Maybe they can send all the recent immigrants to do the fighting. We'll send our somalians. And let them fight it out in the frozen tundra. Rinse and repeat until Europe is great again.
Greenland is 5D chess. What has it accomplished? EU is in panic. Some want to kick the US out of NATO, all of them want to raise their military budget. Just as Trump strongly suggested.
No one can spare military resources when there is a real, or rather Imagine threat.
Trump is cutting allies, in this case Zelenskyj’s allies. Anyone remember him? Seems he got lost in the media storm.
OT: Imagine being constantly outraged over the latest Trump news, and before you have a chance to process it, the next thing is already here. Lying awake at night thinking about Greenland. (True story from Facebook.) Must be exhausting. 😄
I have not seen anybody talking of raising defense spending but I have seen talks of how Europe must choose new stance towards Russia because they believe Russia could help Europe against the USA. Or at least here in Finland, I can't talk for whole Europe.
My husband ask me today why Denmark believes they have the right to control Greenland and I struggled to answer. Can anyone here point me to anything that might help me explain it to him. As a side note: he is an avid Fox fan, and I just recently introduced him to Promethian Action and am amazed that he is intrigued so I really want to follow up.
America's manifest destiny calls for bold leadership to secure the continent and beyond, and Greenland stands as a prime example of territory that rightfully fits under strong, decisive control to protect Western interests. Supporters of a truly great America recognize that the island is strategically essential and was effectively placed under U.S. stewardship during a critical historical moment, only to be unfairly pulled back afterward.
Consider the facts: In 1940, Nazi Germany occupied Denmark, rendering the Danish government unable to exercise real authority over its distant possessions. Denmark as a functioning sovereign power over Greenland effectively ceased during that occupation—the homeland was under enemy control, supplies cut off, and governance impossible from afar. This created a power vacuum in the North Atlantic, where Greenland's position made it vital for defending the hemisphere against Axis threats.
The United States stepped in responsibly. In 1941, an agreement was reached allowing full American military control and defense of the island to prevent it from falling into hostile hands. American forces built bases, protected the territory, and ensured it served the Allied cause—ferrying aircraft, monitoring weather, and securing shipping lanes. Greenland operated under de facto U.S. protection and administration for the duration of the war, with cryolite exports and other resources supporting the fight against fascism. This wasn't charity; it was necessary action by the only power capable of safeguarding it when the previous overseer was incapacitated.
Yet after victory in 1945, the situation shifted unfairly. Post-war arrangements, influenced by European reconstruction and diplomatic maneuvering, restored nominal Danish oversight in a way that ignored the realities of wartime stewardship and investment. The U.S. had poured resources into bases like Thule (now Pituffik Space Base), which became crucial for Cold War defense against Soviet expansion. President Truman even offered to purchase it outright in 1946 for $100 million, acknowledging the strategic imperative and the logical claim built on wartime control—but that offer was rebuffed, and the island was handed back under outdated colonial frameworks rather than true security needs. It felt like a raw deal, where American sacrifices in blood and treasure were sidelined by weak European politics that prioritized old ties over practical reality.
Today, the case for American annexation is even stronger. Greenland holds immense untapped resources—vast reserves of rare earth minerals critical for technology and defense, oil, gas, and fisheries—that could fuel energy independence and reduce reliance on unreliable foreign suppliers, including those aligned with adversarial powers. Strategically, it dominates the Arctic, guarding key routes like the GIUK Gap, enabling superior missile defense, submarine monitoring, and projection against threats from Russia or China, who are increasingly active in the region. Controlling Greenland would secure the northern flank, open new shipping lanes as ice naturally recedes, and create economic booms in mining and infrastructure that benefit hardworking people everywhere.
This isn't about conquest for its own sake—it's about fulfilling a higher purpose to expand prosperity and security across the Americas and the Arctic sphere. Bold leaders who understand real strength have long seen this potential, from historical offers to more recent pushes emphasizing it as a smart strategic move. Reclaiming proper control of Greenland would correct past injustices, undo the post-WWII sleight of hand, and position America to lead unchallenged in a dangerous world. Anything less allows rivals to gain ground while true supporters of American greatness watch opportunities slip away. The time is right to make it happen through whatever firm means necessary—diplomacy first, but resolve always.
As I said before the government, which is who you've quoted, is against it. But articles I've read say the the PEOPLE are excited by the potential of joining the US.
So, the Danes were already threatened with Euro-boots on the ground in Ukraine - most disagreed vehemently. But, there is support. (Remember Denmark's government initially cooperated with the Germans to maintain some autonomy before widespread resistance emerged.) So, the Danes are slow to get angry, so to speak.
Now, suddenly Euro-boots must be sent in the other direction to defend a mountainous frozen wasteland? Even as Denmark is supposed to govern Greenland, generation of politicians have outvoted the designated Greenland politicians. It's essentially viewed as a forgotten wasteland.
Yeah, NAH.
Popularity of leaders in Europe is around 10% approval.
Meanwhile, DS, NeoCohens Globalists + Green Goblin:
Good of them to show where their loyalty lies.
Now we can pull out of NATO
Maybe they can send all the recent immigrants to do the fighting. We'll send our somalians. And let them fight it out in the frozen tundra. Rinse and repeat until Europe is great again.
Greenland is 5D chess. What has it accomplished? EU is in panic. Some want to kick the US out of NATO, all of them want to raise their military budget. Just as Trump strongly suggested.
No one can spare military resources when there is a real, or rather Imagine threat.
Trump is cutting allies, in this case Zelenskyj’s allies. Anyone remember him? Seems he got lost in the media storm.
OT: Imagine being constantly outraged over the latest Trump news, and before you have a chance to process it, the next thing is already here. Lying awake at night thinking about Greenland. (True story from Facebook.) Must be exhausting. 😄
I have not seen anybody talking of raising defense spending but I have seen talks of how Europe must choose new stance towards Russia because they believe Russia could help Europe against the USA. Or at least here in Finland, I can't talk for whole Europe.
I read the same thing. President Putin will not suffer fools. British Imperialists & EU elites need to get testosterone shots.
Moron. Like there is a NATO without the USA. Bought and paid for politician.
The USA should kill NATO by leaving it.
My husband ask me today why Denmark believes they have the right to control Greenland and I struggled to answer. Can anyone here point me to anything that might help me explain it to him. As a side note: he is an avid Fox fan, and I just recently introduced him to Promethian Action and am amazed that he is intrigued so I really want to follow up.
Colonialism. They got it and no one wanted it enough to take it away. We once offered $100M, but they didn’t take it.
America's manifest destiny calls for bold leadership to secure the continent and beyond, and Greenland stands as a prime example of territory that rightfully fits under strong, decisive control to protect Western interests. Supporters of a truly great America recognize that the island is strategically essential and was effectively placed under U.S. stewardship during a critical historical moment, only to be unfairly pulled back afterward.
Consider the facts: In 1940, Nazi Germany occupied Denmark, rendering the Danish government unable to exercise real authority over its distant possessions. Denmark as a functioning sovereign power over Greenland effectively ceased during that occupation—the homeland was under enemy control, supplies cut off, and governance impossible from afar. This created a power vacuum in the North Atlantic, where Greenland's position made it vital for defending the hemisphere against Axis threats.
The United States stepped in responsibly. In 1941, an agreement was reached allowing full American military control and defense of the island to prevent it from falling into hostile hands. American forces built bases, protected the territory, and ensured it served the Allied cause—ferrying aircraft, monitoring weather, and securing shipping lanes. Greenland operated under de facto U.S. protection and administration for the duration of the war, with cryolite exports and other resources supporting the fight against fascism. This wasn't charity; it was necessary action by the only power capable of safeguarding it when the previous overseer was incapacitated.
Yet after victory in 1945, the situation shifted unfairly. Post-war arrangements, influenced by European reconstruction and diplomatic maneuvering, restored nominal Danish oversight in a way that ignored the realities of wartime stewardship and investment. The U.S. had poured resources into bases like Thule (now Pituffik Space Base), which became crucial for Cold War defense against Soviet expansion. President Truman even offered to purchase it outright in 1946 for $100 million, acknowledging the strategic imperative and the logical claim built on wartime control—but that offer was rebuffed, and the island was handed back under outdated colonial frameworks rather than true security needs. It felt like a raw deal, where American sacrifices in blood and treasure were sidelined by weak European politics that prioritized old ties over practical reality.
Today, the case for American annexation is even stronger. Greenland holds immense untapped resources—vast reserves of rare earth minerals critical for technology and defense, oil, gas, and fisheries—that could fuel energy independence and reduce reliance on unreliable foreign suppliers, including those aligned with adversarial powers. Strategically, it dominates the Arctic, guarding key routes like the GIUK Gap, enabling superior missile defense, submarine monitoring, and projection against threats from Russia or China, who are increasingly active in the region. Controlling Greenland would secure the northern flank, open new shipping lanes as ice naturally recedes, and create economic booms in mining and infrastructure that benefit hardworking people everywhere.
This isn't about conquest for its own sake—it's about fulfilling a higher purpose to expand prosperity and security across the Americas and the Arctic sphere. Bold leaders who understand real strength have long seen this potential, from historical offers to more recent pushes emphasizing it as a smart strategic move. Reclaiming proper control of Greenland would correct past injustices, undo the post-WWII sleight of hand, and position America to lead unchallenged in a dangerous world. Anything less allows rivals to gain ground while true supporters of American greatness watch opportunities slip away. The time is right to make it happen through whatever firm means necessary—diplomacy first, but resolve always.
Anons on this board are truly amazing to me. Thank you so very much Fren for this information. I look forward to sharing it with my husband.
Yes, thanks.
That means they are choosing Russia and China
Don't even doubt it, but the United States will get Greenland. How the United States gets it depends on Denmark and Greenland.
There are two ways: the easy way, in which no Europeans die, or the hard way, in which many Europeans die unnecessarily.
Too bad it seems Denmark & Greenland are choosing the hard way.
You have to understand, the vaccine didn't kill off enough of the white nationalists, got to find other ways to change the culture.
THE PEOPLE of Greenland seem to be excited about joining the US. The feckless government of Denmark is the only one unhappy.
I don’t see people from Greenland excited to become a territory of US. https://x.com/ojoelsen/status/2010734917575942452?s=61
As I said before the government, which is who you've quoted, is against it. But articles I've read say the the PEOPLE are excited by the potential of joining the US.
So business as usual for the European elite. 1776 has entered the chat.
It’s cute how they just pretend the United States isn’t NATO.
They like to do things the hard way... I wonder what kompromat Denmark holds over this fools head.
So, the Danes were already threatened with Euro-boots on the ground in Ukraine - most disagreed vehemently. But, there is support. (Remember Denmark's government initially cooperated with the Germans to maintain some autonomy before widespread resistance emerged.) So, the Danes are slow to get angry, so to speak.
Now, suddenly Euro-boots must be sent in the other direction to defend a mountainous frozen wasteland? Even as Denmark is supposed to govern Greenland, generation of politicians have outvoted the designated Greenland politicians. It's essentially viewed as a forgotten wasteland.
Yeah, NAH.
Popularity of leaders in Europe is around 10% approval.
Meanwhile, DS, NeoCohens Globalists + Green Goblin:
chants are starting up again,
But yeah, Denmark
The woman on the right realizes this is a fool's errand.