|
|
|
|
|
|
by fritzorino
156 days ago
|
|
|
You misquote. The article says that the islands may be seized if they were transferred to another European power, and especially if transferred to Germany. The article does not that they would have simply been seized regardless. |
|
|
It's clear that the threat of Denmark falling into the hands/influence of another power, not the fall itself, was enough. In case it wasn't clear, Lansing writes "the possible consequence of absorption," not, "the absorption of Denmark."
The US position was that Denmark was too small and weak to remain neutral or defend the islands. Therefore, as long as the islands remained Danish, they were a security risk to the US.