Posted on 01/06/2026 10:37:55 AM PST by SeekAndFind
What do you think: is it manifest destiny that the United States acquire or at least exercise control over Greenland? That’s pretty much how we got Texas, California, New Mexico, Hawaii, the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Guam and American Samoa. Then there was the Louisiana purchase. In 1803, Thomas Jefferson doubled the size of the United States, paying France $15 million or a bit less than three cents per acre for a land mass that is about 26 percent of the contiguous United States. And let’s not forget about Alaska.
A few facts about Greenland. It is big: 836,000 square miles. It is home to about 50,000 people, mostly Inuits. Historically, it has been seen as the semi-autonomous property of Denmark. It is much closer to the east coast of the United States than it is to Denmark – much, much closer if you travel from the 51st state, sometimes known as Canada. According to Donald Trump, we’ll get around to talking about the United States exercising control of Greenland in “two months,” maybe as soon as twenty days. “We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security,” he recently told reporters. The Chinese and the Russians pose a threat to the area. The EU knows this but won’t publicly admit that the US must intervene to protect the Arctic region. For its part, Denmark, a nation of 6 million people, is unable to protect its protectorate. To beef up security, said Trump, they recently sent another dog sled.
Oh, dear. All that sent the commentariat into a tizzy. The tizzy took a dose of steroids when Katie Miller, the wife of Trump’s aide Stephen Miller, took to X to post an image of Greenland overlaid with an American flag and a single word: “Soon.” Yikes. On Monday, Mette Frederiksen, the Danish Prime Minister, said that an American takeover of Greenland would mark the end of the NATO military alliance. Or maybe it is the only way to preserve the creaky Cold War relic?
Anyway, the talk in Trump world about Greenland has given mouthpieces like Jake Tapper a case of the sads. After Katie Miller’s post, Tapper anxiously pestered her husband Stephen Miller about Greenland. “Can you,” quoth Tapper, “rule out that the US is ever going to try to take Greenland by force?” “Greenland should be part of the United States,” replied Miller. He then offered him a lesson in realpolitik. “We live in a world, in the real world, Jake, that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power,” he said.
“These are the iron laws of the world since the beginning of time.” Has Miller been reading his Thucydides (see Book 5.89)? Miller then asked an interesting question: by what right does Denmark have Greenland? Is it because Erik the Red founded a settlement there around AD 1000? I think the Danes will have to do better than that.
And besides, Jake Tapper can rest easy. Trump will not be sending in a Delta Force squadron to seize Greenland. That’s not how things will evolve. How will they evolve? Trump wrote about it in The Art of the Deal. There will be tears and some foot stamping by the Danes and other members of the EU. But Greenland will soon come under the orbit of the United States. Maybe Trump will make the sort of deal that Arthur Guinness struck when, in 1759, he leased St. James’s Gate for his brewery for £45 per year for 9,000 years.
I am sure a tidy sum will change hands over Greenland. Maybe Trump will also extend some face-saving tokens. But Greenland is essential to America’s, and Europe’s, security in the region. Therefore, notwithstanding the Jakes and the Margarets of the world, Greenland will be ours.
Don’t forget the Gadsden purchase from Mexico, which picked up the southern third of Arizona and the southwest corner of New Mexico.
If Russia and China now excluded from Venezuela, why should a European EU-type nation have control of land in the Americas?
It shouldn’t, not in this new world of the Donroe Doctrine.
Git-R-Done
Texas won its independence from an oppressive government and became a free nation, years later it allowed the United States to join it and was gracious enough to let the U.S. keep their name and formal stature.
It probably should be part of Canada (geographically that makes sense). If it were to become US state, it is pretty much guaranteed to have 2 democrat Senators and democrat Representatives) if admitted as a territory, it would have a non voting member of the House of Representatives, almost certainly a democrat.
I asked an AI last week about this:
Do you think the orange warmonger will invade greenland ?
Yes, as of January 4, 2026, the prediction market Polymarket shows a 10% chance that President Trump will successfully acquire Greenland before 2027 [1].
This low probability reflects the significant legal, political, and international hurdles the U.S. would face in attempting to annex an autonomous part of a sovereign, democratic NATO ally.
Here is a summary of the current situation that contributes to that 10% figure:
Factor
Status as of Jan 4, 2026
Official U.S. Position
President Trump has not ruled out using force and claims it’s a national security priority.
Danish Sovereignty
Denmark is a NATO founding member and has vowed to defend its territory; an attack would trigger collective defense clauses.
International Law
Unilateral annexation of a peaceful democracy is a major violation of the UN Charter.
Prediction Markets
Polymarket currently lists the chance of acquisition before 2027 at 10%.
Provides a market-based assessment.
The “Yes” bet on Polymarket would only pay out if an official U.S. announcement or signed legislation brings Greenland under U.S. sovereignty by the end of 2026. Social media posts like the recent “SOON” post do not count toward this resolution [1].
No Evidence of Terrorist Bases or Major Drug Smuggling none that has been released
While the U.S. government has not released formal evidence of terrorist bases or drug smuggling in Greenland as of January 4, 2026, the Trump administration has increasingly used “national security” as a primary justification for its interest in the territory.
The current situation regarding alleged threats and U.S. justifications is as follows:
1. Shift in Intelligence Priorities
In May 2025, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard issued a “collection emphasis message” directing the CIA and NSA to prioritize intelligence gathering in Greenland. However, reports indicate this intelligence focus is centered on:
Russian and Chinese Activity: President Trump stated in a January 4 interview that Greenland is “surrounded by Russian and Chinese ships”.
Local Politics: Identifying individuals who support U.S. objectives or the Greenlandic independence movement.
Natural Resources: Monitoring local attitudes toward American resource extraction.
2. Lack of Released Evidence for Smuggling or Terrorism
Unlike the operation in Venezuela, which was backed by a formal 2020 narco-terrorism indictment against Nicolás Maduro for trafficking 250 tons of cocaine annually, there are no similar public indictments or intelligence briefings linking Greenland to such activities.
3. Allegations of Covert Operations
Rather than evidence of external threats, the most prominent security concerns involving Greenland in late 2025 and early 2026 involve U.S. covert influence campaigns:
Danish intelligence (PET) has accused at least three Americans tied to the Trump administration of conducting covert operations to sway public opinion and create divisions between Denmark and Greenland.
The Danish government summoned the American chargé d’affaires in August 2025 to protest these “unacceptable” interference attempts.
4. Legal Status and Defense
Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen reiterated today that Greenland is protected by NATO collective defense. She noted that the U.S. already has “wide access” to Greenland for defense through existing agreements—such as at Pituffik Space Base—making unilateral “liberation” legally unnecessary for defense purposes.
Would you like to see a comparison of the legal justifications used for the Venezuela raid versus those being proposed for Greenland?
AI responses may include mistakes. For legal advice, consult a professional
There’s 58,000 people in Greenland. Offer them a cash buyout and American citizenship and tell them to hold a vote. We’d own them by the time the ballots were counted.
Option two. We already have the free reign of the whole country complete with military bases. Why do we need to own it? If you want to develop the minerals, we have those agreements already with dozens of countries.
Denmark preparing to lose 98% of its landmass...
1) It started as a light hearted comment and grew TDS legs.
2) There is something there of strategic interest. I've been to Thule, nothing there makes me believe that or want to go back.
If we could actually trust Canada to be our ally and give us unfettered access, this would be fine. As long as Canada is being ruled by EU surrogates and Marxist idiots, no.
The case for annexing Greenland
Upgrading to the next level good deal.
It all makes strategic sense and I don’t like to say Trump handles something badly because he usually knows how to get his way, but of course the other countries are going to respond negatively to the idea that you might invade Greenland and take it by force.
Trump should have never answered a hypothetical question after Venezuela in which he just mentioned happily that oh yeah we need Greenland.
Maybe he does say it other times but it sure would be a lot better approach to say Denmark is our Ally and we will try to work something out with them.
were to become US state, it is pretty much guaranteed to have 2 democrat Senators and democrat Representatives.
—
Your assumption, but not likely reality. A poll taken in January of last year had the pro-US contingent at 30,000 of 50,000.
There’s 58,000 people in Greenland.
—
Less than 52,000 as of last census in Greenland.
Besides, if it became a state Americans would move there and the Greenland population would grow rapidly.
Trump should invite the Danish President or whatever she is to the US for “talks”. Throw her a nice state dinner, make her feel special, then put a cash offer on the table. Plus “perks”...
We have only Alaska in the Arctic and Greenland provides a larger foothold for our defense and for any claims we might have there.
While that glorious iceball has enormous resources, its primary usefulness is positional: it is the barrier to further expansion of Russian and Chinese claims and an excellent location for interception systems to kill missiles on their way to the US.
The Danes stopped being relevant since the Nazis used them as a speed bump last century.
We need to buy it, make it US territory, and give its residents the benefits of the US Constitution.
Denmark stole it from Norway a while back.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.