24

Donald Trump said Friday his administration will take action on Greenland “whether they like it or not,” further escalating his rhetoric as he pushes to acquire the Danish territory for the U.S.

The comments came during a meeting with oil executives to discuss the prospect of doing business in Venezuela. Less than a week earlier, the U.S. military invaded the oil-rich South American nation and captured its leader, Nicolás Maduro.

Denmark and its European allies in NATO – the military alliance co-founded by the U.S. – have pushed back, reiterating that Greenland is not for sale. But the Trump administration nevertheless says it is currently weighing a range of options on Greenland, including utilizing the U.S. military or cutting a deal to purchase it from Denmark.

all 47 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] WatDabney@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 month ago

Donald Trump is a deranged lunatic and an existential threat to the US and its citizens, and to people around the world, and that renders him unfit for office. He needs to be removed as soon as possible, while there's still some possibility that the extensive harm that he has done and is doing might be reversed.

[-] tburkhol@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

I hope he tries The Thing that finally gets domestic power to remove him. 25th amendment, impeach & remove, resign. Whatever. None of those seem particularly likely at this point.

I very much hope he doesn't ever get the opportunity to do The Thing that finally gets a foreign power to stop him. He's had no consequences so far. Barely any meaningful resistance. It's hard to imagine what someone with his brain damage thinks, but he doesn't have any evidence that he can't do whatever he wants, and it won't be surprising if he tries.

[-] null@piefed.nullspace.lol 2 points 1 month ago

I find it essentially impossible to believe there is a The Thing for the first one. Where things are at now, I can't even imagine what that could possibly be.

[-] Makeitstop@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

The 25th amendment is invoked by the cabinet and the vice president. Those are the people supporting this shit, they aren't going to get rid of him. He's doing what they want and giving them cover.

I would say that the only thing that could convince them to remove him is if he became such a liability that they felt the need to get rid of him out of self-preservation. But honestly, I don't think they have the necessary level of awareness. If anything, I suspect most of them would be more likely to double down on being cartoonishly evil and try to do whatever it takes to cling to power.

[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 month ago

Without a change in congress I have no idea what he could possibly do to get republicans to do something. It's literally a cult. He could come to their houses and rape their kids and they'd be out there the next day explaining how this is good for America, actually.

[-] Soulg@ani.social 1 points 1 month ago

He will never be 25th-ed, he made Dan sure to only pick those with his cock firmly down their throat at all times

[-] Triumph@fedia.io 1 points 1 month ago

Classic Dan.

[-] Eldritch@piefed.world 0 points 1 month ago

That will never happen and short of people showing up with pitchforks and torches or guns and bombs. This will continue. Republicans will continue to whinge and wince publicly. While squealing orgasmicly inward at everything he steals and everyone he hurts.

The only possibility would be for every Republican in this coming midterm to lose their elections. And even that wouldn't guarantee it. Democratic leadership will have to grow a spine as well.

[-] aesthelete@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

It feels hopeless but the real way to stop the train a'rolling is a general strike.

[-] tburkhol@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

I saw signs calling for a general strike Jan 20 at the last demonstration, but I haven't seen any real momentum. Tell me when it is and I'll have a neighborhood barbecue.

[-] aesthelete@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

The only one I heard of was this one: https://generalstrikeus.com/ and I think Cory Doctorow was trying to get one planned: https://doctorow.medium.com/https-pluralistic-net-2024-11-11-rip-jane-mcalevey-organize-f8ba7e91c5c9. He set his date out pretty far in the future because he knows that it's difficult to organize one.

Americans, show some spine and end this man

I am calling upon all service workers to call in sick tomorrow. If you serve anyone anything, this means fast food workers. This means all the people who cannot afford to take a day off. If we all just don't show up, the world stops....why don't we all get this?

[-] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

Yeah I don't think everyone you're calling upon is going to get your message.

You're also calling upon people who do something they can't afford to do. This suggests you don't have an understanding of how things are for people that are struggling.

[-] PanGodofPanic@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 month ago

Yeah, the whole army of me doesn't show up, and them I'm fired (or take a reason sick day for no reason when I have a very, very limited number of those and get fired next time I'm sick).

Nobody else is willing to join this because some internet rando promised them it would work, and a solid chunk of the population would be unwilling to join even if there was no consequences because they generally back the regime and its warmongering. In the theoretical best case it's the prisoners' dilemma on a societal scale which is basically impossible to win without a larger national union syndicate to coordinate.

Unionize now, then we can actually make a general strike happen.

[-] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago

The rest of NATO need to put troops in Greenland, today, with clear orders to fire on any invading force, even if its the US.

If there's one clear and obvious pattern with Trump's use of military power, it's that he likes quick, easy, low cost military operations. One day of airstrikes, one special forces raid, declare victory, go home. Either he or the people around him understand that America has no stomach for a war right now. The American right have been beating the anti-war drums hard for the last decade. But surgical military operations win public because they're already over before anyone can react. Look, see, no Iraq style quagmire. Trump gets it done, no problems. Not like those other idiots.

All of which adds up to the conclusion that Trump will not want to spark a war with the entirety of NATO. But he's extremely confident that if he steals Greenland fast enough, NATO won't want a war to take it back.

This is why the defence of Greenland has to be pre-emptive. A clear commitment to a fight, before the US can put boots on the ground. Do that, and Trump will back down. The right wing politics of today are not the right wing politics of 2001. He doesn't want a war, he wants an easy victory. We cannot offer him one.

[-] wuffah@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Greenland is an autonomous territory of Denmark, one of the founding members of NATO along with the US.

Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty states that an armed attack against one NATO member shall be considered an attack against all members, and triggers an obligation for each member to come to its assistance.

Attacking, invading, operating in, or otherwise taking military action against Greenland will at best destabilize and delegitimize NATO, and at worst prompt a full military response from NATO member states against the United States Military, the largest and most powerful armed force in history several times over, with a budget an order of magnitude larger than the rest of the world combined.

I cannot overstate how horrifically, hilariously bad this would be:

  • It would begin an escalating conflict that would give China the perfect distraction to invade Taiwan, and remove the support that Ukraine desperately requires to continue defending against Russia.

  • To avoid war, Denmark and NATO would be forced to concede and appease Trump as Chamberlain did with Hitler, further emboldening Trump, Putin, and Xi Jinping to continue their totalitarian regimes and campaigns which literally amount to no less than cartoonishly evil total world domination.

  • In full scale conflict, NATO states would be faced with a losing battle in which their only recourse would quickly become the use of nuclear weapons.

This absolutely cannot happen. Our only window to stop the Trump regime’s utterly Fascist-with-a-capital-F designs by conventional political means is rapidly closing. Once the American military is in Denmark without their consent, my advice is to start looking at options for your own survival of WWIII.

[-] b_tr3e@feddit.org 2 points 1 month ago

That would be the end of NATO. Which means it's the US on one side an the rest of the world on the other. Except Israel, of course.

[-] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Which means it's the US on one side an the rest of the world on the other

It won't work out this way, no matter what happens.

  1. Pacific Rim nations will probably stick with US interests over European interests, because the US is the only thing between them and China (at the moment). Europe doesn't have the global presence or the interest to operate in the Pacific. This includes: Taiwan, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, Singapore, the Philippines, etc. Even if the US is showing itself to be a less reliable partner, it is still not (yet) an active threat to their interests the way that China is.

  2. Ukraine under Zelensky won't just surrender to Russia and will probably tolerate a lot from the US in order to continue their defense efforts unless they are somehow offered EU membership/protection explicitly. I could see Ukraine breaking ties with the US if it meant joining the EU.

  3. The above might give Trump the excuse to say openly that Ukraine "didn't want peace" (via surrendering to Russia) and then declaring open support for Russia in the name of "peace". Then it's an out-and-out US-Russia partnership.

  4. China will continue to pretend neutrality, continue to manipulate its rivals into destabilizing, continue using its neighbor countries to export its environmental disasters, and then invade Taiwan. If that doesn't provoke direct conflict with the US, the rest of the Pacific Rim starts to look really vulnerable.

  5. South America is... complicated. Obviously a lot of nations like The Dominican Republic and Colombia would side against the US with Venezuela. Argentina wouldn't. Is Venezuela under direct US control/occupation at this point? Brazil is a founding member of BRICS, so they're probably aligning with China and/or Russia, but they'll probably stick to conflict avoidance as much as possible.

  6. India might make some public statements of condemnation of imperialistic behavior to score political points, but that would be it. The only way they get involved in any conflict is if China is on the other side (or maybe Pakistan, but that's more complicated).

  7. Iran is in so much trouble right now with Tehran being completely out of water, and the internal economic strife. They're still a power in the region, but not really in a position to influence things beyond their borders.

  8. Canada won't support US aggressive actions, but will also do almost anything to avoid direct conflict with the US. That's a very difficult position which will produce confusing, noncommittal and seemingly self-contradictory actions and statements.

  9. Africa...? No idea, really.

[-] miked@piefed.social 1 points 1 month ago

Tehran being completely out of water

Haven't been paying attention to the Iran protests. Knew they were running out soon but didn't know it happened.

[-] DaddleDew@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

But on the plus side, the members could start their own alliance named "Now Excluding America Treaty Organization". I way on the plus side because the acronym would spell out "NEATO"

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

And the US and Russia will start their own Friendship Union. Like the G7, except only two of them.

We can call it FU2

[-] DrFistington@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Just fucking kill him. No one will really care

[-] Ioughttamow@fedia.io 1 points 1 month ago

I bet Jodie Foster will care, do it for her! Get pardoned by the next admin for protecting democracy! Win win!

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

You keep saying this, as if millions of people aren't in his cult.

[-] athatet@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 month ago

Yeah but once he stops yammering people will forget about him pretty quick.

[-] SuiXi3D@fedia.io 1 points 1 month ago

Yeah, and I hope it's FUCKING DIE. I'm so sick and fucking tired of Trump.

[-] hydrashok@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

“If anyone knows anything about not respecting boundaries, it’s me!” - Drumpf

[-] Bonesince1997@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago
[-] harmbugler@piefed.social 1 points 1 month ago

Grab 'em by the Nuuk.

[-] Janx@piefed.social 1 points 1 month ago

Unfair. That's only according to his ex-wife, court records, the Epstein files, several credible victims, and his own recorded admission...

[-] wuffah@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

I’m a little more worried about the part where he causes WWIII.

[-] MrVilliam@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

They were commenting on his disregard for consent or even negotiation. He takes what he wants. He "grabs them by the pussy," as it were.

[-] Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

The Epstein files still have not been released.

[-] MisterD@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

Time to sell the bonds that back the US currency. It will make the USD's value plummet

[-] miked@piefed.social 1 points 1 month ago

2024 numbers - https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/RS/PDF/RS22331/RS22331.51.pdf

Country - Amount Held ($ billions) - Percentage of All Foreign Holdings in Federal Debt Japan $1,061.5 12.40% Mainland China $759.0 8.87% United Kingdom $722.7 8.44% Luxembourg $423.9 4.95% Cayman Islands $418.9 4.89% Canada $378.8 4.43% Belgium $374.6 4.38% Ireland $339.4 3.97% France $332.3 3.88% Switzerland $298.7 3.49%

Total top 10 countries of foreign investors in federal debt $5,109.8 59.71% Total all foreign investment in federal debt $8,558.4 100%

[-] FenderStratocaster@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Something feels like covid felt just before covid became a pandemic.

[-] HumanOnEarth@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 month ago

I'm getting that itch to buy big things that might not be available much longer or will be in high demand.

For COVID it was a trampoline (best decision ever, impossible to find one weeks later).

For this..... not sure yet. But surely running out of time to figure it out.

[-] miked@piefed.social 1 points 1 month ago
[-] danekrae@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

My flatmates voted a new guy into the apartment. He ruined everything in it.

Now he's threatening other people in the building, and I expect them to do something about it.

[-] optissima@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago

He's pulled a gun on the flatmates, and started brandishing it throughout the complex, but the only ones unarmed in the building are said flatmates, to extend the metaphor.

[-] danekrae@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

No, no, no. They have the most weapons in the building...

They are just scared, that they could lose what they still have, if they resist.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

What I expect is the US will land and declare it belongs to the US now. The only question I have is if Greenland's military is going to shoot back.

[-] Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io 2 points 1 month ago

The Danes have already stated, "shoot first, ask questions later." I don't expect them to step down from that position. An invasion by a hostile state IS an act of war. And the invader is by definition a war criminal. The Danes are being serious, they aren't jesting. FAFO.

[-] TonyOstrich@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

I'm more interested in what the rest of the world will do. I have no doubt Greenland will defend itself, but no one really seemed interested in sending troops to help Ukraine when Russia invaded, what would be different in this scenario? I realize technically it's NATO, but it isn't like any of those agreements are bound by laws of nature and most of the people in charge these days seem more interested in whatever is profitable than what is right.

this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2026
24 points (100.0% liked)

politics

28176 readers
729 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS