Republican Senator Tom Cotton Admits He Suggested to Trump U.S. Should Buy Greenland

@Th1nkF1rst

Yes, he did.

And so did Abraham Lincoln. (Iceland would have been part of THAT deal)

@beckyromero There are people who live in Greenland and own property, homes, and businesses. You just can't sell their citizenship and their property. The world doesn't work that way anymore.

@quitwhendone

They'd get dual citizenship.

It won't be like Hong Kong.

Heck, we'll even give polar bears dual citizenship.

@beckyromero How would you feel if Trump sold your state to Denmark?

@quitwhendone

It would mean I wouldn't need a passport to visit Greenland, for one.

But, there's no Constitutional mechanism for a state to leave the Union.

The key question with Greenland might be self-determination (and the Danish constitution).

What if the people of Greenland are pursuaded to the point that they eventually WANT to be part of the United States?

@beckyromero Yeah, last time it happened it was an all-out war. It cost the lives of over 600,000 troops. I live in a state that was part of a US purchase back when Jefferson was president. Nobody asked the French citizens here if they wanted to be US citizens. They just did it. Thankfully, that sort of thing doesn't happen anymore.

@quitwhendone
You have prefered the continuance of OWNING people?

@beckyromero Of course not. I'm just saying states leaving caused the country to fight to keep them.

@quitwhendone The world does still work that way, and always will.

@LesserUgly Actually, it doesn't. Transferring land from one sovereignty to another wouldn't fly without approval of the people living in the land.

@quitwhendone tell that to the Karen in Myanmar.

@quitwhendone Actually no one owns land in Greenland!
Only the Danish government, who allows you to build upon a requested parcel and live or work there.
There is a land use lottery, until you get drawn you have to rent.

@Th1nkF1rst interesting. I didn't know that. Is that for the Danes or the indigenous people as well?

@quitwhendone furthermore there is something called eminent domain which exists in different forms in most countries where land can be taken from private citizens of their government.

In international settings, land transfer actually had little bearing on the inhabitants of a place. Power structures dictate who owns what. Hong Kong is a great example of this. Britain decided to hand it to the Chinese, the Chinese decided to allow it to be a Special Economic Zone granting it semi autonomy, and they simply decide when that is over as seen in current affairs. Autonomy is dictated by factors including how much of a hassle it is to govern as well. Transnistria is an unrecognized country that technically belongs to Moldova, but Moldova can't get their shit in order enough to be bothered by it. Kaw Thoo Lei is part of Myanmar as per the 1947 Burmese constitution but has been in a civil war ever since. Myanmar can't maintain functional control over much of Kaw Thoo Lei, but regardless, they still own it. You still need a Burmese visa to go there. So yes, having the locals on board is helpful, but it isn't necessary. As far as Greenland goes, 57,171 people isn't exactly enough people to have a say in what larger governments dictate. If Denmark chose to sell Greenland to anyone, which they aren't, the populace would not have a say in the matter.