It would be pretty hard to maintain a fleet in the Med if all those ships need to return to Norfolk to refuel and reprovision.
Europe needs to accept reality. America is no longer the good guys. It is more likely that the US will attack Europe than defend Europe from attack. Behave accordingly. As soon as is practical seperate yourselves economically and in security from the US.
Breaking Nato has been the goal of Putin since he took power. Getting Drumph to do it for him will be his greatest achievement. We already have a military base in Greenland and I'm sure working within the Nato framework any additional security arrangements can be made. Congress don't let Russia use Drumph to achieve it's goals. Being played for a sucker is never a good look.
If the rest of the world stops buying US Treasuries, or requires much higher interest rates to own them, that brings this rogue nation to its knees through unsustainable debt loads and interest payments. Not in my best interest as an American, but something I would not mind seeing.
Existing use of allied military bases not only helped U.S. operations in other parts of the world. The main folly of the U.S. insistence on owning Greenland for security reasons, lies in the fact that it already has access to all Danish ports and air force bases around Greenland. All they need to do is ask Copenhagen. As a staunch ally, they will grant any such request.
So why own Greenland, if military access is already secured?
Correct. And by demanding Greenland, Trump is weakening security in the Arctic. Today, 7 of 8 Arctic nations are NATO members. Together they are far better in providing security in the region than for the US to do so alone, in the face of not only Russian but also NATO country opposition, if it were to seize Greenland
I'm wondering if some of the recent analysis of this issue is based on the assumption that the US government feels that it does indeed have allies and whether it is a mistake to believe this.
So, European countries might feel that they are allies of the US but if the US feels that any other country is just an actual or potential enemy (outside of proven client states) , then preemptive acquisition of strategic assets makes some kind of demented sense. If you think, for example, that Denmark might one day be ruled by a leader as blithe to international law as Trump himself currently is and which will renege on any military access agreement on a whim then aggressive acquisition of Greenland now is just bringing this crisis forward and resolving it in the US's favour.
The obvious argument against this is that it turns allies into enemies but, heck, if you feel that they are that anyway (or could easily become so (civilizational erasure etc)) then strike now and keep them in line.
And, to state the obvious, if you don't have allies then you also don't alliances either, whatever the other partners might think. The other countries bordering the Arctic will continue to guard it as either they will get clobbered by the US or Russia for not doing so. So less allies and more 'common interests with a dash of subjugation'.
I'm not making an argument that this is a good way of handling international relations but rather that it is possible a 'good enough' fit as a lens through which to see US actions currently. Summarizing a little more, the US now feels more like an ethnic clan in its relations with others that something more sophisticated.
A lot of 'thinking aloud' going on with this so happy to, ahem , see some refining...
I’ve read the NSS 2025 several times and it is fair to say that the Trump administration operates with a revisionist world view. They do see a jungle out there. They also see the liberal rule based project of the EU as antithetical to American (business) interests. They see their domestic “enemies” — the democrats — as aligned with Europeans. They see a seamless domestic-foreign continuum in the liberal project that needs to be torn down. Europeans are not their friends because democrats are not their friends. This is globalist thinking thru the looking glass.
But the purpose is not against Russia, but to aid Russia, at Putin’s orders to Trump. Beside disrupting NATO, Trump will allow Russia access to Greenland which NATO currently blocks. This will outflank the GIUK gap, not strengthen it.
What nonsense. Putin's orders? It's clear to all that USA's marching orders emanate from Tel Aviv, not Moscow.
Answer this question..WHY does Russia need access to Greenland? Russia has global-strike hypersonic and nuclear powered missiles in addition to it's traditional "triad" nuclear forces, and no strategic need to possess Greenland to strike anywhere on earth in a matter of minutes.
The strongest lever the Europeans have is their purchasing and ownership of US Treasury bonds. The US has to roll over a vast stock of maturing debt this year, alongside funding its massive budget deficit, much of which is funded by Europeans. A moratorium on purchase of USTs would send yields spiralling and the dollar slumping. The impact on US asset values would be devastating.
Petition to the United States Congress: Oppose Any Illegal Annexation or Military Occupation of Greenland
Please, please take a moment to sign this petition and forward generously—we, as citizens can still make a difference, but time is of the essence!! Shawn AVDD
The US's power over the last 80 years has come from collaboration, promoting democracy, and openness. The invasion of a strategic partner, undermining democracy, and retreating into itself poses the biggest threats to the US itself, with huge consequences to the rest of the world. May Europe get its act together quickly and dramatically step up economic and military integration, smart deregulation, and the promotion of large-scale digital and electrical infrastructure.
On January 20, 2026, the "Remove the Regime" organizers are calling for a nationwide, peaceful day of action: at 2:00 p.m., people are asked to "walk out"' from wherever they are, and then from 3:00-5:00 p.m., they're asked to "walk in" to their local congressional offices to demand impeachment and removal. #politics #breakingnews #whitehouse
Appreciated the focus on second-order effects: once sovereignty becomes ‘negotiable’ inside an alliance, every smaller member starts hedging—and the whole deterrence story weakens
Might it be asking too much for some Republicans in Congress to finally grow a backbone and try to curb Trump’s imperialist tendencies?
Sadly, yes. 5 years of the orange one have shown that.
It would be pretty hard to maintain a fleet in the Med if all those ships need to return to Norfolk to refuel and reprovision.
Europe needs to accept reality. America is no longer the good guys. It is more likely that the US will attack Europe than defend Europe from attack. Behave accordingly. As soon as is practical seperate yourselves economically and in security from the US.
As an American, I’ve grown exhausted at being embarrassed. What the hell are we doing.
Breaking Nato has been the goal of Putin since he took power. Getting Drumph to do it for him will be his greatest achievement. We already have a military base in Greenland and I'm sure working within the Nato framework any additional security arrangements can be made. Congress don't let Russia use Drumph to achieve it's goals. Being played for a sucker is never a good look.
Europe owns a very sizable chunk of US debt. Any move against European interests should trigger a massive sell-off of US securities. Easy as that.
Yes. another way in which the US underestimates its vulnerability.
If the rest of the world stops buying US Treasuries, or requires much higher interest rates to own them, that brings this rogue nation to its knees through unsustainable debt loads and interest payments. Not in my best interest as an American, but something I would not mind seeing.
The US will be bankrupt. Technically they are already for decades. Thanks to Trump it will be reality. The US is a third world country.
Existing use of allied military bases not only helped U.S. operations in other parts of the world. The main folly of the U.S. insistence on owning Greenland for security reasons, lies in the fact that it already has access to all Danish ports and air force bases around Greenland. All they need to do is ask Copenhagen. As a staunch ally, they will grant any such request.
So why own Greenland, if military access is already secured?
Correct. And by demanding Greenland, Trump is weakening security in the Arctic. Today, 7 of 8 Arctic nations are NATO members. Together they are far better in providing security in the region than for the US to do so alone, in the face of not only Russian but also NATO country opposition, if it were to seize Greenland
I'm wondering if some of the recent analysis of this issue is based on the assumption that the US government feels that it does indeed have allies and whether it is a mistake to believe this.
So, European countries might feel that they are allies of the US but if the US feels that any other country is just an actual or potential enemy (outside of proven client states) , then preemptive acquisition of strategic assets makes some kind of demented sense. If you think, for example, that Denmark might one day be ruled by a leader as blithe to international law as Trump himself currently is and which will renege on any military access agreement on a whim then aggressive acquisition of Greenland now is just bringing this crisis forward and resolving it in the US's favour.
The obvious argument against this is that it turns allies into enemies but, heck, if you feel that they are that anyway (or could easily become so (civilizational erasure etc)) then strike now and keep them in line.
And, to state the obvious, if you don't have allies then you also don't alliances either, whatever the other partners might think. The other countries bordering the Arctic will continue to guard it as either they will get clobbered by the US or Russia for not doing so. So less allies and more 'common interests with a dash of subjugation'.
I'm not making an argument that this is a good way of handling international relations but rather that it is possible a 'good enough' fit as a lens through which to see US actions currently. Summarizing a little more, the US now feels more like an ethnic clan in its relations with others that something more sophisticated.
A lot of 'thinking aloud' going on with this so happy to, ahem , see some refining...
I’ve read the NSS 2025 several times and it is fair to say that the Trump administration operates with a revisionist world view. They do see a jungle out there. They also see the liberal rule based project of the EU as antithetical to American (business) interests. They see their domestic “enemies” — the democrats — as aligned with Europeans. They see a seamless domestic-foreign continuum in the liberal project that needs to be torn down. Europeans are not their friends because democrats are not their friends. This is globalist thinking thru the looking glass.
But the purpose is not against Russia, but to aid Russia, at Putin’s orders to Trump. Beside disrupting NATO, Trump will allow Russia access to Greenland which NATO currently blocks. This will outflank the GIUK gap, not strengthen it.
What nonsense. Putin's orders? It's clear to all that USA's marching orders emanate from Tel Aviv, not Moscow.
Answer this question..WHY does Russia need access to Greenland? Russia has global-strike hypersonic and nuclear powered missiles in addition to it's traditional "triad" nuclear forces, and no strategic need to possess Greenland to strike anywhere on earth in a matter of minutes.
Notice that Murmansk is the nuclear subs base, 200 km from NATO border, and Russia has not been doing anything about it for 2 years now.
The strongest lever the Europeans have is their purchasing and ownership of US Treasury bonds. The US has to roll over a vast stock of maturing debt this year, alongside funding its massive budget deficit, much of which is funded by Europeans. A moratorium on purchase of USTs would send yields spiralling and the dollar slumping. The impact on US asset values would be devastating.
The real damage isn’t annexation.
It’s that security guarantees now appear conditional on ownership and leverage.
Exactly! In that sense, the damage has already been done
The United States is utterly unreliable because of our domestic political chasm. Our word is written in invisible ink.
One thing for sure, Trump would finally realize it is a lot smaller than it looks on his map.
Petition to the United States Congress: Oppose Any Illegal Annexation or Military Occupation of Greenland
Please, please take a moment to sign this petition and forward generously—we, as citizens can still make a difference, but time is of the essence!! Shawn AVDD
https://c.org/j9SkRhJP5F
The US's power over the last 80 years has come from collaboration, promoting democracy, and openness. The invasion of a strategic partner, undermining democracy, and retreating into itself poses the biggest threats to the US itself, with huge consequences to the rest of the world. May Europe get its act together quickly and dramatically step up economic and military integration, smart deregulation, and the promotion of large-scale digital and electrical infrastructure.
On January 20, 2026, the "Remove the Regime" organizers are calling for a nationwide, peaceful day of action: at 2:00 p.m., people are asked to "walk out"' from wherever they are, and then from 3:00-5:00 p.m., they're asked to "walk in" to their local congressional offices to demand impeachment and removal. #politics #breakingnews #whitehouse
#fyp https://www.instagram.com/reel/DTbyFryDnb3/?igsh=enJ6dmQ2eHlwOW9x
I agree entirely. It is long past the point where Europe needs to take a firm stance against U.S. aggression.
Today they finally did.
Appreciated the focus on second-order effects: once sovereignty becomes ‘negotiable’ inside an alliance, every smaller member starts hedging—and the whole deterrence story weakens
-Noble