Is Greenland next?

112,654 Views | 1331 Replies | Last: 1 mo ago by AtlantaGaAggie
bobbranco
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:21a, 1/26/26
Deny the China problem, spread disinformation and bury that head...

https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/americas-maritime-blind-spot-how-china-gaining-upper-hand-high-seas

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/issue-brief/chinas-exploitation-of-overseas-ports-and-bases/

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2025-china-ports/
Reply Quote
flown-the-coop
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bobbranco • 8:22a, 1/26/26
I think they are just trying to say that the deal to purchase base XYZ at $x on the 3rd of November, the year of our lord 2022 did not occur, so that statement several pages back about Chinese purchasing the only US base is indeed false cause certain specifics were not met.

It's better to just move on.
Reply Quote
Ag with kids
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to GAC06 • 9:08a, 1/26/26
GAC06 said:
What intelligence do you think China was getting from Panama before that they can't now?

What intelligence do you think they'd get from a tiny port in Greenland? Greenland has less than 100 miles of paved roads and no railroads. Not exactly a recipe for a bustling shipping hub. Now maybe down the line if more commercially viable mineral deposits come around that could change somewhat.

In any case what are we even arguing about? I was simply refuting the claim that we needed a new deal because they wanted to sell our base to China, which was false.

I'm not really arguing.

Just pointing out those things...
Reply Quote
nortex97
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:22a, 1/29/26
Greenlanders seem to be moving to approve of Trump deal:

Surprising no one who has been paying any attention.
Reply Quote
bmks270
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:13p, 1/29/26
What is the proposed deal?
Reply Quote
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:58p, 1/31/26
Warning language but like all of his streams, entertaining and informative.

Reply Quote
Who?mikejones!
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ed Harley • 7:35a, 3/3/26
Ed Harley said:
Who?mikejones! said:
Ed Harley said:
I have no problem with Maduro being taken out. I was in favor of bombing Iran and doing it again if necessary. I'm hawkish on foreign policy.

But I don't understand the desire to take over Greenland, other than a straight land grab.

Can someone enlighten me?


Self defense purposes

I'll admit I'm not as much of a history of buff as many on this board are, but I'm also not even close to ignorant on the subject.

I can't recall our foreign policy ever including commandeering a country/territory SOLELY for defense purposes (ie without even a pretextual reason for taking it over).

Seems like a bad idea if that's the only reason. And the talk about it isn't helpful.


Bump
Reply Quote
YouBet
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bmks270 • 7:59a, 3/3/26
bmks270 said:
What is the proposed deal?


Best I can do:

Quote:
Trump told CNBC in an interview after speaking with reporters that the framework is "a little bit complex" and "we'll explain it down the line" when asked if it is a potential deal of ownership.

Trump also told the outlet "they're going to be involved in the golden dome, and they're going to be involved in mineral rights, and so are we."


Funny.

Quote:
When asked when he would discuss the matter with the Danes, Trump said he would talk with Rutte instead.

"He's frankly more important," the president declared.
Reply Quote
aggiedata
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:14a, 3/3/26
Reply Quote
flown-the-coop
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiedata • 9:34a, 3/3/26
Engaged in a brief discussion on the main Iran war thread but it was "off topic".

The empty saber case rattling by Spain, UK, EU, etc absolutely validated the Trump admin position on Greenland.

I seriously think people are just overly naive or patently ******ed to think we can just "trust" in treaties, leases, agreements and such when it comes to conflict, war, pushing and shoving.

Trump gets it. Seems many if not all of his cabinet get it. I get it, many others here get it.

But for the life of me I cannot understand the concept of making the USA subservient to anyone. F that.

America first means whatever we say it means. If that's owning Greenland... fine.
Reply Quote
SteveA
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to flown-the-coop • 9:43a, 3/3/26
Quote:
America first means whatever we say it means. If that's owning Greenland... fine.

Nah. Taking over another country for a proxy is not fine.
Reply Quote
flown-the-coop
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to SteveA • 9:47a, 3/3/26
SteveA said:
Quote:
America first means whatever we say it means. If that's owning Greenland... fine.

Nah. Taking over another country for a proxy is not fine.

Sorry, it is.
Reply Quote
Ellis Wyatt
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to SteveA • 9:48a, 3/3/26
SteveA said:
Quote:
America first means whatever we say it means. If that's owning Greenland... fine.

Nah. Taking over another country for a proxy is not fine.

It isn't really for a proxy. It is for a guarantee of access, something our "allies" aren't reliable for anymore. The west has fallen.
Reply Quote
SteveA
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ellis Wyatt • 9:54a, 3/3/26
Serious question. Why are they no longer reliable?
Reply Quote
Who?mikejones!
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to SteveA • 10:19a, 3/3/26
Ask Spain, france, italy or Britain, all.who have made decisions to either not allow or severely limit access to using their our bases, their bases or their airspace
Reply Quote
flown-the-coop
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:26a, 3/3/26
Why are people against us taking over Greenland?

Are we set to enslave the first peoples and remaining Danes and make them harvest whale oil and glacier ice to supply the Trump Ice Club & Luge Course that will be built on sacred land there?

Any takeover by the US will almost certainly line the pockets of the Danes and also the locals along with a gigantic of cash and development there.

US takeover of Greenland will be the best thing that could have ever happened to the place.
Reply Quote
SteveA
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Who?mikejones! • 10:40a, 3/3/26
Quote:
Ask Spain, france, italy or Britain, all.who have made decisions to either not allow or severely limit access to using their our bases, their bases or their airspace

Well, would you let an ally launch strikes agains a close state like Iran from our bases? Iran can retaliate much easier against Europe that it can the US. Why would they paint themselves as a bigger target? You must see that. And the Greenland thing has been going on longer than recent issues with these bases.
Reply Quote
AtlantaGaAggie
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to flown-the-coop • 10:40a, 3/3/26
flown-the-coop said:
Why are people against us taking over Greenland?

Are we set to enslave the first peoples and remaining Danes and make them harvest whale oil and glacier ice to supply the Trump Ice Club & Luge Course that will be built on sacred land there?

Any takeover by the US will almost certainly line the pockets of the Danes and also the locals along with a gigantic of cash and development there.

US takeover of Greenland will be the best thing that could have ever happened to the place.


You don't see an issue invading an Allie's territory? What would make us different from Russia and Ukraine? We just take what we want when we want?
Reply Quote
flown-the-coop
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AtlantaGaAggie • 10:44a, 3/3/26
AtlantaGaAggie said:
flown-the-coop said:
Why are people against us taking over Greenland?

Are we set to enslave the first peoples and remaining Danes and make them harvest whale oil and glacier ice to supply the Trump Ice Club & Luge Course that will be built on sacred land there?

Any takeover by the US will almost certainly line the pockets of the Danes and also the locals along with a gigantic of cash and development there.

US takeover of Greenland will be the best thing that could have ever happened to the place.


You don't see an issue invading an Allie's territory? What would make us different from Russia and Ukraine? We just take what we want when we want?

Yes. Doesn't mean we cannot be nice about it. And if nice doesn't work then not as nice is used.

I have no issue with Ukraines right to defend itself. Greenland and Denmark are welcome to defend themselves.

I am not Russian so it's not up to me to determine what is and is not in Russias interest as a going sovereign.
Reply Quote
SteveA
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to flown-the-coop • 10:44a, 3/3/26
Quote:
Why are people against us taking over Greenland?

Are we set to enslave the first peoples and remaining Danes and make them harvest whale oil and glacier ice to supply the Trump Ice Club & Luge Course that will be built on sacred land there?

Any takeover by the US will almost certainly line the pockets of the Danes and also the locals along with a gigantic of cash and development there.

US takeover of Greenland will be the best thing that could have ever happened to the place.

People are against annexing sovereign nation's land when it is unwanted. Regardless how strategic it is, taking that land by force isn't something the US should do.
Reply Quote
AtlantaGaAggie
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to flown-the-coop • 10:47a, 3/3/26
I'm glad you're not in charge then. If you determined Iceland was in our best interest we'd take that too? Where does it stop?

That's a serious departure from historical norms on how the US has operated in the world.

I don't want a US policy that just says invade countries without provocation because we think it's good for us.

The average American won't support that policy either.
Reply Quote
SteveA
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to flown-the-coop • 10:48a, 3/3/26
Quote:
I have no issue with Ukraines right to defend itself. Greenland and Denmark are welcome to defend themselves.

I am not Russian so it's not up to me to determine what is and is not in Russias interest as a going sovereign.

This is absurd. We are not Russia. We are not Nazi Germany. The fact that this is even a conversation is crazy.
Reply Quote
flown-the-coop
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AtlantaGaAggie • 10:52a, 3/3/26
AtlantaGaAggie said:
I'm glad you're not in charge then. If you determined Iceland was in our best interest we'd take that too? Where does it stop?

That's a serious departure from historical norms on how the US has operated in the world.

I don't want a US policy that just says invade countries without provocation because we think it's good for us.

The average American won't support that policy either.

I do. And nearly 80 million of my friends agreed, hence we elected Donald to do this.

Yes, if Iceland is of enough strategic interest to us then it can be the "Cool Hawaii" replete with its own black sand beaches and volcanoes.

How is this even a convo? And we sort of just did this in Venezuela and Iran. We will go in, adjust things as we see fit, and move on.

Enough of being a bunch of pansies meeting in Davos picking winners and losers whilst giving each other handies in the hot tubs.
Reply Quote
AtlantaGaAggie
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to flown-the-coop • 11:02a, 3/3/26
You're misunderstanding what they voted for. They did not vote to just start invading countries. You're in the a very small minority on this topic.

I would fully expect Congress to stop anything even remotely that appears as whole sale invasions of ally countries.

Additionally - Trump ran on no new wars and removing war mongers from his cabinet. The position you're taking is exactly the opposite of what he campaigned against.

Iran doesn't even align to what he campaigned for but he'll get latitude because it's Iran. Invading ally countries will quickly create an uproar.
Reply Quote
SteveA
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to flown-the-coop • 11:07a, 3/3/26
User name checks out.
Reply Quote
flown-the-coop
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AtlantaGaAggie • 11:08a, 3/3/26
AtlantaGaAggie said:
You're misunderstanding what they voted for. They did not vote to just start invading countries. You're in the a very small minority on this topic.

I would fully expect Congress to stop anything even remotely that appears as whole sale invasions of ally countries.

Additionally - Trump ran on no new wars and removing war mongers from his cabinet. The position you're taking is exactly the opposite of what he campaigned against.

Iran doesn't even align to what he campaigned for but he'll get latitude because it's Iran. Invading ally countries will quickly create an uproar.

Wrong.

We voted to put America first and that means cleaning up some very real threats and problems facing us, including Iran and its declared jihad on the United States and its allies, Maduro sending criminals, drugs and terrorists across our borders to rape, plunder and pillage our cities and people, and showing the rest of the world we mean business.

Trump just announced a total embargo of trade with Spain. And he is threatening a heavy hand on the UK over their Diego Garcia ****nannery.

I am not in a small minority in what i believe on this, just in the small minority with the wits and balls to vocalize it.
Reply Quote
Ellis Wyatt
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to SteveA • 11:08a, 3/3/26
Keir Starmer is an authoritarian and a marxist. For one.

They care nothing about Americans beyond our money.
Reply Quote
Ellis Wyatt
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to SteveA • 11:10a, 3/3/26
Isn't that the point? They don't care about us.

Our national defense should never be at the whims of socialists and marxists. They'll never look out for us.
Reply Quote
1 edit
Who?mikejones!
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to SteveA • 11:11a, 3/3/26
SteveA said:
Quote:
Ask Spain, france, italy or Britain, all.who have made decisions to either not allow or severely limit access to using their our bases, their bases or their airspace

Well, would you let an ally launch strikes agains a close state like Iran from our bases? Iran can retaliate much easier against Europe that it can the US. Why would they paint themselves as a bigger target? You must see that. And the Greenland thing has been going on longer than recent issues with these bases.


If we relied on Spain for our greater security needs, then yes.

But we dont and they do rely on us to protect them.

But, the question is why trump wants to own greenland. This is the answer.

Greenland is a far more important defense need than most people realize. Its important for sea lanes, for space defense, for telecommunications and for land based defense, both European and artic.

We cant have anyone who will attempt to restrict what we can or can't do there because the political winds change in Denmark or the eu.
Reply Quote
1 edit
flown-the-coop
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:13a, 3/3/26
Bessent and Greer put on front street in the oval discussing trade, tariffs and embargo's.

I'm scared to look at the markets. Foreign policy making happening as hoc in front of the press and the German chancellor.

Entertaining but the traders have to be white knuckling trying to figure out the impacts as they are announced!
Reply Quote
AtlantaGaAggie
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to flown-the-coop • 11:31a, 3/3/26
Sorry- you're out of touch on this topic. We won't agree so there is no point in continuing this discussion.

It doesn't matter either - what you're advocating isn't going to happen. We are not going to invade Greenland.
Reply Quote
flown-the-coop
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AtlantaGaAggie • 11:45a, 3/3/26
AtlantaGaAggie said:
Sorry- you're out of touch on this topic. We won't agree so there is no point in continuing this discussion.

It doesn't matter either - what you're advocating isn't going to happen. We are not going to invade Greenland.

I'm not advocating for us to invade. We will just buy it one way or another. I am telling you that if we determine it to be of strategic necessity it will be ours.

I am way more in touch in this topic than you are. Spain and the UK just ensured that Greenland will be a US territory.

And that's a great thing for many, many reasons. Why are people so hatin on it?
Reply Quote
AtlantaGaAggie
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to flown-the-coop • 11:48a, 3/3/26
Nobody is against us buying them. If they want to be sold- great. We'll take them and I look forward to my next vacation there freezing!

If it requires any military intervention then you won't have broad support.
Reply Quote
flown-the-coop
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AtlantaGaAggie • 11:58a, 3/3/26
I dont think it would require military intervention, but I think it would be rational to use such force if the Danes want to tussle.

Let me lay out for you how the US military takeover of Greenland plays out.

Trump: hello sir, this is Donald, wanted to let you know I changed the map and Greenland is now called Trumps Ice Island.

Danish: you most certainly cannot change the map! How dare you! We most strenuously object! We will take this up with the UN!

Trump: we already told the UN and they are cool with it. We explained it to them in terms they can understand.

As the Dems, MSM and the EU along with international media go "REEeeeeh!!!", we will be setting up shop.

You don't honestly thing the Danes are going to point a rifle at us and tell us to go away or they will… shoot?!
Reply Quote
YouBet
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to flown-the-coop • 12:02p, 3/3/26
flown-the-coop said:
Bessent and Greer put on front street in the oval discussing trade, tariffs and embargo's.

I'm scared to look at the markets. Foreign policy making happening as hoc in front of the press and the German chancellor.

Entertaining but the traders have to be white knuckling trying to figure out the impacts as they are announced!


As an example, Trump just casually throws out that are halting all trade with Spain and want nothing to do with them while answering a question about Iran.

Everyone in room...."Whaaattttt?"
Reply Quote
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.