Well, howdy there, Internet people, it's Bell again.

So today, we're going to talk about whether Greenland could be held.

Recently, we went over whether the U.S. could take Greenland.

It was a question that was posed by one of you, and it's something we often go over when politicians somewhere want to send the youth of their country off to fight for some nebulous reason.

I'll put a link to that video down below, and it can provide some context to this.

But the short answer is yes.

The U.S. can take it, pretty easily.

But taking and holding aren't the same thing, as we've often covered, and as a lot of countries have learned recently.

The chain of events that could be set in motion by the U.S. attempting to use military

force against one of our closest allies, who also happens to be a member of NATO, is dramatic.

And while many of the normal things that are used to calculate whether a military can hold a country,

say the U.S. can.

There's a lot of other variables. Standard occupation math. 20 soldiers per 1,000 citizens.

Normally, this is where the analysis ends, because militaries don't want to commit enough troops, or they can't. And there's no reason to go further.

Military planners are also generally smart enough to avoid trying to take a country with a whole bunch of allies.

Make no mistake, a move to take Greenland is the end of NATO and the end of

the U.S. as a superpower. But that's a topic for another video. This is about the military aspects of it.

Fighting in the extreme climate of Greenland is something else.

Everything freezes and breaks.

Soldiers get frostbite.

Sentry duty is agony.

In the previous video, I mentioned the 11th Airborne.

...