However, I am unaware of what the treaty itself says with respect to whether, or the means by which, a nation may withdraw.
Posted on 01/18/2026 5:26:07 PM PST by MinorityRepublican
After talks between the Greenland and Denmark foreign ministers and U.S. officials on Wednesday yielded no results, President Donald Trump was met with questions as to what his next steps might be. Talking to reporters in the Oval Office, Trump—who continues to ramp up pressure on Greenland in his desire to annex the territory—refused to rule out the option of leaving NATO.
“Greenland is very important for the national security,” said Trump, doubling down on his argument about the 0Kingdom of Denmark territory. He went on to say the U.S. “cannot rely on Denmark” to protect Greenland from Russian and Chinese interests and warned that he has many options to explore. “You found that out last week with Venezuela," said Trump, referencing the operation that resulted in the capture and detainment of the fallen Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.
Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen said there remains a “fundamental disagreement” between Denmark and the U.S. as to what lies ahead for Greenland. In a display of strength, Denmark announced an expansion of its military presence on and around the island on Wednesday. Several European NATO allies followed suit, with Sweden and Germany among the countries committing to send military personnel to the territory.
Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen on Thursday said Greenland’s defence was a “common concern” for all of NATO. Echoing that sentiment, Danish Defence Minister, Troels Lund Poulsen, told reporters in Copenhagen that Denmark is planning to have a "larger and more permanent" NATO presence to ensure the island’s security. It’s “crucial to show that security in the Arctic is not only for the Kingdom of Denmark, it is for all of NATO,” said Poulsen.
(Excerpt) Read more at time.com ...
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
US out of NATO and the UN
Worst case is that Trump may not be allowed to leave NATO, but he can strip them of EVERYTHING we provide...which is basically the same thing.
Linguistic gymnastics by leftwing reporters:
Trump refuses to rule out buying everyone a hippopotamus for Christmas.
Trump refuses to rule out hiring Swalwell a Chinese call girl.
Trump refuses to rule out abortions for liberal women.
Trump refuses to confirm there are alien bodies stored in Area 51.
blahblahblah
The press doesn’t tell us what is actually going on or ask meaningful questions, they just make up crap.
I don’t think so. Unfortunately Congress has to agree to it.
But the Senate (and that includes Linda Graham) will probably pass a law requiring authorization before the President can withdraw from NATO.
Re: "The USA cannot rely on Denmark to protect Greenland from Russian and Chinese interests..."
Wow - congratulations, Time Magazine!
You admit - in just the second paragraph - that Trump is motivated foremost by national security interests.
The question is not “Can Trump do that?” But rather, “Will the Republican congress and senate EVER do anything?”
How many of the NATO countries, with their token military forces, would or could come to our aid if we were attacked?
NATO is a parasite sucking the life blood of the American people.
Greenland/Denmark notwithstanding, US interests are best served by leaving asap.
“Unfortunately Congress has to agree to it.”
Not necessarily. W Bush withdraw from a treaty with Russia on his own.
He could reduce the US support to no more than that of the other countries in nato.
I wish he could dump NATO.
Trump is not going to use force to take over Greenland. This is complete conjecture and gas lighting. He might be encouraging this viewpoint because it may help him diplomatically.
Article 13 of the NATO Charter reads, “After the Treaty has been in force for twenty years, any Party may cease to be a Party one year after its notice of denunciation has been given to the Government of the United States of America, which will inform the Governments of the other Parties of the deposit of each notice of denunciation.”
So, yes, President Trump can pull us out of NATO.
Don’t leave NATO because of the Greenland issue.
Leave it because it has outlived its usefullness, causes trouble with it’s meddling, and because we have already poured far too much taxpayer money into NATO
to benefit Europe while they constantly work against us and our interests.
However, I am unaware of what the treaty itself says with respect to whether, or the means by which, a nation may withdraw.
I fear this Greenland acquisition push is going to cost the Republicans in the midterms. I sense many voters are annoyed by it, probably because they don’t understand the importance of obtaining it. Then pathetic RINOs like Tom Tills open their pie holes and undercut the President. I don’t see it as a winning issue, but I hope I’m wrong.
It would be more than worth it if it resulted in the USA getting out of NATO, but I doubt many others would see it that way.
More importantly, Boasberg & Co.
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.