Well, now you ask, I’d start with religion. Too many people in your country believe weird things. Then there is disdain for science and deep mistrust of autority. Also there is an all too commonly held belief that “Liberty” (with a capital L) means you can do what you want and have no responsability for society. Nobody can compel you to do sensible things, because that is tyranny or, even worse, socialism. The consequences of your actions are not your fault.
And you have a horrible press and currently an idiot for president.
And too many lawyers, probably.
Hey, we may be too religious, deny science, have a horrible press, and an idiot president, but, wait, what was the last thing you said?
I doubt that America is unique in that.
No, not unique. But more extreme, particularly among rich countries for sure. Your fanaticism is at the level of Afghanistan, if you plot that on a graph with the economic power in the other axis the USA are a total outlier.
Cite:
What is your country?
Your cite doesnt match with your claim. And it has nothing to do with fanaticism- the poll question was “How important was religion in your life?”. Religion can be very important without being a fanatic. And it is trying to show that religion being important "
As shown in the graph below, there is a strong negative correlation between GDP per inhabitant and the importance of religion They also say-
It suggests only that there is no strong link between economic growth and religious belief.
and how the hell did they get 1000+ people to answer that poll in, say Ethiopia?
They link to another cite which concludes
"On the other hand, we do not find that their results are robust to changes in their baseline statistical specification. When model-averaging methods are employed to integrate information across alternative statistical specifications, little evidence survives that religious variables help to predict cross-country income differences.
And I cant even find Afghanistan on that chart.
If you see here-
The USA comes in 84th out of 113. About the same as Argentina and Ireland. Afghanistan comes in at 8th.
This quote is about U.S.-Canada relations, and only tangentially related to Greenland, but:
‘I feel sorry for Americans. If you can’t be friends with Canada, then you almost certainly do not have a friend anywhere in the world.’ - British Columbia Premier David Eby
As I’ve mentioned many times, we’re four linear miles from BC.
Moderating:
@Pardel-Lux, as a stand alone, and a direct answer to @robby’s question, your comment on general issues with the American attitudes is fine, in fact, a fair and useful POV on how America is an outlier. But the responses and back and forth is probably too general for a very specific thread. As such, I ask everyone to limit their responses in this thread on the sidetrack or to spin off a new thread. Alternately, feel free to DM me (or flag your own post), and we can split the appropriate posts out into a new thread.
I think he’s right.
I missed this truly disturbing Truth Social Greenland post that Trump put out in May:
And he repeated it on August 1:
Greenland Cult of Personality Graphic
This Guardian story from three days ago is also important:
P.S. to anyone who doesn’t want to click on Truth Social links: The Truth Social graphic can be seen by scrolling down in the Guardian story that is my last link above.
Ugh. They’re building a casus belli – drill without permission, be confronted by Greenland authorities, spark a violent confrontation (all carefully caught on camera, of course), and send in the Marines to protect the heroic Americans. I expect this to take place before the midterms.
I doubt the Pentagon leadership will want to engage in hostilities with NATO allies.
Assuming Kegsbreath hasn’t already removed any and all top officials who’d be willing to oppose a direct presidential command. I’d like to believe that the command structure hasn’t been so completely gutted and that they’d remember their oaths, but then I think of Michael Flynn and wonder how many like him have been shuffled into strategic positions..
The Trumpian solution to this is to simply say that if they attack Americans they no longer count as allies.
You think gas is expensive now, wait until we’re under an embargo from NATO.
They’ll do what they are told, what they “want” is irrelevant. Ever since Trump’s first term people have been talking up the idea that the military will stand up to Trump and save us, but it never happens. It’s just a fantasy that the military will say “no” to him.
What if el donald is in the middle of a hissy fit over something stupid and orders the nukes launched?
Then somebody gets nuked.
Then someone dangles something shiny in front of him until he forgets about it. It’s the sort of thing his staffers did during his first term when they didn’t want him to sign something - they just distracted him and then removed the relevant paperwork from his desk.
They won’t say “no” but sometimes they can make him forget he asked in the first place.
This article was a good read – all quotes below are from PhillyGuy’s link.
The situation presented is bad enough, but not quite as perilous as the headline suggests. In a sense … Trumpism is playing a game of “I’m not touching you!” with Greenland, taking advantage of the island nation’s geography, climate, and the effects both have on Greenland’s national defenses.
The American oil company in question is Greenland Energy, apparently put together for solely this effort – as opposed to Exxon, Chevron, and the like. Greenland Energy is technically working under the aegis of a UK company that had already secured legitimate oil exploration rights from Greenland’s government:
Although Greenland stopped issuing new oil licences in 2021 on environmental grounds, a UK company called 80 Mile had secured exploration rights in Jameson Land. Greenland Energy’s corporate filings say it will take a majority stake in the project in exchange for funding the exploration, though it still needs government permission to proceed. [my bolding - b]
For better or worse, this means that Greenland Energy’s involvement in oil exploration in Greenland is not prima facie illegitimate – they didn’t just show up there with nothing in hand.
Still, Greenland Energy will need further sanction from Greenland’s government to … “proceed”. Now this is where Greenland Energy is playing games – what is “proceed”? Proceed to land vessels on Greenland’s undefended east coast coast? Proceed to then offload supplies onshore? Proceed to erect oil-drilling equipment, but leave it fallow for a spell? Proceed to drill into the ground? “I’m not touching you!”
But the next month, local people in the sparsely populated region noticed a tug pulling a barge shorewards and unloading a dozen containers. “The goal was to get the equipment onshore at Nunap Qeqqa [Jameson Land] in connection with planned oil exploration drilling,” the Greenland government’s statement said. [my bolding - b]
Meanwhile, Greenland Energy has informed its shareholders that their reps are meeting with the Greenlandic government to secure approvals for actual exploration. The Guardian article adds in an editorial comment (i.e. without atrribution) questioning whether Greenland’s decisions regarding Greenland Energy can truly be considered unfettered:
As a semi-autonomous territory of Denmark, decisions about Greenland’s natural resources rest with its local elected leaders, who now face a delicate decision. They could grant permission for oil drilling, even though the planned wells appear to fall within a conservation area protected by the Ramsar convention on wetlands. Or they could refuse and, some worry, give Trump a pretext to advance his imperialist agenda. [my bolding - b]
… not touching you …
Greenland, at the moment, remains publicly diplomatic. My speculation: In the event of a potential “TACO Tuesday” (not necessarily on a Tuesday), perhaps there’s though of eventually seizing the equipment?
The Greenland government’s statement said it “would not be proportionate” to demand the equipment be removed. An application for permission remained under processing, it added.
After laying all that out … in the end, is Greenland Energy even prepared to follow through and commence exploration? IMHO, there is room for doubt.
A Greenland Energy representative has said a vessel carrying its 300 shipping containers of drilling equipment is to set sail from Canada on 12 September. Sinking the wells would begin in October.
… "set sail from Canada? Why aren’t you guys sailing out of Galveston, Texas? Wait … let go of Mark Carney’s nose!
I’ll be curious to see if another shoe ever drops here.
The American consulate has been recently set up in the centre of Nuuk. There have been frequent protests - hundreds of people showing up - outside the building.
Of course, when clicking on usembassy.gov, you get an “experiencing technical difficulties” page - quite emblematic of this broken administration.