Is America Really Going to War for Greenland?

Plus: Threats of new tariffs on NATO allies, masked federal agents stir unrest in Minnesota, and Trump’s new health care proposal.

1x 1.1x 1.25x 1.5x 2x 3x

:15 :15

Download

Is America Really Going to War for Greenland?

This week, editors Peter Suderman and Matt Welch are joined by novelist and Reason contributor Kat Rosenfield and head of media for the Institute of Economic Affairs Reem Ibrahim to assess the mounting confrontation between the United States and its European allies over Greenland. Trump's tariff threats, talk of national security emergencies, exchanges between world leaders, and speculation about military force have pushed an unusual territorial dispute into the center of trans-Atlantic politics. The group considers what the confrontation means for NATO and trade policy with Europe.

The conversation then turns to Minnesota, where masked federal agents continue detaining and harassing people in the aftermath of the Renee Good killing, prompting legal battles, disputes with state officials, and concerns about civil liberties. They also examine Trump's newly announced health care plan and what it signals about his domestic policy priorities. A listener then asks whether libertarians have any reason to want Greenland as part of the United States.

 

0:00—U.S. maneuvering to acquire Greenland

08:22—Trump's relationships with Russia and Europe

24:09—ICE confrontations spark unrest in Minnesota

40:32—Listener question on libertarian desires for Greenland

45:51—Trump's health care proposal

55:47—Weekly cultural recommendations

 

Upcoming Reason Events

The Reason Roundtable: Live in Washington, D.C.! February 4

 

Mentioned in the podcast:

"Trump 2.0, Year 1: A Libertarian Nightmare," by Brian Doherty

"Donroe," by Liz Wolfe

"Greenlanders Don't Consent To Becoming Americans," by J.D. Tuccille

"Seizing Greenland Might Be the Least Popular Idea in American Political History," by Eric Boehm

"As ICE Cracks Down Harder, Support for Abolishing ICE Surges," by Joe Lancaster

"'We Are Not Investigating' the Shooting of Renee Good, the Deputy Attorney General Says," by Jacob Sullum

"ICE Agents Flouted DHS Policies That Could Have Prevented Renee Good's Death," by Jacob Sullum

"Video Shows Feds Shooting ICE Protester With Nonlethal Round at Point-Blank Range, Blinding Him in One Eye," by Autumn Billings

"Federal Agents Used a Battering Ram To Enter a Minneapolis Home Without Valid Warrant, Video Shows," by Autumn Billings

"No, ICE Agents Do Not Have 'Absolute Immunity' From State Prosecution," by Damon Root

"Trump's 'Great Healthcare Plan' Has Promise but Should Add More Freedom for Americans," by J.D. Tuccille

"28 Years Later: The Bone Temple Delivers Anarchy in the U.K., Again," by Peter Suderman

"Movies," by John Hospers

• Producer: Paul Alexander
• Video Editor: Ian Keyser

What are we consuming this week?

Matt Welch

• North Dallas Forty

Peter Suderman

• 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple

Kat Rosenfield

• The Beast in Me

Reem Ibrahim

• Lady Chatterley's Lover, by D.H. Lawrence

---

Comments

[Minadin]

No.

[Social Justice is neither]

But what if Leftist retards really, really need it as a talking point for their mutual masturbation podcast?

[JFree]

Europe is so vassalized and comfortable in their vassalization now. I don't think they even realize that NATO is not an alliance. It is a rather annoying and expensive obligation by the US to walk everyone's poodle.

They can't even process their own opinions about Russia. They bark as if they are enemies but in fact have become even more dependent over the last four years on having the US solve whatever problems arise now.

And they are so tin eared that they really believe that "Well by mutual agreement the US can spend whatever the US wants on Greenland so what's the problem?"

[Fu Manchu]

You are right that Europe has gotten soft as fuck and needs to pull its weight. And I'm all for the US not writing Europe a blank check for defense. And perhaps NATO is just not worth it and shouldn't exist. But suggesting the US doesn't benefit from NATO is fucking retarded. The US gets significant benefits from NATO, such as intelligence sharing, bases, soft power, and weapons sales.

[JFree]

Most of the 'benefit' that the US gets from NATO is to enable the US to project power even further into Eurasia. That is exactly what the US should be questioning - for ourselves. We aren't - but we should.

Further, the whole arms sales and corrupt '2% of GDP' target is a serious problem. We can no longer produce weapons for real war because our defense budget is for MIC profits and special ops/video gee-whizzery. Russia is outproducing the US/NATO by 5x re artillery/ammo.

I wish the US still had some diplomatic/soft power. But we don't and we don't care and Europe has none either. BRICS is winning that.

[Fu Manchu]

The guy is fucking pants on head retarded and nutso. And his note to the PM of Norway really takes the cake. He's not fully committed to peace because he didn't win a prize - LOL, is he in Kindergarten? Denmark has no documentation that it owns Greenland - LMAO what a retard. He thinks the gov't of Norway should have rigged the Nobel committee to give him the prize - makes sense, because that's what he would do. And no explanation of why he would take one country's territory due to a grievance with another - does he think Norway is Denmark?

But I'm sure cultist faggots here will handwave it all away.