- Reaction score
- 1,736
- Points
- 1,140
But...her emails.
Diversion point in history right there.
MAGA could have been snuffed out in the cradle right there, but her emails....
And now here we are contemplating the US military occupation of Greenland.
2026 US-Denmark Tensions/End of NATO
- Thread starter Altair
- Start date
Diversion point in history right there.
MAGA could have been snuffed out in the cradle right there, but her emails....
And now here we are contemplating the US military occupation of Greenland.
- Reaction score
- 11,538
- Points
- 1,160
Yes?
Should Greenlanders not be ready to defend their sovereignty?
No one is going to Greenlands aid unfortunately.
probably not but Europe could still retaliate by shutting down all US bases in Europe and could end up dumping trillions in US bonds which would likely cripple the US economy to the point of causing massive unrest.
No need to fight Americans. Let them fight themselves. It’s how Rome eventually fell. Civil wars and infighting.
- Reaction score
- 11,538
- Points
- 1,160
That would be great. Shut down US bases, refuse US ships at European ports, hassle the shit out of Amercian travellers. Cancel military procurement projects and contracts.
They could become a real Pan-European superpower.
- Reaction score
- 1,736
- Points
- 1,140
Don't threaten me with a good time.
- Reaction score
- 1,736
- Points
- 1,140
We shall see if the rumors of some nations sending troops turns out to be true.
I wouldn't hold my breath, but there is a higher than zero chance.
- Reaction score
- 6,326
- Points
- 1,260
I keep saying, is Trump's end game to get Denmark/EU to pony up payment into the Golden Dome and this is how it happens. Trump expects us to pay a yet to be defined/agreed up amount of money towards the Golden Dome, I suspect that he's strong arming Denmark first and if he can make them bleed heavily in terms of payment into it, it will be our turn next for payment.
I have to wonder if we should be extending to Denmark their involvement into JORN with us, with them paying their fair share. Re-open 4-6 of the old, closed, US cold war bases and have them staffed with Danes/NATO soldiers and feed the data all into the central command base in North Bay, which in turn feeds into NORAD.
- Reaction score
- 6,326
- Points
- 1,260
What are the chances of an AOPS from Halifax is being spun up now for a Nuuk curtesy call?
- Reaction score
- 12,272
- Points
- 1,160
Here in Canada we were threatened by Russia for the duration of the Cold War but never really believed it could happen. We spent reluctantly on defence. Mainly to satisfy others, in particular the US. Absent the Cold War pressures we spent nothing at all.
But when one man in the US starts making noises, well, it seems we believe that and everybody wants someone to man the border for them.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 17,568
- Points
- 1,260
That sounds like a terrible idea.
HavokFour
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,213
- Points
- 1,040
Another incredibly clear 'no, thank you' for the ones in the back.
www.sermitsiaq.ag
Pressemøde: – Vi vælger det Grønland, vi kender i dag, siger Jens-Frederik
Statsminister Mette Frederiksen og formanden for Naalakkersuisut, Jens-Frederik Nielsen (D), vil give en udtalelse om 'den aktuelle situation'.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 17,568
- Points
- 1,260
At the 40:14 mark Kory Teneycke nails it.
- Reaction score
- 6,326
- Points
- 1,260
The timing of this, Carney going to China, is fateful. The trip was planned back towards the end of October but having it occur now, with all that is going on, is quite something.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 43,416
- Points
- 1,160
Awkward...
- Reaction score
- 6,326
- Points
- 1,260
‘Unacceptable’ for Greenland not to be in US hands, says Trump
US president’s comments come hours before high-stakes talks between Denmark, Greenland and US
www.theguardian.com
“The US needs Greenland for the purpose of national security. Nato should be leading the way for us to get it,” the US president said on social media. The alliance “becomes far more formidable and effective” with the territory under US control, he said.
“It is vital for the Golden Dome that we are building,” he said, referring to a proposed missile defence system.
- Reaction score
- 6,185
- Points
- 1,160
Just throwing this out there as a hypothetical at this point. For the sake of argument let's say the US makes some type of deal with a Greenlandish Quisling leader to purchase/annex Greenland in some way. Nothing following a Danish constitutional process that Copenhagen would consider lawful, but enough of a fig leaf for the US to hide behind as justification for taking control of the island.
As a new US territory the US establishes the new Greenland NORAD Region (GNR). Do Canadian fighters participate in policing this new NORAD region? What happens to NORAD if we refuse? If we do deploy our fighters to police incursions into the region how does that affect our relationship with NATO and Denmark? A Danish Mechanized Battalion is a rotational unit in our Latvia Brigade and that Brigade falls under NATO Multinational Division North which is Danish led.
I truly hope that we can write off Trump's bluster (and that of his political entourage) over Greenland as just that and that some kind of reasonable resolution can be found for this issue, but realistically if the US were to in some way take control over Greenland against the wishes of the majority of the population there - then the current "World Order" will truly be broken. NATO will effectively cease to exist and Europe and the US will become rivals as opposed to partners. Canada will be in an extremely precarious position as the mouse sleeping next to the rogue elephant.
As a new US territory the US establishes the new Greenland NORAD Region (GNR). Do Canadian fighters participate in policing this new NORAD region? What happens to NORAD if we refuse? If we do deploy our fighters to police incursions into the region how does that affect our relationship with NATO and Denmark? A Danish Mechanized Battalion is a rotational unit in our Latvia Brigade and that Brigade falls under NATO Multinational Division North which is Danish led.
I truly hope that we can write off Trump's bluster (and that of his political entourage) over Greenland as just that and that some kind of reasonable resolution can be found for this issue, but realistically if the US were to in some way take control over Greenland against the wishes of the majority of the population there - then the current "World Order" will truly be broken. NATO will effectively cease to exist and Europe and the US will become rivals as opposed to partners. Canada will be in an extremely precarious position as the mouse sleeping next to the rogue elephant.
Oldgateboatdriver
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 4,324
- Points
- 1,010
The resolution of this issue, which has been completely fabricated by Trump, is to push for defining the problem (which seems to change every day).
There has to be a political campaign ran by Denmark and it’s NATO allies combined with a communications one, that pushes the US to be clear as to what their national security issue with Greenland really is.
Then, you go all out in diplomacy in the US (meaning in Congress and the news outlets in an organized fashion) to remind that there is already an agreement in place with the US to give them all access they feel is necessary for those DEFENCE needs.
The idea here is to demonstrate to the open public in the US, and in Congress in particular, that there is no real “national security” issue here, but just an attempt at seizing the natural resources of a friendly, allied country.
Expose the lie and the issue goes away, IMHO.
There has to be a political campaign ran by Denmark and it’s NATO allies combined with a communications one, that pushes the US to be clear as to what their national security issue with Greenland really is.
Then, you go all out in diplomacy in the US (meaning in Congress and the news outlets in an organized fashion) to remind that there is already an agreement in place with the US to give them all access they feel is necessary for those DEFENCE needs.
The idea here is to demonstrate to the open public in the US, and in Congress in particular, that there is no real “national security” issue here, but just an attempt at seizing the natural resources of a friendly, allied country.
Expose the lie and the issue goes away, IMHO.
- Reaction score
- 1,399
- Points
- 1,010
The US cannot establish a Greenland NORAD Region, that is up to NORAD, so Canada gets a say.
But yes, if Canada says no it does put NORAD in jeopardy. Which is not something either side wants; from the US point of view they lose Canadian airspace, so defensive depth. What happens to the northern radars would be anyone’s guess.
Which leads to the bigger question: what would be the current US administration’s reaction to being told no.
The fundamental problem with this plan is that's built on the idea that there is in fact a coherent defence need for the US that it does not already have the ability to address. There are already long standing agreements that give the US an enormous amount of freedom and control in establishing and maintaining forces there, with the Cold War numbers exceeding 10,000 that included forced resettlement of locals, numerous bases, nuclear weapons, so on and so forth. The US made the decision to draw all those down, if it feels there is a need for expanded forces it can do so. This in addition to current and expanding Danish defence efforts.
Trump wants Greenland because of ego reasons (looks good on a map, he thinks it'll make him look powerful for expanding US territory, what have you) or because he thinks he/the US can make money by exploiting natural resources, likely without any consideration for how difficult exploiting some of those resources might actually be.
