I guess the headline has been changed? The HN title says "illegally drills wells" but the article now says "prepares to drill".
Reading the article and the linked government statement, it sounds like the issue is that the company did receive permits to ship their equipment to one location in Greenland, and then moved that equipment to a second location without permission, while the overall drilling operation is still waiting for approval.
Still bad in the sense that they're presumably trying to push boundaries, but it's a far cry from actually carrying out "illegal drilling".
While you're waffling on whether it's technically "illegal drilling" or "illegal not-yet-drilling":
1. the US president has previously threatened a war of conquest in Greenland, a territory of a NATO nation
2. the executive chair of the firm that is doing the illegal not-yet-drilling -- and also a top stakeholder -- is friends with said US president and donated to his campaigns.
The article reads like the act of landing the drilling equipment in Greenland was in itself illegal. Not the same as drilling, and ofc IANAL, but still...
A large part of the problem is that trust has gone completely out of the window, because the US is being run by an autocratic rapist. This phrasing isn't meant to be inflammatory, rather I'm merely describing a technical problem here - someone who doesn't respect "no", the idea of consent, the rule of law, etc. The reality itself is what is inflammatory.
> I guess the headline has been changed? The HN title says "illegally drills wells" but the article now says "prepares to drill".
Unrelated to the topic here, but does anyone else get pissed when news sites change articles, without any indication, without any differences and/or old version linked somewhere?
I've sometimes read the article, had a whole argument with someone, where they quoted something from the article that completely changed the meaning of the first version of the article and what I was arguing about. With more and more sites blocking archiving services (archive.org etc.), it's even harder to find the original texts, some existing for weeks or even months before being changed.... it gives me a total "Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia" vibe.
No news sites change headlines and edit articles all the time. Often there's a "last updated" date on the article and it can be days or weeks later than the original posting date. The last-updated date is better than nothing, but without a changelog it's very hard to know what version of the article you or anyone else read at any given time.
As an American, we've had to watch this administration almost directly defy our own Supreme Court. A "warning" from Greenland or Denmark that doesn't include ordnance pointed at those shipping containers isn't going to mean anything.
The tagline of the Trump administration is "who's going to stop me?"
The TACOs have never been unilateral, you need some sort of pain they care about. The bond market spiking interest rates contained the worst of the tariffs, SCOTUS rulings have curtailed some of his more egregious abuses, protests and their fallout (innocent people getting killed) helped to contain ICE.
Denmark and/or Greenland needs to seize those containers, keep them under armed guard, and then give Greenland Energy a reasonable deadline to come and retrieve them or else they'll be destroyed.
I don't see the contradiction. "Who's going to stop me?" implies that the expectation is for no one to stop him. But when someone eventually does, it's TACO time.
We've elected a president who couldn't care less about the country, much less its allies, has no knowledge or experience relevant to governing, and who chooses his underlings based solely on their looks and sycophancy. It's a fun experiment!
> We've elected a president who couldn't care less about the country,
Worse: from day one, he enacted a playbook designed to sabotage the country within and abroad. This administration is a wet dream for every US adversary.
A stiff warning! This needs to be nipped in the bud, equipment confiscated, people arrested. Using a military force if needs be. It's the only way bullies understand.
Then Trump would have a good pretext to invade, to "protect Americans and their property/interests". They have to be careful about how they do this because the biggest bully is watching and ready to intervene.
I do know why you were down-voted, maybe the swear.
But yes, easy enough to stop them arrest the execs and block access to the area. All I can guess is that will happen if that company starts off-loading the equipment.
Greenland Energy has retained Phil McGraw, better known as Dr Phil, a prominent rightwing former chatshow host who served on Trump’s religious freedom commission, to make a documentary series that will “capture the mission of these modern-day wildcatters”.
Beyond parody.
EDIT: To clarify, Greenland Energy is a Texas based company.
Denmark needs to send in their military that was preparing to destroy airport runways and instead destroy that equipment before it is too late
Jeff Landry is just going to get a federal pardon, may already have it written and in his pocket already
There's video of this massive container ship unloading all those containers already:
> A Greenland Energy representative has said a vessel carrying its 300 shipping containers of drilling equipment is to set sail from Canada on 12 September. Sinking the wells would begin in October
> Jeff Landry, the hard-right Louisiana governor serving as Trump’s Greenland envoy, has said Greenland could be pumping oil next year
adding: video segment from Rachel Maddow Show last night on this subject
So let me get this straight - a foreign company landed their gear on Greenland without authorisation and is starting to drill for oil without permission. And the government's response is a strongly worded letter?
Why would you not just send the local police to shut it down, impound the ship and expel the people running it? Surely thats trespass, vandalism of public property, theft, illegal importation of goods etc.
> So let me get this straight - a foreign company landed their gear on Greenland without authorisation and is starting to drill for oil without permission
No, you didn't get it straight. When you re-read it you will see they have not started drilling, but are preparing to start once they get permission (their application is currently under processing).
Not equivalent, inclusive of. Starting to do x can absolutely include getting ready to do x.
When I'm starting to go to bed, I usually take the dogs out one last time, go turn the lights off, etc.
When I'm starting a new team, that might mean selling execs on the idea that I need headcount, finding space for them to sit, etc. all of which are also getting ready.
> For one, getting ready means you have NOT started to do the thing.
Is a provocation to test the Danish reaction and to make people forget about Iran.
Is also a real risk of a faux flag operation to force the US army to enter the area "in defense of the US citizens that were just doing their drilling job and were unfairly attacked".
See: Rachel Maddow: Is this how we invade Greenland?!
Greenland is a haphazard country of many little islands without connected roads
there's no local police to swoop in and arrest foreigners
that's actually how Landry is getting with it under Trump's support
Denmark must send in their military and destroy all the equipment like they were preparing to destroy runways when Trump was going to invade (this is still a stealth invasion)
That's either very very naive or a joke about how it's absolutely an invasion, but the admin will call it something "inoffensive". Hard to tell these days.
>”They could grant permission for oil drilling, even though the planned wells appear to fall within a conservation area protected by the Ramsar convention on wetlands. Or they could refuse and, some worry, give Trump a pretext to advance his imperialist agenda.”
I guess the headline has been changed? The HN title says "illegally drills wells" but the article now says "prepares to drill".
Reading the article and the linked government statement, it sounds like the issue is that the company did receive permits to ship their equipment to one location in Greenland, and then moved that equipment to a second location without permission, while the overall drilling operation is still waiting for approval.
Still bad in the sense that they're presumably trying to push boundaries, but it's a far cry from actually carrying out "illegal drilling".
While you're waffling on whether it's technically "illegal drilling" or "illegal not-yet-drilling":
1. the US president has previously threatened a war of conquest in Greenland, a territory of a NATO nation
2. the executive chair of the firm that is doing the illegal not-yet-drilling -- and also a top stakeholder -- is friends with said US president and donated to his campaigns.
That can all be true, but this is still posturing and they haven't yet broken any laws.
The article reads like the act of landing the drilling equipment in Greenland was in itself illegal. Not the same as drilling, and ofc IANAL, but still...
A large part of the problem is that trust has gone completely out of the window, because the US is being run by an autocratic rapist. This phrasing isn't meant to be inflammatory, rather I'm merely describing a technical problem here - someone who doesn't respect "no", the idea of consent, the rule of law, etc. The reality itself is what is inflammatory.
[dead]
> While you're waffling on whether it's technically "illegal drilling" or "illegal not-yet-drilling"
What double speak.
You cannot be guilty of something if you’re not doing it.
[dead]
> I guess the headline has been changed?
No. Check internet archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20260808055323/https://www.thegu...
The HN poster got the title wrong.
Hn has strict length limits that often force people to editorialize. They could be more careful to not alter the meaning when they do so.
The correct title was within the HN title length limit.
And it was previously submitted under that title: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49251785
> I guess the headline has been changed? The HN title says "illegally drills wells" but the article now says "prepares to drill".
Unrelated to the topic here, but does anyone else get pissed when news sites change articles, without any indication, without any differences and/or old version linked somewhere?
I've sometimes read the article, had a whole argument with someone, where they quoted something from the article that completely changed the meaning of the first version of the article and what I was arguing about. With more and more sites blocking archiving services (archive.org etc.), it's even harder to find the original texts, some existing for weeks or even months before being changed.... it gives me a total "Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia" vibe.
> when news sites change articles, without any indication, without any differences and/or old version linked somewhere?
I take that as a strong indication that the news outlet is not to be trusted.
How do you know you’re not gaslighting yourself?
Maybe the article never changed, it always read how the other person interpreted it.
You read it through your filters and took something completely different than what it said.
I’ve seen this happen heaps. Even with articles where I’ve been able to prove it hasn’t been edited, and books too.
No news sites change headlines and edit articles all the time. Often there's a "last updated" date on the article and it can be days or weeks later than the original posting date. The last-updated date is better than nothing, but without a changelog it's very hard to know what version of the article you or anyone else read at any given time.
This article is borderline ragebait. Just read the actual Greenland government statement to know what’s happening.
https://naalakkersuisut.gl/Nyheder/2026/07/3007_80_Mile
The US is no longer a trusted partner. Actually hasn't been for quite a while.
As an American I’d like Europe to stand up to Trump. If little Iran can, so can Europe.
lets see if the vassal states of USA will let one of their own getting sucked dry.
As an American, we've had to watch this administration almost directly defy our own Supreme Court. A "warning" from Greenland or Denmark that doesn't include ordnance pointed at those shipping containers isn't going to mean anything.
The tagline of the Trump administration is "who's going to stop me?"
Given the other tagline is TACO[1], I guess the “who's going to stop me?” is less rhetorical and more literal.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_Always_Chickens_Out
The TACOs have never been unilateral, you need some sort of pain they care about. The bond market spiking interest rates contained the worst of the tariffs, SCOTUS rulings have curtailed some of his more egregious abuses, protests and their fallout (innocent people getting killed) helped to contain ICE.
Denmark and/or Greenland needs to seize those containers, keep them under armed guard, and then give Greenland Energy a reasonable deadline to come and retrieve them or else they'll be destroyed.
I don't see the contradiction. "Who's going to stop me?" implies that the expectation is for no one to stop him. But when someone eventually does, it's TACO time.
What’s Greenland going to do? Make a strongly worded statement? They’re kinda out of options.
Seize the equipment and people.
Seriously that's the most likely outcome here. Everyone on the ground gets detained and deported. And loses a bunch of money.
... and expect the executive branch to be maduro-ed away into some secret cia torture place or straight Guantanamo
How do you figure they are out of options?! There are many steps between mere statements and actual war. Economic sanctions for one.
We've elected a president who couldn't care less about the country, much less its allies, has no knowledge or experience relevant to governing, and who chooses his underlings based solely on their looks and sycophancy. It's a fun experiment!
> We've elected a president who couldn't care less about the country,
Worse: from day one, he enacted a playbook designed to sabotage the country within and abroad. This administration is a wet dream for every US adversary.
Please fix the inflammatory clickbait title to the actual Guardian headline:
Greenland issues ‘strong warning’ as Trump-linked oil firm prepares to drill
the timetable in the article is completely wrong or has been radically accelerated
that massive 300 container delivery due in September and then drilling in October has already been completely unloaded NOW, months ahead
there's no "prepare" it's already in progress
F*cking hell.
A stiff warning! This needs to be nipped in the bud, equipment confiscated, people arrested. Using a military force if needs be. It's the only way bullies understand.
Then Trump would have a good pretext to invade, to "protect Americans and their property/interests". They have to be careful about how they do this because the biggest bully is watching and ready to intervene.
I do know why you were down-voted, maybe the swear.
But yes, easy enough to stop them arrest the execs and block access to the area. All I can guess is that will happen if that company starts off-loading the equipment.
[flagged]
EDIT: To clarify, Greenland Energy is a Texas based company.
That is one of the most insane sequence of words I've had the misfortune to read in quite a while.
Denmark needs to send in their military that was preparing to destroy airport runways and instead destroy that equipment before it is too late
Jeff Landry is just going to get a federal pardon, may already have it written and in his pocket already
There's video of this massive container ship unloading all those containers already:
> A Greenland Energy representative has said a vessel carrying its 300 shipping containers of drilling equipment is to set sail from Canada on 12 September. Sinking the wells would begin in October
> Jeff Landry, the hard-right Louisiana governor serving as Trump’s Greenland envoy, has said Greenland could be pumping oil next year
adding: video segment from Rachel Maddow Show last night on this subject
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGpC91qs8yA
It'd be interesting to see if they wait until it's built and then nationalize it.
Maybe Iran should join NATO to defend Denmark/Greenland. /s
So let me get this straight - a foreign company landed their gear on Greenland without authorisation and is starting to drill for oil without permission. And the government's response is a strongly worded letter?
Why would you not just send the local police to shut it down, impound the ship and expel the people running it? Surely thats trespass, vandalism of public property, theft, illegal importation of goods etc.
> So let me get this straight - a foreign company landed their gear on Greenland without authorisation and is starting to drill for oil without permission
No, you didn't get it straight. When you re-read it you will see they have not started drilling, but are preparing to start once they get permission (their application is currently under processing).
Thats what I meant by "starting to drill".
> Thats what I meant by "starting to drill".
In your mind "starting to do something" is equivalent to "getting ready to do something"?
That's weird.
For one, getting ready means you have NOT started to do the thing.
Why confuse the two?
Not equivalent, inclusive of. Starting to do x can absolutely include getting ready to do x.
When I'm starting to go to bed, I usually take the dogs out one last time, go turn the lights off, etc.
When I'm starting a new team, that might mean selling execs on the idea that I need headcount, finding space for them to sit, etc. all of which are also getting ready.
> For one, getting ready means you have NOT started to do the thing.
Started and starting are very very different.
Is a provocation to test the Danish reaction and to make people forget about Iran.
Is also a real risk of a faux flag operation to force the US army to enter the area "in defense of the US citizens that were just doing their drilling job and were unfairly attacked".
See: Rachel Maddow: Is this how we invade Greenland?!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGpC91qs8yA
This is a direct stab to NATO in the heart. And EU market is being closed for USA at full speed.
Greenland is a haphazard country of many little islands without connected roads
there's no local police to swoop in and arrest foreigners
that's actually how Landry is getting with it under Trump's support
Denmark must send in their military and destroy all the equipment like they were preparing to destroy runways when Trump was going to invade (this is still a stealth invasion)
> this is still a stealth invasion
what is a stealth invasion?
I'd guess an invasion that's pretending not to be an invasion.
It's not an invasion, it's a special drilling operation.
That's either very very naive or a joke about how it's absolutely an invasion, but the admin will call it something "inoffensive". Hard to tell these days.
>”They could grant permission for oil drilling, even though the planned wells appear to fall within a conservation area protected by the Ramsar convention on wetlands. Or they could refuse and, some worry, give Trump a pretext to advance his imperialist agenda.”