Greenlanders Don't Consent To Becoming Americans
Residents of the chilly island coveted by President Trump favor independence—and subsidies.
According to President Donald Trump, taking possession of Greenland is a national security necessity. It's so critical, he claims, that he's willing to take the chilly island the "easy way" or the "hard way." Denmark, which governs Greenland, isn't eager to surrender the territory. Even more important, the residents of Greenland, most of whom don't especially want to be Danish, have even less interest in becoming American. The leader of a country founded on high-minded sentiments about the "consent of the governed" should consider taking that into account.
You are reading The Rattler from J.D. Tuccille and Reason. Get more of J.D.'s commentary on government overreach and threats to everyday liberty.
Acquiring Greenland 'the Easy Way' or 'the Hard Way'
"The United States needs Greenland for the purpose of National Security. It is vital for the Golden Dome that we are building," the president posted January 14 on Truth Social. "NATO should be leading the way for us to get it. IF WE DON'T, RUSSIA OR CHINA WILL, AND THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!"
At the White House days earlier, Trump had commented, "We are going to do something in Greenland, whether they like it or not, because if we don't do it, Russia or China will take over Greenland, and we're not going to have Russia or China as a neighbor." He then added, "If we don't do it the easy way, we're going to do it the hard way."
"The president has made his view clear, and we have a different position," Danish Foreign Minister (and former prime minister) Lars Løkke Rasmussen politely responded.
More firmly, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, the prime minister of Greenland, which enjoys autonomous status within Denmark, snapped, "If we have to choose between the US and Denmark here and now, then we choose Denmark. We choose NATO, the Kingdom of Denmark and the EU."
That was actually a remarkable response given that Nielsen leads a political party—the Democrats—which came in first in the island's last general election, in March 2025, on a platform of free markets and independence for Greenland. He leads a coalition that favors independence and governs people who voice majority support for Greenland to stand alone as a sovereign nation.
Greenlanders Want To Be American Even Less Than They Want to Be Danish
"56% of Greenlanders answer that they would vote yes to Greenlandic independence if a referendum were held today, 28% would vote no, and 17% do not know what they would vote for," The Verian Group announced a year ago about a survey it conducted in Greenland.
With regard to Trump's long-voiced desire to acquire Greenland for the United States, Verian's Camilla Kann Fjeldsøe added, "the results show that 85% of Greenlanders do not want to leave the Realm and become part of the United States, while 6% want to leave the Danish Realm and become part of the United States, whereas the remaining 9% are undecided."
Greenland's 57,000 people don't want to be Danish, but they really don't want to be American. If forced to choose between remaining an appendage of one country or joining another, they'll likely take the devil they know over the one they don't.
What About the Consent of the Governed?
That's a problem for Trump's imperial ambitions—annexing Greenland would have to happen over the objections of the people who live there. The U.S. could get away with that sort of thing when it didn't even pretend to give a damn about what the Sioux and the Cheyenne wanted, and when it bought the Louisiana Territory and Alaska from autocratic regimes. It's not as if Napoleon Bonaparte or Czar Alexander II were going to offer their subjects a say in the matter anyway. But Denmark is a relatively inoffensive liberal democracy that holds regular elections. Greenlanders are accustomed to picking their own political leaders and having input into their fate. If asked, they'll almost certainly reject the offer.
So, is Trump really going to opt for doing it "the hard way" and just grab the island?
When the United States decided its own fate 250 years ago, the Declaration of Independence set out grievances with the British crown, as well as some basic principles for the new nation. Among them:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
Most Americans no longer consented to be governed by King George III or the British Parliament and so set up a new country with a government of its own. What excuse would we have for foisting American governance and laws on Greenlanders if—as seems likely—they reject political affiliation with the U.S.?
We Could Invoke Existing Agreements (and Spare Ourselves Some Welfare Costs)
If Trump is worried about Greenland's security from Russian or Chinese incursions—a concern shared by Denmark, which has a tiny military and is ill-prepared to defend a large area—there are other options. For instance, the U.S. could build on its existing alliance with Denmark.
For starters, the U.S. first stationed troops in Greenland during World War II and then signed a defense treaty regarding the island in 1951. Pituffik (formerly Thule) Space Base currently houses around 150 U.S. military personnel on the island. That's a small presence, but it numbered in the thousands during the Cold War and might be increased again—if we asked nicely under the terms of the existing agreement.
Building on the existing military relationship would help the U.S. escape one of the pitfalls of acquiring Greenland: The island is a welfare case that's subsidized by Denmark. Last year, the governments of Denmark and Greenland signed yet another agreement for "initiatives and investments" in Greenland that will cost Danish taxpayers DKK1.6 billion ($249 million). That's above and beyond the existing very generous and expensive Danish welfare state. To pay for those goodies, Denmark's tax to GDP ratio was 45.2 percent in 2024, compared to 25.6 percent for the U.S.
Greenlanders like it that way. The Verian pollsters mentioned above found that "a small majority agree or mostly agree that Denmark should continue to support Greenland financially, even if the country becomes independent." Why should the U.S. take on that burden—or, more likely, further disappoint Greenlanders, again without the consent of the governed—when we could just build on existing defense relationships?
The president may want Greenland, but the people who live there don't want to be American. That should be the end of the matter. If he's worried about securing the island against aggression by foreign powers that aren't him, Trump could build on existing agreements and avoid violating Greenlanders' right to choose their own government—and simultaneously avoid the cost of subsidizing them.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
The president may want Greenland, but the people who live there don't want to be American. That should be the end of the matter.
Some people didn’t want masks or “vaccines “, but whatever.
Some people don't want sneeze guards at the salad bars that are open to the pubic. Tough titties for them... They can eat at home, and I can eat at non-disease-spreading salad bars in pubic! WITH sneeze guards, and NO sneezed mucus from strangers, on my salad! These are my salad days, and stupid disease-lovers can take a hike! There's NOTHING to sneeze at here!
Also, Der TrumpfenFarter-Fuhrer sure ass Hell looks like He wants to be the Emperor of the Evil AmeriKKKan Empire! Whether the cuntquered people like shit, or snot! He wants to shit and snot on their salads, for STARTERS, on THEIR could-have-been salad days!
Trump and pretty much every military analyst on the planet: NATO should be strengthening its position in Greenland. If we don't, China or Russia will.
56% of Greenlanders: We got this.
NATO should be providing shitloads of rifles and ammo to every household of Greenland dwellers, to help fend off any potential invasions from Russia, China, Cuba, North Korea, Mars, Uranus... Or from a certain OTHER greedy imperialist power (AKA Evil Empire)!
Trump and pretty much every military analyst on the planet: NATO should be strengthening its position in Greenland. If we don't, China or Russia will.
Doubtful, if not outright bollocks.
More likely than all the conspiracies you claim day in and day out.
You too, no concept of reality when it comes to Greenland, because Trump tells you otherwise.
Lackey.
But where is your rebuttal? That isn’t a rebuttal. You were very clear about this sort of thing the other day.
Show how Russia or China can "take" Greenland, either by foreclosure or militarily. No one has. It cannot be done.
Who is eating all the fish?
Rebuttal?
Look at the geography. The U.S. is closer to or has much easier access to Greenland than either Russia or China.
Russia can't take Ukraine which is adjacent to it. To take Greenland, the Russians would have to go through the Arctic, the Barents Sea bordered by unfriendly Finland, Sweden and Norway, and the North Atlantic in all of which the U.S. Navy (and the Royal Navy) reign supreme. Even in the Arctic, the U.S. Navy (and Royal Navy) reigns supreme, projecting power from Alaska and the North Atlantic.
For Red China to reach Greenland, they'd have to either go through the North Pacific and the Bering Straight into the Arctic, in all of which the U.S. Navy reigns supreme and could easily cut off the Communist Chinese. Or the Red Chinese would have to go all the way south around the tip of South America (Straights of Magellan) or through the Indian Ocean around the bottom of Africa a d the Cape of Good Hope. Then the Commies would have to go north from the South Atlantic all the way up to the North Atlantic in all of which the U.S. Navy reigns supreme.
By contrast, the U.S. can easily reach Greenland up the east coast of the U.S. and Canada, from Alaska through the Arctic, or overland or by boat through friendly Canada.
There's no way the Russians or Red Chinese could reach Greenland that far away in the face of U.S. attack submarines, U.S. surface to surface missiles, U.S. carrier-based aircraft, and U.S. land-based aircraft from bases in the U.S., Northern Europe, the U.K. and Canada, or anywhere in the world.
The Russians and the Red Chinese would be at a huge geographical tactical and strategic disadvantage (as well as technological disadvantage) in any attempt to take Greenland.
Who is NATO and where do the weapons come from?
Ever flown a drone? How bout gone fishing?
What is my view on greenland buddy?
All I've said on the matter is that discussions on inquiring greenland have been going on for 100 years and he isnt going to invade militarily. The interest is strategic and the critical minerals there. Whats incorrect dumbass?
Is this more sarcshrike lies and strawman from you? Amazing you turn into full sarc.
You were wrong on everything you thought was true regarding economics and instead of learning or education yourself you lash out lol.
Hope you dont become an alcoholic too.
The bullshit is from Trumpistas like you and your followers freaking out that Russia or China is going to take over Greenland and destroy the US. You feed that bullshit.
Taking Greenland is worth it if it destroys NATO in the process.
Ha! Ha! Maybe so.
Because that is what Putin would like, and so you approve.
The constant bullshit from steaming piles of lying TDS-addled shits like you is tiresome in the extreme. Fuck off and die, asswipe.
Danish intel warned last year about Russian and Chinese military goals toward Greenland and Arctic.
https://justthenews.com/government/security/danish-intel-warned-about-russian-and-chinese-military-ambitions-toward
Denmark and the NIB, in 2018, specifically blocked China from building airports in Nuuk because it would've made China Greenland's largest employer and would've arguably, put Greenland on the hook for debt to Chinese interests. They financed the same airport(s) themselves creating Air Greenland.
This was approximately a year before Trump first proposed buying Greenland.
Again, these people are making Sleepy Joe look keen and JD "I'm from Ohio!" Vance seem cosmopolitan.
Shh the lame stream media did not approve of your "news".
SRG2 has never heard of the GIUK gap.
Oh, SRG has 'heard', but it takes more than one brain cell to process that, so SRG is SOL.
Incunabulum thinks the world is flat.
Oh bullshit and a half. A Russian or Chinese takeover of Greenland is no more feasible than a Japanese invasion of Hawaii or California in 1941.
Trump's as idiotic about Greenland as he is about trade. A fucking moron. Stick to evicting woke and climate alarmism from the government.
Takeover and invasion are two different things retard.
The Puritans and even the UK couldn't have possibly have taken over N. America in 1630. Within about 100 yrs. they controlled an amount of territory on par with the size of Greenland. And the UK didn't have a population of 1.4B people or the ability to fly to the colonies at the time.
He has the same comprehension of English issues sarc has.
Yah, yah, and you and Trump are economic geniuses, so brilliant that you have not once refuted a single thing I've said about Trump's economics. Not once.
I'm glad you recognize my knowledge of Greenland is as much better than yours as is my knowledge of economics. But that's a low bar for idiots like you and Trump.
Don't have to, asswipe. Reality has done it for us. Fuck off and die, TDS-addled lying pile of steaming shit.
Why is everyone playing dumb?
Time and again, Trump and members of his administration have said they want a U.S. military presence in the eastern Arctic. The objective is straightforward: maintain oversight of key entry points to the Arctic Ocean and prevent China from establishing any military foothold if Arctic shipping routes become commercially viable.
No one in the Trump administration has actually said outright they intend to invade Greenland. Instead, they have created ambiguity, letting people fret that “all options” remain on the table if the United States is denied some form of presence in the region.
If the U.S. formally asked Greenland for permission to build a major American base, both Greenland and Denmark almost certainly would have said "Go fuck yourself". Standing up to Trump is politically popular with their globalist beaus, and saying no would have played well at Davos.
Now the situation has flipped. Greenland and Denmark have a big incentive to obtain an U.S. commitment that it has no intentions of conquest toward the island, in exchange for an American base land lease on the island. It would not be surprising if they end up proposing it themselves.
Everything Trump does was written in his "The Art of the Deal" book. This is textbook Trump, straight out of The Art of the Deal. Reason lefties like Tuccille, SRG2, and TonyGodiva, probably understand this perfectly well, but “orange man bad” remains too emotionally satisfying for them to stop playing dumb.
Stupid Government Tricks, on the other hand, likely has not thought it through at all. He is precisely the kind of opponent the Trump administration hopes it is dealing with in Denmark: reactive and literal.
They aren't playing sir.
Yet Trump and you clowns all act like the world will end because Russia or China threatens to take over Greenland if Trump doesn't do it first, and that includes invading a NATO "ally" if necessary.
Oh fuck off, you retard. Where did I say that?
I said what I think the administration's actual motives are. I said nothing about the veracity of the threat. The chances of Trump invading Greenland are next to zero. It's obvious what he is doing if you sit and have a think.
SGT 'think'? Ha and ha!
How about this is a big distraction from what he is planning? His next moves have nothing to do with Greenland.
Trump plays a long game. But you are incapable of understanding this.
He's setting the table and seeing how others react without tipping a cow.
Oh, well shit, if you say so it must be so.
Perhaps as the child with Polio understands they will not become professional soccer players because they can't run with the other kids in school, you might want to sit back and accept your struggle to comprehend is signalling you are not capable of thinking at the level of others.
Neocons make lots of claims. Call me when China takes Taiwan first and Russia is a joke, 3 years and they can't topple Ukraine.
The Venezuela action likely saved Taiwan from any attempts at a takeover.
Shorting Iran blindfolding Maduro and interrupting oil supplies were Trump cards against China. These also had effect against Russia supporting Ukraine from a distance.
It also hamstrings the Cuban regime. Maybe they’ll collapse after Iran.
TDS-addled steaming piles of lying shits are notable for their imbecility. Fuck off and die, asswipe.
What About the Consent of the Governed?
"If you wanted or if you think you need to have weapons to take on the government, you need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons."
Vaccines, any gun control laws, welfare for illegals, welfare for able-bodied Americans, public schools, leftist media, or the terroristic wing of the Democratic party.
And some people vote for for the guy who gave Fauci a medal for Covid.
No, under the rule of the U.S. Empire, we the ruled get whatever the rulers (the powers that shouldn't be) think will enrich them. If that is expanding the empire, endangering us, e.g., WWIII, so be it.
Don't like it? Still vote? Still support tyranny? Fight Back! Stop supporting your enslavers, be like your Founding Fathers, REVOLT.
This seems to be a very oddly, and very specifically, worded poll, or at least the reading of the results. Still, I would support self-determination of the Greenlanders, and respect their wishes.
Still, I would support self-determination of the Greenlanders, and respect their wishes.
As indicated by the "we got this" and Biden's speech, IMO, the issue is larger and more complicated than that.
I grew up in a town of 15K people. Probably more guns than the entirety of the civilian population of Greenland. I certainly favor their individual autonomy, but if they elect to get a loan from China that they can't pay back to build an airport, I don't think even Nova Scotians and The North Atlantic states are uninterested parties in the matter any more than my neighbor or the people down the block or the people across town would be if I decided to build an airport I couldn't afford.
I should note that, again IMO, there's an air of a false dichotomy of Imperialism. That is, the US buying or invading Greenland is a/the horrific (re-)ascension of White Colonialism but Ukraine joining NATO or the EU is seen as hunky dory, despite the fact that, within the EU, if you drive freight between Germany and France, you've got 7 days to drive the truck back and can't make more than 3 stops, whereas, in the US, if a "newly-51st State Greenlander" wants to drive their freight to every state in the Union, spending a year in each, they're completely free to do so.
The idea that China could foreclose and own Greenland is pathetic rubbish.
Your utter retardation isn't my fault. Seriously, you should probably get checked out. Your level of cognitive dysfunction makes Sleepy Joe's awareness of international and historical politics seem sharp.
What the hell happened to SGT. He used to be at least able to rationalize this stuff out.
Too much cable news?
TDS is what happened. Like the rest of the asswipes, if Trump is somehow involved, rational thought goes out the window. And the fucktard is too stupid to see that.
Fuck him with a barb-wire-wrapped baseball bat.
Trump broke his hardwired globalist little brain with recent actions. Plus he’s been increasingly furious that Trump’s tariffs have been successful.
It wouldn’t shock me to see him slowly descend into Sarcasmicness. Although I am unaware if he has issues with alcohol.
It will become very real the moment another democrat becomes president. The last one sat back and did nothing for months while Russia massed an invasion force on the Ukrainian border, and nothing still when they invaded.
The United States didn't care much for the "consent of the governed" in 1860 when the southern states decided to invoke their own declaration of independence just as the colonists had done in 1776. Any talk of liberty or of self-determination since then has been meaningless.
Do you know what the spiral case or coil campaign is?
Denmark, despite having abolished slavery in 1792, was in on the Transatlantic Slave Trade on both ends until the governor of St. Croix emancipated them all in response to a slave uprising.
The idea that the US is the clearly the big bad in all of this is a very modern, low-IQ, white-supermacist, ethno-centric, imperialistic take.
Denmark, despite having abolished slavery in 1792, was in on the Transatlantic Slave Trade on both ends until the governor of St. Croix emancipated them all in response to a slave uprising.
In on the slave trade to the tune of twice the population of Greenland until the emancipation in 1848.
And, again, all of this is both eclipsed and abjectly dwarfed by even just the Holodomor and The Great Chinese Famine when looking back in history .
I'd have a lot more sympathy for the Confederates ....
* If they hadn't opposed New England's Hartford Convention in 1815 to discuss secession over the War of 1812. If 1860 was a betrayal of 1776, their opposition to 1815 was even more so. Two faced opportunists.
* If they hadn't just lost the Presidential election. An election is a promise to abide by the results. They'd have had a lot more credibility if they'd seceded before the election. And considering their 1815 record, they'd have been the ones screaming treason if their candidate had won in 1860 and the Northern states had seceded.
The myth of Confederate honor is a joke. Anyway who still believes in it is a sucker for a bunch of sour grapes slavers.
Your argument is simply sophistry and deflection. You seek to compare opposition within the confines of the Constitution to that without. When they seceded is irrelevant. Rights are not time-delineated or dependent on circumstances. You seem to think the southern states should have given up on the Union prior to the election rather than trying to bring about a solution agreeable to all sides. And you swipe about honor falls flat in the wake of Lincoln's "total war" against southern civilian populations.
1815: New Englanders meet to discuss secession. Southerners call them traitors.
1860: Southerners do secede. You call that loyalty to the Constitution.
Two-faced hypocrite, that's what you are.
These two data points are separated by 45 years. Yet, you treat the latter as some sign of hypocrisy vis a vis the former. Your data points utterly neglect changes that occurred over 45 years to provide context for the apparent shift in preferences.
The Confederacy was many things. A defender of freedom and consent of the governed was not one of them.
You are clearly wrong. The Confederate Constitution refutes your allegation as does the history of the Republic itself. It was, in fact, the southern states which were the most ardent defenders of the Constitution and the sovereign right of the States. Since slavery was clearly a part of the new nation when the Constitution was inscribed, believing that Yankees were in the right by attempting to change through force what they couldn't through law is wrong. And considering that the war wasn't even about slavery anyway, the whole moral house of cards in regards to abolition collapses. That the southern people wished to choose their own government and depart from the Union was self-evident.
That is complete bullshit.
According to one whose every post is just that. Back to your Howard Zinn, Molly.
What a detailed refutation. Is that all you’ve got, faggot?
Yah, right. Why did those oh-so-law-abiding independence lovers in the South call New Englanders traitors in 1815 for convening to discuss secession?
It's amazing how hard you are lying to prove MollyGodiva — MollyGodiva, of all people! — right.
Agree. Anytime anyone dares to suggest that the Confederacy actually was acting within the law as it existed a bunch of commenters here usually show up screaming racist. 650k dead to preserve the union against the will of the governed. The rest of the civilized world managed to (mostly) end slavery without burning down populated cities like Atlanta.
The rest of the civilized world managed to (mostly) end slavery without burning down populated cities like Atlanta.
Don't forget that millions of newly-freed slaves died as the result of the legal limbo that ensued.
The UK literally paid owners to make their slaves free and equal citizens and then proceeded liberate slaves in their controlled colonies and surrounding territories. We burned our way from Mississippi and Louisiana to Pennsylvania.
Since the Whiskey Rebellion.
Russia and China can't take over Greenland. Russia's navy is rusted trash and China's is mostly a coastal navy that's centered on the 3 island chain.
[sigh]
Russia has circumvented the global oil sanctions to the tune of more than The West has given the Ukraine to defend itself. When the US blockaded Venezuela, an oil tanker attempted to skirt the blockade, when it was pursued, it swapped to the Russian flag and fled to the GRIUK Gap to the Norwegian Sea.
The point is not the 55,000 people living in Greenland. Russia has sacrificed 10-fold that number in Ukraine. The point is that the arctic is becoming a progressively more passable shipping lane as time goes on and, whether it's the US or NATO or the EU or Russia or China, *someone* *will* dominate and control it to whatever more or less hands off degree they choose. It will not be the 55,000 Greenlanders.
For supporters of Global Free Trade to whatever degree you think it does or doesn't exist now, the obfuscation is and should be embarrassingly retarded.
Try answering a simple question: how can Russia or China peacefully take over Greenland?
They can't. Even if China were to foreclose on some loans (what loans? Why would Greenlanders borrow from China when the US and Europe are right at hand? It's more fantasy.), they'd be evicted within days by NATO.
The military counterpart is even dumber. If Russia or China are willing to go to war to take Greenland, how? And how would they hold on to it?
It's bullshit either way, and if the best you can come up with is "China will foreclose on a loan" or "Russia is willing to lose 200,000 soldiers" then you haven't got diddly squat.
Try answering a simple question: how can Russia or China peacefully take over Greenland?
They can't.
Sure, the same way the Rosebud Sioux Tribe couldn't possibly stop Keystone XL and Ukraine couldn't possibly stop the flow of oil from Vyborg to Griefswald and reap billions of dollars and military aid in doing so.
Tell me, do you think Yemen or Somalia should control the Straight of Hormuz and The Red Sea because of your retarded notions of individual autonomy or do you think other nations and people in the region (ore even in Minnesota) might have a say in the matter?
Moron.
Again, whether you think we should be giving money to Ukraine to fight Russia or not, to act like there's no interest in arctic waterways and/or that Trump is more likely to bulldoze private property in Greenland than China is to regard them the way they regard Hong Kong or Taiwan or Africa is just self-beclowning stupidity.
Didn't answer my question. Raised unrelated issues. Want a hint? Greenland is not in the Strait of Hormuz.
Didn't answer my question.
You answered your own question, which was between irrelevant and an oxymoronic non sequitur to begin with. Did China peacefully take over Hong Kong? If it is/was peaceful, but subversive, are you is that your idea of libertarianism or individual liberty?
And, you're right that Greenland isn't the Straight of Hormuz, China and Russia aren't Somalia, Yemen, or the Rosebud Sioux either.
You're really getting to into CBS News levels of opposing Trump and supporting Russia/China here.
Seriously, what is it with you retards that, when someone says, "It's in the best interest of the US, Greenland, Denmark, NATO, the EU, and pretty much anyone who consumes oil or minerals and doesn't like Russian former-communists and/or Chinese communists, that Greenland and the territorial waters around it be well-regulated and proactively defended by aligned interests." you hear "They're going to eminent domain and bulldoze Nuuk!"
A good fraction of Japan understands why it's a bad idea not to do so. A good fraction of S. Korea understands why it's a bad idea not to do so. A good fraction of Poland understands why it's a bad idea not to do so. A good fraction of Saudi Arabia understands why it's a bad idea not do so. Hell, there's probably a fraction of First Nations people in and outside Greenland who understand it's a bad idea not to do so. Why do you continue to act like there's no merit at any level beyond the 55,000 people living on the island?
It's insanity on par with the Goods thinking that they need to defend illegal immigrants from Nazi storm trooper ICE agents who don't carry guns.
What does any of that rant have to do with Russia or China taking over Greenland, either by foreclosure or militarily?
Nothing. You deflect because you can't answer such basic questions.
Well said. Add in fishing too.
Try answering a simple question: how can Russia or China peacefully take over Greenland?
They could outbid Trump if Denmark agreed to sell it.
They could build an airport, staff it with CCP loyalists, outvote the natives in opposition to Denmark, and demonize the native loyalists, similar to what was done in Hong Kong.
*or*
They could build part of an airport in a debt-trap diplomacy scheme and claim land or resources in lieu of payment the way Venezuela owes them for oil. I mean, we could rely on the good nature and lenient financing of a political power that fundamentally doesn't believe in capitalism or individual or regional autonomy, but that seems naive to the point of dishonesty or even communist sympathy.
Which is why Denmark specifically blocked them from building an airport.
Stupid is as Stupid does.
I'm only a "supporter" of Global Free Trade if the global traders include the costs of their own self-defense on the high seas in their profit and loss statements. The United States government should immediately drop all import regulations and protective tariffs unilaterally. If other countries want to punish their own citizens with import restrictions and regulations, it's on them. If warships threaten the United States of America, our military should be used to defend the United States of America - and NOTHING ELSE. We should never have let ourselves become the world police and we should insist that our government cease and desist the Global War Against Terrorism and the War on Drugs. The track record of American interventionism to "protect our vital national interests" has been abominally counter-productive. Stop it already!
It appears you lack seeing about 80% of the big picture looking though those rose colored glasses.
Well said.
As much as I love the founding documents of America, much of the prose was fine-sounding nonsense. The consent of the governed is meaningless except in the most abstract principle sense. Although it may be true that most colonists objected to the increasing abuses by the Crown in the run-up to the Declaration of Independence, at no time during the war can it be said that "most Americans no longer consented" to be governed by King George the Third. The most remarkable thing about American Independence was that the founders actually believed in the principles they cited in breaking away from the British Empire and implemented as much of them as they could when they framed the Articles of Confederation and, later, the Constitution. Our governors have been increasingly ignoring "the consent of the governed" ever since and a very few idealistic libertarians are the only ones left now to protest Presidents like Biden and Trump, limp-dick Congresses and legislating from the bench Supreme Courts.
Greenland needs to boot all American troops off its land.
Ok ChiCom Tiny.
Their boots were sold to China and now they stand bare footed on a massive glacier.
This is all re-framing and posturing by all sides. We controlled a section of Panama for 70+ years. Regardless of what the Panamanian people thought of it, or in this utterly weird article "voted for." Further, Panamanians didn't "become" Americans, and they didn't get a say in how we conducted business on the canal.
Carter should have never given it back, but that is another story.
Back when this whole Greenland thing was first being discussed I stated here in the comments that this is all about trade routes and greater independence from compromised ports. I don't like Imperialism and expansionism, but I also understand it's need and purpose. Especially in an increasingly antagonistic global climate.
Realpolitik isn't about compromise, although compromise is an arrow in the quiver.
Comparing the Panama Canal Zone to Greenland shows just how stupid MAGAs are.
Thinking that I'm MAGA shows just how stupid you are. Find one post where I support or defend Trump.
Description ≠ Subscription, you micro-encephalic pederast.
It’s much better than being a retarded ChiCom faggot shill. Amd you are indeed one dumb little poof.
I don't like Imperialism and expansionism, but I also understand it's need and purpose.
Once again, on at least one hand, we're talking the capital-I-mperialism of millions of bodies in the Ukraine vs. the "imperialism" of (as you point out) giving the canal back to the Panamanians on the other hand.
Trump, repeatedly, actively, wants the Poles to be Polish and the Fins to be Finnish. He even wants the Russians and the Chinese and the Norks and the Venezuelans to be their respective nations/people. The idea that he's going to buy or invade Greenland specifically to cover it in shopping malls and make everyone speak English is misguided and, even then, the "imperial" colonization of PR or HI or Guam isn't the same imperialization of the prior centuries... unlike in Ukraine.
Your use of the term "realpolitik" shows everyone how little you approve of the principles of liberty. It implies that you favor the United State government throwing its weight around to benefit American private interests regardless of the costs. I also suspect you may be using your "schwartz" a bit too often lately.
I'm using "Realpolitik" as it is defined, recognition of what IS, rather than what OUGHT to be. As I mentioned to the MG sock:
Description ≠ Subscription
I also went on to describe how I don't like imperialism and expansionism, did you (intentionally) miss that part?
Private interests?
Security for the nation and the world is considered private interests?
The Verian pollsters mentioned above found that "a small majority agree or mostly agree that Denmark should continue to support Greenland financially, even if the country becomes independent."
That's some serious hubris! Imagine a teenager running away from home and then still wanting his parents to send him his allowance. If Greenland wants to be its own country, it will have to put its big-boy pants on and take care of itself.
A big part of the problem is that Greenland as "The People of The State of Greenland" fit into preemie-sized pants, while the territorial pants they're actually wearing are a Men's 42 flex fit.
I'd say there's a metaphor about minor girls running around in their big sister's short skirts that are way too big for them keep on, but this is Reason "Age is just a number and taboo lines are just a figment of imagination, pre-teen girls, even those with penises, should aspire to being a low-level sex workers." Magazine.
Edit: Whoops! This was meant in reply to DRM below but fits here as well.
[Shrug]
At some point I expect that Trump offers Greenland a pile of money per resident to become an independent republic linked to the US via a Compact of Free Association.
Greenland then gets to talk about its independence and send somebody to the UN the same way the Marshall Islands, Palau, or Micronesia does. While the US military has the run of the place, the same way it does in the Marshall Islands, Palau, or Micronesia.
Makes the most sense overall but the Prime Minister is on record that the US can't afford their welfare state so the compensation will have to be substantial.
It's so critical, he claims, that he's willing to take the chilly island the "easy way" or the "hard way."
So....grab em by the pussy?
You’re just jealous he won’t grab you by YOUR pussy.
They wait in want don't disappoint.
I posted a form of this above in response to someone.
Time and again, Trump and members of his administration have said they want a U.S. military presence in the eastern Arctic. The objective is straightforward: maintain oversight of key entry points to the Arctic Ocean and prevent China from establishing any military foothold if Arctic shipping routes become commercially viable.
No one in the Trump administration has actually said outright that they intend to invade Greenland. Instead, they have created ambiguity, letting people fret that “all options” remain on the table if the United States is denied some form of presence in the region.
If the U.S. formally asked Greenland for permission to build a major American base, both Greenland and Denmark almost certainly would have said, “Go fuck yourself.” Standing up to Trump is politically popular with their globalist beaus, and saying no would have played well at Davos.
Now the situation has flipped. Greenland and Denmark have a strong incentive to obtain a U.S. commitment that it has no intentions of conquest toward the island, in exchange for leasing land for an American base. It would not be surprising if they end up proposing it themselves.
This is textbook Trump, straight out of The Art of the Deal. Tuccille probably understand this perfectly well, but orangemanbadding for Koch pays his bills.
And, for the latter half of your post, the other side of the coin is true.
Normalizing trade and taking loans from China, despite currency manipulations and subversion/belligerence in their own region, was hip, diverse, and oppositional to evil, White, Western, Conservative, American imperialism.
Then pipelines started blowing up, debts started coming due, and making a living is tough and Dad's got to figure out how to finance the student loans and keep the furnace running.
I said something similar the other day although probably not as eloquently. This is classic Trump and everything else is theater. Tuccile continues to be either disengenuous or just plain dumb.
Disingenuous all the way. All the Reasonistas know, but honesty isn't what Koch pays them for.
Greenland has zero reason to give Trump what he wants. They would be wise to kick the US military off their island.
Let's also point out how fucked up your argument is. The US threat to invade is not a valid negotiation tactic.
Let's also point out how fucked up your argument is. The Trump administration has not made a threat to invade Greenland.
They reply "nothing is off the table" to retarded leading questions from corrupt journalists and then you shrill morons decide to fill in all the blanks yourself.
Trump has made a threat to invade Greenland. To say otherwise is to ignore what Trump says.
No, we just ignore what you say. You’re a retard, a ChiCom shill, and an inveterate liar. By definition you are not only worthless, you are malignant.
Can you refute that? Silence will be taken as an admission that I am correct.
Very astute.
God gave 'Greenland' to the Vikings thousands of years ago - From the Book of Armaments - Holy Cow! From the ice with the polar bear to the other ice with the fish. Ya sure ya betcha!
Those Vikings were exiled to Minnesota after wandering the world for many generations in search of their horned helmets. Next year in Nuulatikamuuk. It is America's manifest destiny to restore everyone's Spaghetti Monster given right of national self-determination. To restore the world of 6000 years ago
"Spaghetti Monster"
Did anyone expect anything else from J(ew)Free? That fedora is tipped at eighty degrees.
People rarely consent to becoming citizens. The vast majority of Americans did not consent.
Trump may not know it, as he seems to know little, but the days of imperialism are over. The days of marching into a country or territory subduing or killing the population are over. Look at the oil executives response to rebuilding Venezuela oil infrastructure. Unless you have a friendly population and stable government no company is going to want to invest in natural resource extraction in a country.
You should tell that to Russia then. And China.
I think Russia is finding out what I say is true. Getting Ukraine doesn't seem to be going well. Has China invaded any country lately? Hong Kong but that was returned to them by Britain.
LOL Hong Kong is supposed to stay independent until 2042. Tibet?
Russia didn't appear to have any issues but found great benefit in seizing control of Crimea under the watch of Putin's buddy Obama.
Such biased reporting.
Why don't we see if we can help Greenland gain her independence from Denmark and then be an ally to the newly formed independent nation? Maybe we don't have to force them to be part of the US.
LOL you failed social studies. Greenland can't support itself with 16 people and a mule. Why do you think they are selling to China?
Trump and his idiot lackeys don’t know the meaning of the word diplomacy. The US can get more influence over Greenland without owning it or invading it. The bluster, implied threats and insults to our allies are unnecessary and counterproductive.
Oh okay Hunter. Go snort some Parmesan cheese.
Why not have Trump simply declare Greenland to be the 51st state? That way Trump can start selling off the mineral rights to his billionaire backers, and leave all other arrangements intact. Win win for everyone.
Just this week we had a similar face saving deal to rectify Trump's humiliating loss of the Nobel Peace Prize to a Venezuelan lady. She handed over a gold plated replica of the medal allowing Trump to believe he was in possession of the real thing. It's all theater of course, but the look on Trump's face tells us that good theater is all he needs.
Have you ever had an original thought? You first mistake was thinking Morning Joe are intelligent people and second was thinking they provide honest news.
Yes, I was the first person to wear a baseball cap with the bill on the side. I never think of Morning Joe, and I don't know what they provide. You are welcome to give us a list of all its faults if you feel so moved.
She should have given the Peace Prize to the bank in Qatar where the proceeds from Venezuela oil theft are being stashed. At least she would have gotten some money instead of a BS photo op
90% of Greenlanders are Greenland Inuit. They'd have to be crazy, or very badly informed, to want to come under Trump and Stephen Miler.
But you are fine with them selling what is not really theirs to China?
Nope. You just don’t like them.
"If we have to choose between the US and Denmark here and now, then we choose Denmark. We choose NATO, the Kingdom of Denmark and the EU."
16 people and mule is not a nation. Sorry. Canada should have taken control of Greenland long ago.
Seems simple enough. Offer Greenland 99-year lease for $250 million annually (equaling Denmark's contribution) on enough property away from the "cities" to build our missile defense systems. If Denmark sees this as an opportunity to start reducing its own payments that will simply strengthen the Greenland independence movement. Greenlanders will get rich and we get our shield.
Sounds like a great way to attract migrants who are already welfare leeches. But hell - we can always kill them like we kill everyone else for reasons
And - Trump raises the stakes. He will impose 10% tariffs - rising to 25% - on eight European countries until they support his bid to buy Greenland.
I assume the Europeans will surrender like an Italian army but they really should up that financial war. Stop selling Treasury debt as primary dealers (8 of the 26 are European) and prohibit banks from rolling over Tbills as they come due. Only the British banks are too in bed with the US to risk that. But even the Brits have to realize now that the US is the enemy to everyone and in particular Europe
Well there's at least a good corruption angle to why Trump is so desperate to own Greenland like yesterday. CRML is offloading 25% of their Tanbreez project ore to a Saudi JV. Saudi Arabia is of course well known as the obvious spot where rare earth magnets will be produced for the US military in a secure location so that the US still has zero ability to create a rare earth processing supply chain. Just as Qatari bank accounts under the control of Trump are the obvious locations for Venezuela oil proceeds to be secured for future disbursement to the Venezuelan people. Because of course.
This is starting to smell like the quid pro quo. The quo being US troops in the region being attacked when US gets dragged into war with Iran for nonUS national security interests in the next few weeks.
Yeah, whatever JewFree.