by the USA on its own initiative.

        Look at this map: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.researchgate.net&#x2F;figure&#x2F;Former-US-air-bases-in-Greenland-during-WWII-the-air-base-of-our-interest-is-circled_fig1_373652483" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.researchgate.net&#x2F;figure&#x2F;Former-US-air-bases-in-G...

        Today there is only the small Thule&#x2F;Pituffik base.

        The US has closed the bases because they make no sense with modern military and satellites.

        1. ericmay · · focus · HN ↗
          &gt; Denmark never denied an approval, so it has no meaningful difference.

          But Denmark could deny access. Formal agreements are important. You generally don’t leave this stuff up to chance or ambiguity if you don’t have to.

          &gt; The US has closed the bases because they make no sense with modern military and satellites.

          I’m confused by this. What good do satellites do? So you can watch an enemy armada sail by? There is more importance especially if&#x2F;when these northern sea routes begin to have interdiction and further early warning systems available. I think the military knows why it needs this stuff.

          1. 3eb7988a1663 · · focus · HN ↗
            Formal agreements matter unless the counter-party is the US who will gleefully alter the deal the second it becomes inconvenient.
            1. ericmay · · focus · HN ↗

              [dead]

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.