We refer to that island as Greenland, because it’s an autonomous region, and yes it’ protected by Denmark, EU & NATO.
Your metaphor is confusing because that wasn’t my main point. I was talking about Operation Artic Endurance Objective: Deterrence against a US invasion of Greenland.
We refer to that island as Greenland, because it’s an autonomous region, and yes it’ protected by Denmark, EU & NATO.
Your metaphor is confusing because that wasn’t my main point. I was talking about Operation Artic Endurance Objective: Deterrence against a US invasion of Greenland.
As Greenland isn’t part of the EU, it’s probably not covered by EU mutual defense clause (but by NATO).
Greenlanders are EU citizens though. We’ll indeed have to see if the art. 42.7 defense clause holds.
The way you conmented made it seem like it had nithing to do with Denmark and tbat the other poster was incorrect. Wrong on noth counts.
Nope, not what I meant at all.
The commenter was saying (about the OP’s report which talks about intensified Ruzzian and Chinese agression) that:
“Still blind to the nation that threatened to invade Denmark” Meaning the US threat.
I then reacted by asking why then do the european military exercise up there since Davos?
What you meant and what you said are different things.
I can read the thread. Its much clearer than your summary. Maybe thats the problem. Clarity.