Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The base is clearly there to protect the US, not Denmark.



Denmark would give the USA Greenland as payment for the USA defending Denmark from a Russian attack of Denmark borders. More spelled out I can't.


No. That’s what NATO is for- and why the US is allowed to have a military presence there already.


Trump is talking out of his ass.

The US doesn't need to annex Greenland, just set up a few bases there which can be more easily done. But even that has less benefits now than it had during the Cold War. If one wants to intercept hypersonic ICBMs they need satellites equipped with powerful lasers to zap'em. Kintetic interceptors in Greenland or space won't do.


> If one wants to intercept hypersonic ICBMs they need satellites equipped with powerful lasers to zap'em.

Are lasers the way to go? ICBMs appear to weigh several dozen tons. (e.g. https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/1044... )

You have to shine a lot of light on a 40-ton missile before you're going to interfere with the flight path. Would this approach work?


Dunno, it has to be some energy beam because kinetic ammo needs replenishing. In space. So laser, microwaves, EMP etc. Maybe it could ignite the ICBMs fuel somehow, as most of the missile's payload is the fuel.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: