Greenland

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
31,016
11,291
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Good morning all. What id Trump's Greenland game is really just another bait and switch tactic? What is he really after?
Good question. Great question actually. Currently, if Trump through American involvement in NATO has access to have military bases in Greenland, and more if he asks for them…what does he want because this rules out the military threat to Greenland other than by America?

From Captain Obvious, Prime Minister Mark Carney called Donald Trump’s talk of using economic coercion to acquire Greenland a worrisome escalation, saying he plans to tell the U.S. President the future security of the Arctic island can be safeguarded by NATO.😲…as if that hadn’t occurred or come up yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Taxslave2

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
28,849
8,290
113
B.C.
Good question. Great question actually. Currently, if Trump through American involvement in NATO has access to have military bases in Greenland, and more if he asks for them…what does he want because this rules out the military threat to Greenland other than by America?

From Captain Obvious, Prime Minister Mark Carney called Donald Trump’s talk of using economic coercion to acquire Greenland a worrisome escalation, saying he plans to tell the U.S. President the future security of the Arctic island can be safeguarded by NATO.😲…as if that hadn’t occurred or come up yet.
If the U.S. We’re to somehow to gain control of Greenland , they will more than likely build ice breakers and keep the seas open . I do not see the EU doing the same .
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
31,016
11,291
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Why , if they are already distancing themselves from NATO ?
They are distancing themselves from NATO why again? Over what again?
1768769934376.jpeg
Let me just make sure I’ve got this straight.
…if Trump through American involvement in NATO has access to have military bases in Greenland, and more if he asks for them…what does he want because this rules out the military threat to Greenland other than by America?
On Wednesday, Trump was asked if he was willing to leave the NATO alliance if the U.S. takes over Greenland?

“Certainly I’m not going to give up options but Greenland is very important for the national security including of Denmark,” he told reporters in the Oval Officebut if Trump (or America via Trump even though it’s a NATO member) takes Greenland, does he then get to choose what options he retains?
1768770994131.jpegSo…essentially…Trump/America are one of the 32 countries in NATO, and then Trump wants to annex/buy/take by force Greenland from another NATO nation, and is already threatening several NATO & EU nations with economic sanctions if they don’t agree to given him wants, that he already has access to…then he’ll maybe not be in NATO unless NATO agrees he can attack/coerce another NATO nation…with NATO being a mutual security pact between all NATO nations?
1768771128313.jpegSomething like that?
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
28,849
8,290
113
B.C.
They are distancing themselves from NATO why again? Over what again?
View attachment 32816
Let me just make sure I’ve got this straight.


View attachment 32817So…essentially…Trump/America are one of the 32 countries in NATO, and then Trump wants to annex/buy/take by force Greenland from another NATO nation, and is already threatening several NATO & EU nations with economic sanctions if they don’t agree to given him wants, that he already has access to…then he’ll maybe not be in NATO unless NATO agrees he can attack/coerce another NATO nation…with NATO being a mutual security pact between all NATO nations?
View attachment 32818Something like that?
NATO should have expired after the fall of the USSR . It has just become another unaccountable bureaucracy with America packing the freight .
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
31,016
11,291
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
NATO should have expired after the fall of the USSR . It has just become another unaccountable bureaucracy with America packing the freight .
…& if America wasn’t benefitting from being in NATO 30 years ago, it wouldn’t have been in NATO 30 years ago…but it was and is…so it’s at least a two-way street with America having a beneficial value to itself by being in NATO.

NATO is America’s anchor into Europe and its stepping stone to the Middle East and Africa away from the coastlines. Without NATO, America’s force protection decreases significantly, and then it’s military stockpiles in these NATO nations become either forfeit or irrelevant and forfeit to America’s force projection.

Then there’s security through intelligence sharing networks, and America would cut itself out of these 30+ nations security networks…& if NATO survives without America, it could fill the vacuum America’s departure creates, and in future conflicts it might then side with Entities other than America.

If you think that sounds like fiction, a year ago today would equally sound like fiction.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
31,016
11,291
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Maybe there’s a bit of an obligation for a NATO member not to threaten to annex through force territory of another NATO member… that is in the same defence pact. Maybe I’m speaking crazy talk though but…
 

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
15,349
2,941
113
Toronto, ON
Maybe there’s a bit of an obligation for a NATO member not to threaten to annex through force territory of another NATO member… that is in the same defence pact. Maybe I’m speaking crazy talk though but…
And he wonders why he doesn't win the Nobel Peace Prize!
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
31,016
11,291
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
And he wonders why he doesn't win the Nobel Peace Prize!
But he’s respecting the will of the American people?

Only a very small percentage of Americans are in favour of taking Greenland from Denmark by force, with recent polls indicating support as low as 4% to 9%.

The majority of Americans, typically over 70%, strongly oppose such a military action. For example, recent polls from January 2026 found the following:
  • A Quinnipiac University poll found that 9% of U.S. voters support taking Greenland by military force, while 86% are opposed.
  • A Reuters/Ipsos poll found that only 4% of Americans thought it would be a "good idea" to use military force to take possession of Greenland, with 71% saying it would be a "bad idea".
  • A YouGov poll indicated that 8% of Americans support using military force to take control of the island, with 73% opposing the idea.
Overall, majorities across all political affiliations (Democrats, Independents, and Republicans) oppose the use of military force against the U.S. ally.

Also, very few Americans support the United States using any form of coercion, including financial means, to acquire Greenland.

Specific poll findings related to financial offers and "extortion" (tariffs used as leverage) indicate:
  • Only 13% of Americans support a proposal to pay Greenland residents a large sum of money to encourage secession from Denmark and joining the U.S. (64% oppose).
  • When asked about U.S. efforts to acquire Greenland in general, which have involved a recent push using tariff threats against Denmark and other European allies, only 17% of Americans approved in a January 2026 Reuters/Ipsos poll.
  • A January 2026 Quinnipiac University poll found that 37% of respondents supported the U.S. attempting to purchase Greenland through a direct sale (without mention of "extortion") even though it’s not for sale, while 55% opposed.
Overall, polls consistently show that the majority of Americans oppose any non-consensual methods of acquisition, including overwhelming opposition to military force, and a general lack of support for using financial pressure.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
119,514
14,701
113
Low Earth Orbit
But he’s respecting the will of the American people?

Only a very small percentage of Americans are in favour of taking Greenland from Denmark by force, with recent polls indicating support as low as 4% to 9%.

The majority of Americans, typically over 70%, strongly oppose such a military action. For example, recent polls from January 2026 found the following:
  • A Quinnipiac University poll found that 9% of U.S. voters support taking Greenland by military force, while 86% are opposed.
  • A Reuters/Ipsos poll found that only 4% of Americans thought it would be a "good idea" to use military force to take possession of Greenland, with 71% saying it would be a "bad idea".
  • A YouGov poll indicated that 8% of Americans support using military force to take control of the island, with 73% opposing the idea.
Overall, majorities across all political affiliations (Democrats, Independents, and Republicans) oppose the use of military force against the U.S. ally.

Also, very few Americans support the United States using any form of coercion, including financial means, to acquire Greenland.

Specific poll findings related to financial offers and "extortion" (tariffs used as leverage) indicate:
  • Only 13% of Americans support a proposal to pay Greenland residents a large sum of money to encourage secession from Denmark and joining the U.S. (64% oppose).
  • When asked about U.S. efforts to acquire Greenland in general, which have involved a recent push using tariff threats against Denmark and other European allies, only 17% of Americans approved in a January 2026 Reuters/Ipsos poll.
  • A January 2026 Quinnipiac University poll found that 37% of respondents supported the U.S. attempting to purchase Greenland through a direct sale (without mention of "extortion") even though it’s not for sale, while 55% opposed.
Overall, polls consistently show that the majority of Americans oppose any non-consensual methods of acquisition, including overwhelming opposition to military force, and a general lack of support for using financial pressure.
Military....

What if he sends ICE?
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
28,849
8,290
113
B.C.
But he’s respecting the will of the American people?

Only a very small percentage of Americans are in favour of taking Greenland from Denmark by force, with recent polls indicating support as low as 4% to 9%.

The majority of Americans, typically over 70%, strongly oppose such a military action. For example, recent polls from January 2026 found the following:
  • A Quinnipiac University poll found that 9% of U.S. voters support taking Greenland by military force, while 86% are opposed.
  • A Reuters/Ipsos poll found that only 4% of Americans thought it would be a "good idea" to use military force to take possession of Greenland, with 71% saying it would be a "bad idea".
  • A YouGov poll indicated that 8% of Americans support using military force to take control of the island, with 73% opposing the idea.
Overall, majorities across all political affiliations (Democrats, Independents, and Republicans) oppose the use of military force against the U.S. ally.

Also, very few Americans support the United States using any form of coercion, including financial means, to acquire Greenland.

Specific poll findings related to financial offers and "extortion" (tariffs used as leverage) indicate:
  • Only 13% of Americans support a proposal to pay Greenland residents a large sum of money to encourage secession from Denmark and joining the U.S. (64% oppose).
  • When asked about U.S. efforts to acquire Greenland in general, which have involved a recent push using tariff threats against Denmark and other European allies, only 17% of Americans approved in a January 2026 Reuters/Ipsos poll.
  • A January 2026 Quinnipiac University poll found that 37% of respondents supported the U.S. attempting to purchase Greenland through a direct sale (without mention of "extortion") even though it’s not for sale, while 55% opposed.
Overall, polls consistently show that the majority of Americans oppose any non-consensual methods of acquisition, including overwhelming opposition to military force, and a general lack of support for using financial pressure.
Shit he could park an aircraft carrier in their biggest harbour and already outnumber the inhabitants.
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
28,849
8,290
113
B.C.
Do they do okay in the Arctic? Carriers I'm saying.
Who knows , the biggest I ever steered was 105 ft . And never went near the arctic . I for some reason wasn’t nuclear powered either . Some things just aren’t fair . Fish everywhere broken boat .
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
119,514
14,701
113
Low Earth Orbit
Do they do okay in the Arctic? Carriers I'm saying.
Who knows , the biggest I ever steered was 105 ft . And never went near the arctic . I for some reason wasn’t nuclear powered either . Some things just aren’t fair . Fish everywhere broken boat .
Good times.

I gotta find out
Arctic-Specific Challenges:
Ice & Cold: Traditional U.S. surface ships, including escorts, lack ice-hardened hulls and systems to counter ice buildup, unlike Russian vessels.

Escort Vulnerability: Smaller escort ships (destroyers, frigates) struggle with heavy ice and rough seas, facing greater risk.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
31,016
11,291
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Watched the above earlier this morning.

US President Donald Trump has said he no longer feels obliged to think only of peace after he was not awarded the Nobel Peace Prize last year. In a message to Norway's Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, Trump blamed the country for not giving him the prize.

In his reply to Trump, Støre explained that an independent committee, not the government of Norway, awards the prize which last October went to Venezuela's opposition leader María Corina Machado.

In the same message to Støre, Trump insisted the US needed "Complete and Total Control of Greenland" - the semi autonomous Danish territory. Asked later if he planned to use force to seize it, he replied "no comment".
1768911557756.jpeg
1768911586871.jpeg
1768911609929.jpeg
Denmark is a fellow member of Nato - a defence alliance with the US as its most influential partner. It works on the principle that members should defend each-other in case of external attacks. There has never been an attack by one member against another since the alliance was founded in 1949.

Denmark has warned that US military action in Greenland would spell the end of Nato (or at least America’s invol. It has received support from European members of the alliance - some even sent a handful of troops to Greenland last week in a move seen as symbolic.

However, Trump followed that deployment with an announcement to impose a 10% tariff on goods from eight Nato allies - including the UK - from 1 February if they opposed his proposed takeover of Greenland, and threatened to raise it to 25% by June.
In his reply, Trump wrote: "Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 Wars PLUS, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace, although it will always be predominant, but can now think about what is good and proper' for the US."

Trump has made no secret of his desire to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and on Monday insisted that "Norway totally controls it [the Nobel Prize] despite what they say". "They like to say they have nothing to do with it, but they have everything to do with it," he told NBC News. Trump says he deserves the award, having ended eight wars since his second term as president began last year.
Donald Trump’s thuggish demands for Greenland, an island that we already have unlimited military basing rights with, are now at a fever pitch. In the wake of his big show of force in Venezuela, he cannot rest until he has added it to his trophy case: Its acquisition is “psychologically needed for success.” So now not only will Denmark be tariffed — at an opening rate of 10 percent, escalating to 25 percent until such time as they give Trump what he demands — so too will ten other countries who have responded to Denmark’s symbolic request for NATO allies to come to Greenland.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
119,514
14,701
113
Low Earth Orbit
Watched the above earlier this morning.

US President Donald Trump has said he no longer feels obliged to think only of peace after he was not awarded the Nobel Peace Prize last year. In a message to Norway's Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, Trump blamed the country for not giving him the prize.

In his reply to Trump, Støre explained that an independent committee, not the government of Norway, awards the prize which last October went to Venezuela's opposition leader María Corina Machado.

In the same message to Støre, Trump insisted the US needed "Complete and Total Control of Greenland" - the semi autonomous Danish territory. Asked later if he planned to use force to seize it, he replied "no comment".
View attachment 32823
View attachment 32824
View attachment 32825
Denmark is a fellow member of Nato - a defence alliance with the US as its most influential partner. It works on the principle that members should defend each-other in case of external attacks. There has never been an attack by one member against another since the alliance was founded in 1949.

Denmark has warned that US military action in Greenland would spell the end of Nato (or at least America’s invol. It has received support from European members of the alliance - some even sent a handful of troops to Greenland last week in a move seen as symbolic.

However, Trump followed that deployment with an announcement to impose a 10% tariff on goods from eight Nato allies - including the UK - from 1 February if they opposed his proposed takeover of Greenland, and threatened to raise it to 25% by June.
In his reply, Trump wrote: "Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 Wars PLUS, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace, although it will always be predominant, but can now think about what is good and proper' for the US."

Trump has made no secret of his desire to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and on Monday insisted that "Norway totally controls it [the Nobel Prize] despite what they say". "They like to say they have nothing to do with it, but they have everything to do with it," he told NBC News. Trump says he deserves the award, having ended eight wars since his second term as president began last year.
Donald Trump’s thuggish demands for Greenland, an island that we already have unlimited military basing rights with, are now at a fever pitch. In the wake of his big show of force in Venezuela, he cannot rest until he has added it to his trophy case: Its acquisition is “psychologically needed for success.” So now not only will Denmark be tariffed — at an opening rate of 10 percent, escalating to 25 percent until such time as they give Trump what he demands — so too will ten other countries who have responded to Denmark’s symbolic request for NATO allies to come to Greenland.
Shouldn't he be cutting off and tariffing Israel and the Synagogue if Satan for him not getting the Peace Prize?

Supporting, arming and funding a genocide is not the way to acquire a Peace Prize.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
31,016
11,291
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Shouldn't he be cutting off and tariffing Israel and the Synagogue if Satan for him not getting the Peace Prize?

Supporting, arming and funding a genocide is not the way to acquire a Peace Prize.
Because….Greenland? I think Netanyahu gave him some kind of peace prize back in December….its not Nobel or FIFA, but more of a plaque or something.