by Trevor » Mon Jan 19, 2026 9:08 pm
Navigator wrote: Mon Jan 19, 2026 3:43 pm
Thank you for posting Trump's talking points on why Greenland is so important.
Yes, Greenland is important to Missile Defense. We have a base there to do that already (Thule). The Danes are more than happy to allow us to build even more such bases there. We don't have to own Greenland to do that.
Yes, Denmark on its own would have difficulty defending Greenland. We could, by the agreements already in place, build more bases and station more troops, aircraft and so on there. The Danes would be more than happy for us to spend the money to do that.
BTW, all of the above apply to Northern Canada as well.
As for the EU wanting to control what happens in the Artic, the Norwegians have claim to a significant portion of it. The Canadians even more so. Are we going to try and take Canada and Norway as well? Frankly, that's ludicrous.
The EU is basically NATO without the US or Canada. We belong to NATO as a member of it as a "Treaty Organization". It is meant for common defense. And it is not just for European security, it is for defense against an attack from ANY direction. NATO actually activated for Iraq and Afghanistan.
Yes, Russia, on its own, is no longer capable of attacking another country with a significant military (such as, say, Poland). However, Russia is allied with China, and Europe would have a major problem if a couple of million Chinese troops showed up to bolster the Russians (which is what I believe will eventually happen).
NATO is not dead. But is has been hibernating while the US carries the vast majority of the load. Trump's efforts to get the Europeans to increase defense spending has worked somewhat, but the Europeans, being the liberal socialists that they are, are not going to reduce social spending to increase military spending, until they themselves get attacked.
Russian land based nukes would fly over Greenland and Canada on their way to US targets. But for the past fifty years, the real threat is from submarine launched missiles, which the Russians would launch off of the East Coast, the West Coast, or from the Caribbean. There is no real defense against these things, as the flight times are so short compared to land based missiles. Plus, their trajectories cannot be anticipated, as the launching submarine can change its launch location, whereas we know pretty much where the Russian land based missile silos are (the mobile launchers can obviously also move, but they don't go far from their bases, and if they did, we would track them by satellite).
What you did not get into is the economic situation. Western Europe is a MAJOR trading partner for the USA. Trump is threatening to disrupt trade over Greenland and destabilize a lot of important markets.
Then there is the childishness over the Nobel Peace prize. Yes, Trump definitely deserves it more than Obama (who literally did NOTHING other than give up in Iraq, handing it to Iranian control). Trump actually accomplished the Gaza cease fire, and handled a number of other conflicts quite well. But the Nobel prize is awarded by a committee of committed leftists. They will only give it to people who adhere to their ideology (Obama) and will NOT give it to a conservative, no matter what they do. But, being a sore loser about it is no basis for foreign policy.
Trump could cure cancer, deliver world peace, reveal the secret to immortality, and they still wouldn't give him the Nobel Peace Prize. Obama won it, essentially, for not being Bush, and even he was a little embarrassed at the open fawning.
Greenland is important to missile defense, not to mention its strategic location and natural resources. Problem is, Trump's going about it in the worst way possible, as he has a habit of doing. They'd be willing to let us begin mining operations, add strategic bases, all without causing such friction... but that just isn't his style, sadly.
Hence my feeling that NATO will not be a U.S. ally when this breaks out. We've been splitting into different camps since the War on Terror, especially over the Iraq War. They've always looked down on us and while the Soviet Union was enough to silence this for a while, Russia isn't strong enough. Hopefully, Trump abandoning them will spur them to stand on their own, but we'll have to see.
Of course, China might be in the superior position now, but that can change. They have no ability to stop us from blockading the Malacca Strait, with Japan blockading from the north. We can also bomb their pipeline and refineries, meaning they'd have little choice but to buy from Russia. I guarantee Putin would squeeze every concession from them he can, knowing China would have little alternative but to comply.
[quote=Navigator post_id=93237 time=1768851829 user_id=2754]
Thank you for posting Trump's talking points on why Greenland is so important.
Yes, Greenland is important to Missile Defense. We have a base there to do that already (Thule). The Danes are more than happy to allow us to build even more such bases there. We don't have to own Greenland to do that.
Yes, Denmark on its own would have difficulty defending Greenland. We could, by the agreements already in place, build more bases and station more troops, aircraft and so on there. The Danes would be more than happy for us to spend the money to do that.
BTW, all of the above apply to Northern Canada as well.
As for the EU wanting to control what happens in the Artic, the Norwegians have claim to a significant portion of it. The Canadians even more so. Are we going to try and take Canada and Norway as well? Frankly, that's ludicrous.
The EU is basically NATO without the US or Canada. We belong to NATO as a member of it as a "Treaty Organization". It is meant for common defense. And it is not just for European security, it is for defense against an attack from ANY direction. NATO actually activated for Iraq and Afghanistan.
Yes, Russia, on its own, is no longer capable of attacking another country with a significant military (such as, say, Poland). However, Russia is allied with China, and Europe would have a major problem if a couple of million Chinese troops showed up to bolster the Russians (which is what I believe will eventually happen).
NATO is not dead. But is has been hibernating while the US carries the vast majority of the load. Trump's efforts to get the Europeans to increase defense spending has worked somewhat, but the Europeans, being the liberal socialists that they are, are not going to reduce social spending to increase military spending, until they themselves get attacked.
Russian land based nukes would fly over Greenland and Canada on their way to US targets. But for the past fifty years, the real threat is from submarine launched missiles, which the Russians would launch off of the East Coast, the West Coast, or from the Caribbean. There is no real defense against these things, as the flight times are so short compared to land based missiles. Plus, their trajectories cannot be anticipated, as the launching submarine can change its launch location, whereas we know pretty much where the Russian land based missile silos are (the mobile launchers can obviously also move, but they don't go far from their bases, and if they did, we would track them by satellite).
What you did not get into is the economic situation. Western Europe is a MAJOR trading partner for the USA. Trump is threatening to disrupt trade over Greenland and destabilize a lot of important markets.
Then there is the childishness over the Nobel Peace prize. Yes, Trump definitely deserves it more than Obama (who literally did NOTHING other than give up in Iraq, handing it to Iranian control). Trump actually accomplished the Gaza cease fire, and handled a number of other conflicts quite well. But the Nobel prize is awarded by a committee of committed leftists. They will only give it to people who adhere to their ideology (Obama) and will NOT give it to a conservative, no matter what they do. But, being a sore loser about it is no basis for foreign policy.
[/quote]
Trump could cure cancer, deliver world peace, reveal the secret to immortality, and they still wouldn't give him the Nobel Peace Prize. Obama won it, essentially, for not being Bush, and even he was a little embarrassed at the open fawning.
Greenland is important to missile defense, not to mention its strategic location and natural resources. Problem is, Trump's going about it in the worst way possible, as he has a habit of doing. They'd be willing to let us begin mining operations, add strategic bases, all without causing such friction... but that just isn't his style, sadly.
Hence my feeling that NATO will not be a U.S. ally when this breaks out. We've been splitting into different camps since the War on Terror, especially over the Iraq War. They've always looked down on us and while the Soviet Union was enough to silence this for a while, Russia isn't strong enough. Hopefully, Trump abandoning them will spur them to stand on their own, but we'll have to see.
Of course, China might be in the superior position now, but that can change. They have no ability to stop us from blockading the Malacca Strait, with Japan blockading from the north. We can also bomb their pipeline and refineries, meaning they'd have little choice but to buy from Russia. I guarantee Putin would squeeze every concession from them he can, knowing China would have little alternative but to comply.