2026 US-Denmark Tensions/End of NATO

[Czech_pivo]

I think the gateway to this is if we take a combative stand over Greenland.

We've been quiet on this, as has the UK. I think that we and the UK know that if either of us goes down this path what it means.

Pulling on that string some more. I also think that the UK (the King) understands that if they don't stand with us against the US, that it will be the end of the Commonwealth and most likely the end of the King being the head of state for a number of other countries (Australia/New Zealand, etc). So they've got to be very careful about this as well.

 

[suffolkowner]

This:

We cant and wont beat them in a stand up fight. But we can make any victory cost an unacceptable level casualties.

Learn from:

Michael Collins (Irish leader) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Im doubtful. Like Ukraine vs Russia except the US is 10x our size instead of 3.5x and considerably more competent. We also lack the depth of MIC the Ukrainians had. Also its not obviously easy for other actors to resupply us
Engaging in an insurgency? I am doubtful that enough Canadians have the stomach for that. How many would we need to do so?
I dont know im just hopeful that we can survive the next 3 yrs of insanity and it can be written off as some sort of collective temporary mental disorder south of the border.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Im doubtful. Like Ukraine vs Russia except the US is 10x our size instead of 3.5x and considerably more competent. We also lack the depth of MIC the Ukrainians had. Also its not obviously easy for other actors to resupply us
Engaging in an insurgency? I am doubtful that enough Canadians have the stomach for that. How many would we need to do so?
I dont know im just hopeful that we can survive the next 3 yrs of insanity and it can be written off as some sort of collective temporary mental disorder south of the border.

If .05% of CDN's say, F*ck it, I'm not going to sit quietly about this, that's 200,000 people who for the overwhelming most part will be able to 'blend in' as an American and cause alot of issues across their country.

 

[brihard]

Engaging in an insurgency? I am doubtful that enough Canadians have the stomach for that. How many would we need to do so?

Most Afghans weren’t fighting us. Most Iraqis weren’t in the mix.

Insurgencies are built off small minorities hiding within a much larger whole.

 

[suffolkowner]

If .05% of CDN's say, F*ck it, I'm not going to sit quietly about this, that's 200,000 people who for the overwhelming most part will be able to 'blend in' as an American and cause alot of issues across their country.

yes im curious historically what the numbers are for successful insurgencies?
% active
% support

 

[Halifax Tar]

We've been quiet on this, as has the UK. I think that we and the UK know that if either of us goes down this path what it means.

Pulling on that string some more. I also think that the UK (the King) understands that if they don't stand with us against the US, that it will be the end of the Commonwealth and most likely the end of the King being the head of state for a number of other countries (Australia/New Zealand, etc). So they've got to be very careful about this as well.

We saw the UK and the King's true colors last year. No one is coming to help us, no one.

 

[Remius]

If .05% of CDN's say, F*ck it, I'm not going to sit quietly about this, that's 200,000 people who for the overwhelming most part will be able to 'blend in' as an American and cause alot of issues across their country.

And then add even something as low as 50K US partisans to that mix.

The US would be stretched hard.

 

[daftandbarmy]

If .05% of CDN's say, F*ck it, I'm not going to sit quietly about this, that's 200,000 people who for the overwhelming most part will be able to 'blend in' as an American and cause alot of issues across their country.

Don't worry... the US can get everything it wants from all of us through exerting economic pressures without having to resort to physical violence, and we can largely thank ourselves - and our national naivety - for the policies that resulted in that relative weakness.

 

[Remius]

European military personnel arrive in Greenland as Trump says US needs island

France says a 15-strong French military contingent has arrived and more forces will be there in the coming days.

www.bbc.com

French recce party contingent of 15 just landed. Starting to wonder if European Intelligence knows something…

 

[IKnowNothing]

Engaging in an insurgency? I am doubtful that enough Canadians have the stomach for that. How many would we need to do so?

I think Canadian stomach (projecting my own uncomfortable with myself views onto others) for a citizen insurgency would have a lot to do with US treatment and intention. If they just want us off the board as a geopolitical and military entity, they can accomplish that without unduly interfering with our domestic policy or daily lives. Can't see the uprising happening.

The odds up if they force us to "be America" rather than neutered Canada, and go up exponentially from there if there's American boots on the ground doing ICE/Gestapo shit in our daily lives.

I dont know im just hopeful that we can survive the next 3 yrs of insanity and it can be written off as some sort of collective temporary mental disorder south of the border.

Amen to that.

 

[McG]

You forget that the linchpin in those two operations was the US itself, all of us relied on them to sustain and carry the lions share of the O. The truth is without the US there is no NATO.

I forget nothing. The claim was made that European NATO would be too cowardly to fight for itself. But European NATO has already demonstrated that it has the courage to fight when it is not threatened, so it would be foolish to assume away its willingness to fight when it is threatened.

NATO, even without the US, is far more capable than anyone the US has picked a fight with since the Cold War. A US war of choice against NATO would have catastrophic consequences for the US, even if they win most of the opening fights.

As for the idea that Canada should forsake NATO commitments and cower within its boarders in the event of a US attack on NATO, there were a lot of small European nations who thought their best path to survival was to quietly wait things out prior to being stepped on by the fascist jackboot. Choosing not to support NATO when it needs us is choosing to be picked-off alone at Trump’s leisure later on.

And don’t fool yourself that a Trump who has crossed the line to attack one functioning democracy would then feel restrained (as opposed to emboldened) toward doing the same to another functioning democracy.

If Trump seizes Greenland as threatened and Canada does not back NATO, then we will have normalized his argument that the US can annex what it wants from who it wants so long as it pretends there is a security nexus. The next time he decides to do that, it could be Baffin Island or Ellesmere Island. If Canada does not back NATO, then the other fallout is that NATO will not back us should Trump pursue his threat to annex this country.

Many have made the argument that US Congress will save the world if Trump executes aspirations of anschluss and lebensraum, but Congress has demonstrated that they will not preemptively prevent that. If the Congress-will-save-us optimists are right, then we just need to fight for time and to prevent a fait accompli. That is in our means, especially with NATO.

… and if the Congress-will-save-us optimists are wrong, then eventually the war will come looking to annex Canada. So Canada may as well fight while there are allies ready to support.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I forget nothing. The claim was made that European NATO would be too cowardly to fight for itself. But European NATO has already demonstrated that it has the courage to fight when it is not threatened, so it would be foolish to assume away its willingness to fight when it is threatened.

NATO, even without the US, is far more capable than anyone the US has picked a fight with since the Cold War. A US war of choice against NATO would have catastrophic consequences for the US, even if they win most of the opening fights.

If you re-read my actual quote and use all of it you will see I acknowledge the willingness. But the ability of Europe to sustain a combat operation in Greenland is simply not there. The lines and lanes are too long and they have neither the equipment nor the depth to carry on such an operation.

Which bring me back to this:

Willingness is one thing, ability is a whole other story. Without both you have to ask and confirm if its a honorable expenditure of blood and treasure.

I respect the zeal in your belief that it is. I think it would be lives spent with little accomplished.

As for the idea that Canada should forsake NATO commitments and cower within its boarders in the event of a US attack on NATO, there were a lot of small European nations who thought their best path to survival was to quietly wait things out prior to being stepped on by the fascist jackboot. Choosing not to support NATO when it needs us is choosing to be picked-off alone at Trump’s leisure later on.

Canada needs to think of itself before everyone else. Is an American invasion of Greenland the hill we want to die on ? If Canada says yes, you will be joining me in the fight. I assume you are still serving.

And don’t fool yourself that a Trump who has crossed the line to attack one functioning democracy would then feel restrained (as opposed to emboldened) toward doing the same to another functioning democracy.

That should go without saying.

If Trump seizes Greenland as threatened and Canada does not back NATO, then we will have normalized his argument that the US can annex what it wants from who it wants so long as it pretends there is a security nexus. The next time he decides to do that, it could be Baffin Island or Ellesmere Island. If Canada does not back NATO, then the other fallout is that NATO will not back us should Trump pursue his threat to annex this country.

So what ? Are we going to convene vigorously ? Do we throw Canadian lives away in a principled stand to defend Ellesmere island from the Americans ? Again if Canada decides we do I guess you will be joining me in the fight.

Many have made the argument that US Congress will save the world if Trump executes aspirations of anschluss and lebensraum, but Congress has demonstrated that they will not preemptively prevent that. If the Congress-will-save-us optimists are right, then we just need to fight for time and to prevent a fait accompli. That is in our means, especially with NATO.

… and if the Congress-will-save-us optimists are wrong, then eventually the war will come looking to annex Canada. So Canada may as well fight while there are allies ready to support.

Are you calling for us to instigate a war with the US ?

 

[Kirkhill]

Another reason why all of this matters.

How China Wins the Future

Beijing’s strategy to seize the new frontiers of power.

www.foreignaffairs.com

When the Chinese cargo ship Istanbul Bridge docked at the British port of Felixstowe on October 13, 2025, the arrival might have appeared unremarkable. The United Kingdom is China’s third-largest export market, and boats travel between the two countries all year.

What was remarkable about the Bridge was the route it had taken—it was the first major Chinese cargo ship to travel directly to Europe via the Arctic Ocean. The trip took 20 days, weeks faster than the traditional routes through the Suez Canal or around the Cape of Good Hope.

Even if the route is only open part of the year it is going to have an impact on the economics of trade.

For another perspective:

The sailing time from Prince Rupert to Kobe is 10 to 14 days and from Halifax to Felixstowe is about the same.
Rail from Rupert to Halifax is about a week.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Another reason why all of this matters.

How China Wins the Future

Beijing’s strategy to seize the new frontiers of power.

www.foreignaffairs.com

Even if the route is only open part of the year it is going to have an impact on the economics of trade.

For another perspective:

The sailing time from Prince Rupert to Kobe is 10 to 14 days and from Halifax to Felixstowe is about the same.
Rail from Rupert to Halifax is about a week.

To me this all boils down to what's yours is yours only so long as you can defend it.

Noy saying its right, just how I see it.

 

[McG]

Are you calling for us to instigate a war with the US ?

No. Trump is threatening a war against NATO. The instigation would be his decision to act on that threat.

If we fool ourselves into thinking that we can sit it out and we choose to not respond with NATO, then we have not saved ourselves. We have simply made Trump’s first fight easier while setting the conditions for our future destruction by his administration.

Do we throw Canadian lives away in a principled stand to defend Ellesmere island from the Americans ?

The site owner has requested people not be making arguments to not defend Canada. You are in that space with this comment.

 

[Kirkhill]

To me this all boils down to what's yours is yours only so long as you can defend it.

Noy saying its right, just how I see it.

And principles are principles so long as you can afford them.

 

[Halifax Tar]

No. Trump is threatening a war against NATO. The instigation would be his decision to act on that threat.

If we fool ourselves into thinking that we can sit it out and we choose to not respond with NATO, then we have not saved ourselves. We have simply made Trump’s first fight easier while setting the conditions for our future destruction by his administration.


The site owner has requested people not be making arguments to not defend Canada. You are in that space with this comment.

Its a question not a comment. And again you cherry pick without full context.

So what ? Are we going to convene vigorously ? Do we throw Canadian lives away in a principled stand to defend Ellesmere island from the Americans ? Again if Canada decides we do I guess you will be joining me in the fight.

And principles are principles so long as you can afford them.

Principals are great. But the so what always means more.

 

[Kirkhill]

No. Trump is threatening a war against NATO. The instigation would be his decision to act on that threat.

If we fool ourselves into thinking that we can sit it out and we choose to not respond with NATO, then we have not saved ourselves. We have simply made Trump’s first fight easier while setting the conditions for our future destruction by his administration.

The site owner has requested people not be making arguments to not defend Canada. You are in that space with this comment.

Regardless of the current situation we absolutely should be prepared to defend Canada. And given our asset base, our resources, we should be able to support a principled stance.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Regardless of the current situation we absolutely should be prepared to defend Canada. And given our asset base, our resources, we should be able to support a principled stance.

In full and absolute agreement.

 

[brihard]

If Trump were inclined to act militarily against Canada, he’ll do it because he feels like it. No specific pretext would make or break it. Any solidarity we show with Greenland and NATO might be something he would act audibly mad about, but it would not fundamentally change his intent regarding Canada. Similarly, if he did not intend hostility to Canada, contributing to the defence of a NATO ally would not change that to suddenly ‘yes’.

All that being the case, if we cannot really change Trump’s intentions towards us, whatever they should be, we should show solidarity with a NATO ally and contribute to collective defence with whatever we can manage. We have the benefit of Trump’s own offered fig leaf: anything we send there, we and NATO allies do so with the public reasoning that we’re postured to defend Greenland from Russia. Just roll our eyes and play his rhetorical game. If he then goes and attacks NATO, ok, that’s gonna suck, but by that point we’re essentially pinning our hopes on Congress or senior U.S. military leadership anyway.

Would that solidarity mean that, push come to shove, Royal Anglian Regiment or 1er Régiment Étranger will be lining up for a Scarborough battle honour? No. But western solidarity with Canada if we’re next in the sights would include many other things that could cause the sort of economic pain to finally trigger a domestic political response in the U.S. Widespread sanctions, dumping of U.S. treasuries, etc. An economically lonely U.S. would very quickly realize it’s in a different sort of situation.

I don’t see a ‘gaming this out’ where failing to support Greenland’s sovereignty is advantageous to Canada. Now more than ever is a time to show up for allies.