Trump says 8 European countries will be charged a 10% tariff for opposing US control of Greenland

[Marener]

Remember when Trump said that Putin would never want him as president?

Boy is that a stupid thing to say in light of his behavior.

Bailing on Ukraine. Fighting inside of NATO.

 

[Rogue AI]

Security is the pretense the regime has given for Don's petulant behavior.

Trump threatens 200% tariff on French wines as Macron reportedly snubs ‘Board of Peace’ seat​

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/01/20/tru...t-tariff-on-french-wines-and-champagnes-.html

Examples of Grandpa Don's unfitness to be prez are becoming a daily occurrence.

Buy American wine, without patriotic winos California will only fall deeper in to unsustainable debt.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Buy American wine, without patriotic winos California will only fall deeper in to unsustainable debt.

US can't be trusted on trade agreements now. He randomly threatens tariffs daily.

 

[Rogue AI]

US can't be trusted on trade agreements now. He randomly threatens tariffs daily.

Good for him, in case you haven't noticed, everyone caves in the end. Keep your products off US shelves too long and they will be forgotten and replaced, trying to get that marketshare back is costly or impossible depending on product. Maybe wine snobs wii continue to prop up France and pay more, most will not, they will move to cheaper alternatives.

 

[berg80]

Buy American wine, without patriotic winos California will only fall deeper in to unsustainable debt.

Obtuse, or purposely avoiding the point?

 

[Rogue AI]

Obtuse, or purposely avoiding the point?

What point? That you are backing foreigners over Americans again? That seems to be the only thing you loons do these days, that and support anarchy in our streets.

 

[berg80]

If Europe's leaders were acting as trump is the markets here and there would be down 10%.

 

[berg80]

What point? That you are backing foreigners over Americans again? That seems to be the only thing you loons do these days, that and support anarchy in our streets.

The point is Dotard is using tariffs as his personal vendetta, not to address trade imbalances. He, once again, isn't acting in the interests of the US. He's acting in his own interests. Surely you aren't too stupid to realize this.

 

[Mac1958]

Trump just doesn't know how the world works...

He doesn't know how tariffs work. He doesn't know how relationships work. He doesn't know how a presidency or the Constitution work.

Par for the course.

 

[OldFlame]

It wouldn't be defeneded by 56,000 locals because they are part of NATO by way of Denmark. Any attack on Greenland would be an attack on the US and Europe...

'Freeloaders in Europe'
As if the US has had no benefit from being a superpower will strong alliance to many European countries. Well, you'll get what you wanted because Europe can no longer trust the US as an ally. The US is threatening an ally in Greenland itself. It's threatening an allied soverign country.

It's so extremely short sighted. Europe will obviously move to cut reliance on the US even more than they already were in the process of doing due to other actions that Trump has taken. That's a done deal now.

Please do, it will save us billions.

The U.S. pays billions annually for European defense through NATO funding, stationing troops, military assistance, and initiatives like the European Deterrence Initiative, with figures around $30-36 billion in recent years for direct costs, though total contributions, including the nuclear umbrella, are harder to quantify, and Europe's increasing reliance on U.S. arms sales highlights this deep commitment, especially post-Ukraine invasion.

Key Areas of U.S. Contribution:

• NATO Funding & Presence: Direct funding for NATO, plus costs for U.S. troops, bases, exercises, and infrastructure in Europe (e.g., $3.8 billion in EDI funding in FY2022).
• Military Assistance
  : Direct financial aid to allies, though this varies by year
  .
• • European Deterrence Initiative (EDI): Funds for rotational forces, training, and equipment to counter Russian aggression.
  • Nuclear Umbrella & Strategic Support: The implicit promise of U.S. nuclear deterrence and high-level support for European security.

Estimated Costs & Commitments:

• Direct Costs: Around $30-36 billion annually for direct defense spending in Europe (around 5-5.6% of the U.S. defense budget in past years).
• Total Commitment: Far exceeds direct spending, encompassing global commitments and strategic deterrence, with some studies suggesting replacing U.S. support would cost Europe $1 trillion over 25 years.

European Reliance & Spending:

• Europe's defense spending has increased, with European NATO members spending significant amounts (e.g., Germany and France over $50 billion each in 2023).
• There's a rising trend of European nations buying U.S. military hardware, with Europe buying over 50% of U.S. military export sales in recent years, indicating deep reliance on American defense technology, notes The Parliament Magazine.

In essence, the U.S. provides foundational defense support, costing billions directly and indirectly, while Europe's increasing procurement from the U.S. shows a growing reliance on American capabilities, says The Parliament Magazine.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The tariff will be "due and payable", Trump says.

Trump STILL DOESN'T ******* KNOW WHO PAYS THE TARIFF.

25th Amendment, please.

It doesn't matter who pays the tariff. If there is no sale, the Euroweenies suffer!

 

[OldFlame]

If you ever read about European history of the last two thousand years you'd learn that it was Christianity that caused far more human suffering than Islam ever did.

Christian "civilization" slaughtered millions of Africans, millions of Aborigines, millions of Vietnamese and South American Indians and millions of Native Americans.

Politicized white Christianity invented antisemitism and even slaughtered six million Jews and other minorities.

But you're a beneficiary of all the slaughter so of course it doesn't count.

I'd say that he is a muslim invader. The name and avatar are hilarious given its posts on here.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

No, NATO did not join us in Iraq. Britain and Canada sent small contingents to fight there but they spent more time complaining about the US than fighting the Iraqis.

Not true. NATO aircraft operated from bases in Jordan and Qatar along with ours.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Why is it closed today?

MLK Day!

 

[OldFlame]

They have actually offered to let us expand our military presence and operations but that is not what trump wants. He wants the goddamn minerals and the land that is his true objective. Since de-icing has begun across miles of Greenland the prospects for mineral and oil deposits are unfathomable.

And you would rather have Russia or China have it.

 

[OldFlame]

Check your stats.
Here's the situation that didn't exist three weeks ago: multiple NATO countries are sending military forces to Greenland—not to defend against Russia or China, but to defend against the United States. Germany, Sweden, Norway, France, Finland, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and Estonia are all deploying troops to the Arctic island as part of "Operation Arctic Endurance," a Danish-led exercise that everyone knows isn't really about training in harsh conditions. It's about showing Trump that if he tries to invade Greenland, he'll be fighting NATO. His own alliance. The one the United States created.


Germany sent 13 reconnaissance troops. France sent mountain infantry and promised to reinforce with "land, air, and sea assets." Sweden dispatched officers. Finland sent two liaison officers. Norway sent personnel to "map out further cooperation between NATO allies"—which is diplomatic speak for "figure out how to defend Denmark from America." The UK, Netherlands, and Estonia followed. Danish Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen announced plans to "establish a more permanent military presence with a larger Danish contribution," with NATO soldiers rotating through Greenland indefinitely.


This isn't a normal training exercise. Danish Royal Navy ships are patrolling Greenland's coast looking for foreign vessels—and the "foreign" threat isn't Russia or China. It's the United States. Denmark has invested 42 billion kroner (about $6 billion USD) into Arctic defense upgrades in the past year, including new naval vessels, long-range drones, upgrades to the Joint Arctic Command in Nuuk, intelligence capabilities, and Arctic military training. They signed two agreements in 2025—one in January for 14.6 billion kroner, another in October for 27.4 billion kroner—specifically to defend Greenland from whoever might threaten it. And right now, that's Trump.


French President Emmanuel Macron stood in front of military personnel and said "history forgives neither lack of preparation nor weakness," then announced France was sending more troops. He's not talking about Russia. He's talking about the United States. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius confirmed Germany's deployment was "in light of Russian and Chinese threats in the Arctic," but everyone knows the real threat driving this deployment is Trump threatening to invade a NATO ally.


Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned that if the United States attacks Greenland, it would "spell the end of NATO." Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen met with Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio in Washington on Wednesday and came out saying there's still a "fundamental disagreement" over Greenland's future and that it's "clear that the president has this wish of conquering over Greenland." Former NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said Trump "speaks like a gangster" in his threats. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte refuses to call it a "crisis," but when asked how security is "enhanced in any way by the US claims that they need to own Greenland," he dodged the question and talked about Arctic cooperation instead.


Republican Senator Roger Wicker, chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told Trump this is "a topic that should be dropped" and cautioned him against "spending time antagonizing allies." Republican Senator Thom Tillis and Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen, co-chairs of the Senate NATO Observer Group, issued a joint statement saying "the United States must honor its treaty obligations and respect Greenland and Denmark's sovereignty and territorial integrity." A bipartisan congressional delegation flew to Copenhagen to try to salvage the relationship. But White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said European troops' presence in Greenland "will not impact the president's decision-making process, nor does it impact his goal of the acquisition of Greenland at all."


So NATO allies are deploying troops to defend against an American invasion, and the White House is saying it doesn't matter because Trump's going to take Greenland anyway.


Denmark says Greenland's waters aren't "swarming with Russian and Chinese vessels" the way Trump claims. Danish Maj. Gen. Søren Andersen, leader of the Joint Arctic Command, said he hasn't seen any Chinese or Russian combat vessels or warships in his 2½ years commanding forces in Greenland. Trump is lying. Again. But he's using the lie to justify annexation, and it's working politically even if it's not true militarily.


According to multiple reports, NATO allies are floating ideas for a new permanent mission in Greenland, modeled on the Baltic Sentry operation that defends underwater infrastructure in the Baltic Sea. Germany proposed calling it "Arctic Sentry." The discussions are "at an embryonic stage" with "no concrete proposals on the table," but the fact that they're happening at all shows how serious this is. NATO is considering a permanent deployment to Greenland—not to defend against Russia, but to defend against the possibility that the United States might actually invade.


Denmark has been clear: under the 1951 treaty (updated in 2004), the U.S. can send more troops to Greenland anytime it wants just by notifying Denmark. There are currently about 150 American troops at Pituffik Space Base in northwest Greenland. The U.S. has had military access to Greenland for over 70 years. Trump doesn't need to invade to increase the U.S. military presence. He can just ask. But Trump doesn't want access. He wants ownership. He wants to plant the flag and call it American soil. And Denmark is preparing to fight to stop him.


Thousands of people—about a third of Nuuk's population—marched through the streets on Saturday protesting Trump's threats. They carried signs that said "Stop Trump," "Make America Smart Again," and "Hands Off." Greenland's Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen said "if we have to choose between the United States and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark." Sara Olsvig, leader of the Inuit Circumpolar Council in Greenland, said "there is no such thing as a better colonizer." Julius Nielsen, a fisherman in Nuuk, told reporters: "We have been a colony for so many years. We are not ready to be a colony and colonized again."


Polls show Greenlanders overwhelmingly oppose U.S. takeover. A Quinnipiac University poll found 55% of Americans also oppose trying to buy Greenland, including 85% of Democrats and 58% of Independents. Only Republicans support it—and even then, Republican senators are publicly telling Trump to drop it.


Kori Schake, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, said "it will take a generation to repair the damage and collapse of trust among the U.S.' closest allies that Trump has caused." She's right. NATO has existed since 1949. It's the foundation of post-WWII transatlantic security. It's kept the peace in Europe for 77 years. And Trump is willing to destroy it—willing to invade a founding member, willing to threaten allies with tariffs, willing to turn the alliance into a protection racket—because he wants an island that Denmark has repeatedly said isn't for sale.


Every adversary the United States has ever had is watching NATO tear itself apart over Trump's imperial fantasy. They're watching European allies deploy troops to defend against America. They're watching the White House dismiss allied concerns and double down on annexation threats. They're watching the collapse of the rules-based international order in real time.


And when NATO finally breaks—when Trump pushes too far and Denmark invokes Article 5 against the United States, or when European allies decide the alliance isn't worth maintaining if America treats them like vassals—every authoritarian regime that wants to see the West divided will have won without firing a shot.


Because Trump decided Greenland was worth more than 77 years of collective security. Because he decided owning an Arctic island mattered more than the alliance that's kept the peace since World War II. Because he's a narcissist playing Risk with real countries, and nobody with the power to stop him has the spine to try.


So NATO allies are deploying troops to Greenland. To defend against the United States.

---

Original reporting by The Associated Press, Reuters, CNN, NBC News, CBS News, Axios, Newsweek, Defense News, Euronews, and PBS.

Why? Why are they against their supposed ally, the US securing Greenland for the future of the free world?

 

[OldFlame]

That is ludicrous. Of course they don't.

Why is it ludicrous? We have millions trying to come here to be Americans, and I bet you support that, don't you?

 

[Marener]

Why? Why are they against their supposed ally, the US securing Greenland for the future of the free world?

Greenland is in NATO, so it’s as secure as every other nation in the alliance.

 

[dudmuck]

It doesn't matter who pays the tariff. If there is no sale, the Euroweenies suffer!

 

[OldFlame]

We are going to acquire Greenland? How exactly? By what right? You know Greenland is not on board right? So are we using force? Please explain

Maybe we'll all migrate there to get away from you loons, you're all about illegal immigration, and it's wonderful that you suddenly care about borders and sovereignty, but apparently only for other countries, not the US.