How has Greenland failed to protect its country?
(Note that I use "its" without the apostrophe because it's a possessive pronoun, whereas "it's" is an abbreviation of "it is" or "it has".)

Greenland is protected under NATO, so the argument that it needs to be owned by the USA to be protected from foreign aggression is false. The irony is that the USA has weakened the NATO guarantee, which strengthens their argument for taking it by force - or "buying" it Mafia-style. The USA's actions towards Greenland remind me of another nuclear power currently attempting to take another country by force to gain access to its natural resources.

Can you publish the videos here? I have to verify my age on X to see them, which means I need to subscribe to Premium and upload Id. I'm on nostr precisely to avoid these controls.

Comprado! Confieso que tengo el pie en los dos mundos porque también tengo la lotería de la navidad. 🤑

Es irónico que Sumar quiera incluir un activo que no tiene valor intrínseco ni económico en una categoría fiscal que incluye los ingresos procedentes de la actividad económica. Es obviamente un ataque a los criptoactivos que se mantienen en autocustodia. Sumar es el epítome de la envidia hacia cualquiera que gana dinero y busca que la población en su conjunto sea lo más pobre posible.