NATO considering troops in Greenland

[rightwinger]

Hmm, that's a lie because President Trump hasn't attacked NATO.

Here's an idea, how about you read the National Defense Plan of 2026 instead sitting there spouting complete ignorance like a pathetic little asshat that doesn't have a clue what anything is really all about?

Article 5

 

[Bitterhook]

Article 5

B-53, Battleship

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Hmm, that's a lie because President Trump hasn't attacked NATO.

Here's an idea, how about you read the National Defense Plan of 2026 instead sitting there spouting complete ignorance like a pathetic little asshat that doesn't have a clue what anything is really all about?

The fat rapist is broadcasting that he is going to attack NATO.

 

[frigidweirdo]

as a sitting duck....

Russia has been all over the artic for resources

which is why resources were a bargaining chip....

i'll wager they know this....

really?, seems it's the first time NATO's been in our back yard .....

~S~

Russia hasn't been all over Greenland though.

And the US used NATO in Afghanistan. Also uses NATO countries to go warring around the world. Especially the UK and Germany.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Hilarious. NATO wants to protect Greenland from the country that provides about 2/3 of their military budget. You can’t make this up.

Denmark provides the military budget. Not the US.

 

[frigidweirdo]

<~~~~~~~~~~>​

A.I. Say's:
The United States' role in the defense of Greenland is based on a 1951 defense agreement with Denmark and is considered strategically logical by both U.S. and Danish security experts due to Greenland's critical location for North Atlantic and North American security. The current arrangement, which involves close cooperation, is widely seen as sufficient and effective, making unilateral acquisition or invasion unnecessary.

Key Reasons for the U.S. Defense Role

• Strategic Location: Greenland is crucial for controlling the Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom (GIUK) Gap, a key maritime chokepoint for monitoring Russian naval movements into the Atlantic.
• Early Warning Systems: The U.S. operates the Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule Air Base), a vital installation for ballistic missile early warning, missile defense, and space surveillance operations for the U.S. and NATO.
• NATO Alliance: Both the U.S. and Denmark are NATO members. The 1951 agreement is an implementation of the North Atlantic Treaty, solidifying the shared responsibility for defense.
• Arctic Security: With increasing interest from Russia and China in the Arctic, the U.S. presence helps ensure stability and counter potential security threats in the region.

The Current Arrangement
Under the 1951 agreement, the U.S. has the right to "construct, install, maintain, and operate" military facilities in Greenland in cooperation with Danish and Greenlandic authorities. This existing framework grants the U.S. broad access to meet its security objectives without needing sovereignty over the island. Experts argue that any necessary expansion of the U.S. military presence can be achieved through existing diplomatic channels and mutual consent.
In summary, the established defense cooperation, rooted in decades-old treaties and mutual security interests, is a logical and functional arrangement that serves the security needs of all parties involved.
In 2026, the logic behind U.S. protection of Greenland is based on established international law, historical precedent, and modern strategic necessity. This relationship is formalized through the 1951 Defense of Greenland Treaty, which grants the U.S. the right to operate military installations on the island for the collective defense of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
1. Legal and Institutional Framework
The U.S. "protection" is a treaty-bound obligation rather than a unilateral claim:

• The 1951 Agreement: Signed between the U.S. and Denmark, this treaty remains the legal foundation for U.S. military presence. It allows the U.S. to "construct, install, maintain, and operate" bases to defend both Greenland and the NATO region.
• Sovereignty and Consent: Greenland is an autonomous territory of the Kingdom of Denmark. Current 2026 updates confirm that any significant change to the U.S. military footprint requires consultation with both Danish and Greenlandic authorities under the 2004 Igaliku Agreement.
• NATO Article 5: As part of Denmark, Greenland falls under NATO's mutual defense clause, making its protection a shared "logical" priority for the entire alliance.

2. Strategic and Geopolitical Logic (2026)
Experts and officials cite several reasons why U.S. protection is logically essential to contemporary security:

• Missile Defense and Early Warning: The
  Pituffik Space Base
  (formerly Thule Air Base) is a critical node for U.S. homeland defense, housing radars that track long-range ballistic missiles over the North Pole.
• The GIUK Gap: Greenland sits at one end of the Greenland-Iceland-UK Gap, a naval chokepoint through which Russian and Chinese vessels must pass to enter the Atlantic. Protecting this area is vital for monitoring submarine movements.
• Arctic Competition: With climate change opening new shipping routes like the "Polar Silk Road," the U.S. views Greenland as a buffer against Russian military expansion and Chinese "near-Arctic" ambitions.
• Resource Security: Greenland contains massive deposits of rare earth minerals and graphite, which are essential for defense technologies and the transition to renewable energy. Protecting the island ensures these resources do not fall under adversarial control.

Commentary:
Based upon the above, the security of Greenland is paramount if both Russia and China are showing interest in a take over.
Since the U.S. has been the protector of Greenland actually prior to 1951
So simply, Frigidweirdo is blowing smoke.

No, Trump is blowing shit.

The US does not have the right to do whatever it wants, no matter what the **** happened before 1951. Denmark runs Greenland, it's a part of Denmark, **** you Trump.

 

[sparky]

Russia hasn't been all over Greenland though.

Russia has been all over the artic , and for one reason Frigid ......the very same reason we (the USofA) are all over S. America

~S~

 

[frigidweirdo]

Russia has been all over the artic , and for one reason Frigid ......the very same reason we (the USofA) are all over S. America

~S~

And all over Greenland.

MONEY. Trump is a whore to money. He can't get enough. He'll kill people to get more money.

 

[Doc7505]

Then tell your government to protect them. Stop advocating for us to take military action everywhere.

<~~~~~~~~~~>
It looks like we've been doing that for the last 75 years.
It's come to the point that we now need to control Greenland.

 

[braalian]

Greenland has no sovereignty. in order to vote in an election in greenland one must be a citizen of denmark.

How does that even make sense?

As much sense as Puerto Rico, right?

 

[frigidweirdo]

As much sense as Puerto Rico, right?

Or any other state. In order to be able to vote in Wyoming, you need to be a citizen of the USA.

 

[GLASNOST]

NATO considering troops in Greenland​

The Democrats were right about Hitler Trump after all.

 

[GLASNOST]

The hysteria of the left is incredible. Trump could tell someone he shot an eagle on the 7th hole

The liberal media would go ballistic and scream Trump admits he shot 7 eagles

So funny but also true.

 

[GLASNOST]

Russia has been all over the artic for resources

Russia colonizes parts of Svalbard and has done since ........ forever.

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

the dissolution of nato is worth taking greenland all by itself

And The western europeans finally try acting like europeans
How adorable

 

[Seymour Flops]

As much sense as Puerto Rico, right?

Yes, Puerto Rico has no sovereignty, either.

Difference is that I have never claimed they did, unlike the Trump-deranged who claim Trump is threatening "Greenland's sovereignty."

 

[SweetTea]

Denmark provides the military budget. Not the US.

I guess you missed the point. The US is a charter member of NATO. The US is the largest contributor to the military might of NATO by a large margin. Without the US, NATO would be impotent and likely not even exist and yet NATO wants to protect Greenland from the very member that keeps it intact.

 

[rightwinger]

Even if Trump takes Greenland, the next President will give it back

 

[SweetTea]

Even if Trump takes Greenland, the next President will give it back

If he is a dumb Democrat, yes.

 

[rightwinger]

If he is a dumb Democrat, yes.

NOBODY
In the US wants Greenland

Except Trump