8 ms·

Denmark summons top US diplomat over alleged Greenland influence operation

153 points by vinni2 1y ago

rich_sasha 1y ago
From a game theory PoV this is interesting. Remember Jan 2025? US back then was allied to Europe, Japan, Australia and a bunch of other places. And these places, largely due to their own volition, outsourced their security to the US (it was a mutually agreed but stupid decision for non-USians). Now Trump, stupidly or not, is using this leverage to extort things: money, land, power, influence. The question is: should you start treating the US as a hostile power now, hope to stem this quickly, but potentially aggregate the hostile power more? Or should you go along, make some concessions, hope he goes away. It is a little like Sudetenland, except we're not 20 years after a world war co-started by the US. And US is still largely a democratic country. What would make the pro-Trump camp lose the next election? Etc etc
- saubeidl 1y ago
  The correct move is Russian-style hybrid warfare against the US. Botnets manipulating social media with pro-European viewpoints. Paying opposition politicians. Inciting unrest to paralyze the regime. Etc etc.
- aaomidi 1y ago
  > US is still largely a democratic country Having fixed elections from a pool of candidates that have been pre approved by people you don’t know does not make for a democracy
vincnetas 1y ago
HN readers from USA, what the hell is happening. How do we "get back to normal"?
- csa 1y ago
  > HN readers from USA, what the hell is happening. How do we "get back to normal"? For the vast majority of Americans, life is “normal”, but perhaps in a slightly different key. Outside of educated liberal circles, there is no discussion of the gutting of our democracy.
  - morkalork 1y ago
    If you look back on the USA's history of interference in the middle east and Central and South America: This is normal behaviour.
- tastyface 1y ago
  Unfortunately, America is an authoritarian country now, and you should not be surprised if things stay this way for literally decades. So it goes.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > what the hell is happening. How do we "get back to normal"? To a certain degree, that is what’s happening. Denmark should bolster its military presence on Greenland, potentially up to and including by putting it under a nuclear umbrella. (Ideally European. Pragmatically, homegrown.)
  - docdeek 1y ago
    How would that work? The options for a European nuclear umbrella would be a choice between Russia (practically impossible), the UK (unlikely to be outside of US influence) or France (only EU nuclear power). A homegrown nuclear weapon would mean pulling out of the NPT and quite possibly giving a state like the US pretext to annex Greenland in the face of Denmark seeking nucear weapons.
    - rsynnott 1y ago
      France has previously indicated that it's willing to make its nuclear umbrella available to other EU countries, though precisely under what terms is unclear.
    - jmclnx 1y ago
      Canada ? Canada could allow France and maybe the UK to put sites on their soil. That would piss of Trump, always a good thing and will give Canada some security. Also, Denmark should now kick the US Military Sites off Greenland until the US climbs out if its psychotic break.
    - aurareturn 1y ago
      nuclear umbrella would be a choice between Russia (practically impossible) Would be one of the bigger plot twists in history. I wouldn't rule it out. I think it has a decent chance of happening. Maybe 10%? Let's say the Russia/Ukraine war is over. Russia mends its ties with Europe and says it will be good from now on. The US is ready to annex Greenland. Denmark is powerless and will lose Greenland. Russia calls Denmark and says it can help. If you're Denmark, what would you do?
      - 1y ago
- aurareturn 1y ago
  Maybe Trump found Hitler's fascism playbook. Part of it is to acquire new territory to stay popular. I'm guessing the US will make at least one serious attempt at annexing new land before Trump's term is over. Panama, Canada, or Greenland maybe? Edit: Getting downvoted now. No clue why. It's not me who is making these suggestions. This administration has literally said these things themselves. If you downvote me, at least have the balls to explain why.
  - bertili 1y ago
    This has the be the answer. If the approval rating tanks, you gotta disrupt. But I'm trying to understand this... any American here who can elaborate how he would feel "great again" and re-vote for GOP if the US flag was planted in the center of Nuuk?
    - westpfelia 1y ago
      Same reason any leader throughout time has planted flags.
- Kenji 1y ago
  [dead]
- dragonwriter 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - aurareturn 1y ago
    Luckily US constitution says a president cannot serve more than 2 terms. He's going to try but I don't think the public will allow him. That said, it wouldn't surprise me if he tried to start a world war in order to try to stay as president. It seems like he'll literally do anything to stay in power. Last time he tried to get a mob to kill the vice president and congress. What's he going to do in 3 years?
    - dragonwriter 1y ago
      > Luckily US constitution says a president cannot serve more than 2 terms The US Constitution says a lot of things, but that doesn't mean that they have a lot of effect. > He's going to try but I don't think the public will allow him. I don't think mortality is going to let him, but, absent also losing an internal or external war, the death of the leader is not a reliable end to an authoritarian regime. One of the reasons for rapidly and aggressively moving to institutionalize control and dismantle opposing power centers is to reduce the dependency of the regime on the cult of personality around the leader.
    - jacquesm 1y ago
      > Luckily US constitution says a president cannot serve more than 2 terms. He's going to try but I don't think the public will allow him. The constitution is no longer the pillar it used to be, and if the public didn't act so far I don't think they ever will. You'd have expected nationwide strikes by now a-la Poland 1982, the movement was called Solidarity for a reason. But in a nation full of individualists it is much harder to get something like that rolling. > That said, it wouldn't surprise me if he tried to start a world war in order to try to stay as president. It seems like he'll literally do anything to stay in power. Last time he tried to get a mob to kill the vice president and congress. What's he going to do in 3 years? This is the million dollar question. Some points of hope: he may not be around in three years, some voices are being heard that push back. But there may be a successor with similarly deranged ideas and the people that are getting a taste of real power around them may want to consolidate their position knowing full well that if they don't succeed now they most likely never will. US-Europe and US-Canada relationships will take decades to heal though, if they ever will, no matter what the outcome.
- lycopodiopsida 1y ago
  We cut all ties with USA and consider them what they de facto are - a rogue state, resembling putinist russia more and more. I've never seen a country disasembling itself with such speed. It took Putin 20 years to get the country and society to where it is now, I am not sure USA will be in a better state after 4 years full with nepotism, oligarchy, anti-scientific freaks in administration, corruption and ignoring laws on a daily basis.
  - casenmgreen 1y ago
    I've read it took Putin something like four years. He came into power 1st Jan 2000, and by 2004 people were no longer speaking openly, from fear.
    - lycopodiopsida 1y ago
      We can say there were autocratic tendencies from the beginning, as well as "tightening the screws", but he went full batshit insane only somewhere after the Maidan revolution.
      - 0dayz 1y ago
        No it started on the day of a particular nato meeting (Munich) where putin gave a bizarre speech. Which 1 year after he invaded Georgia.
        ablation 1y ago
        I take it you mean the 2007 Munich speech: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Munich_speech_of_Vladimir_Putin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Munich_speech_of_Vladimir...
  - Swenrekcah 1y ago
    That is what the despots want. The way for democracy to survive is by keeping in contact and business with the regular population where possible, but with enough independent strength to not have to bow to the despotic governments.
- jimkleiber 1y ago
  I wonder what percentage of this can be attributed to "covid killed a lot of Americans (and emotionally destroyed more), covid was brought to the US by foreigners, we can no longer trust foreigners." I think processing our feelings around covid could help a lot.
  - krapp 1y ago
    I think very little. Americans have been deeply prejudiced against foreigners ever since the founding of the country, every wave of immigration since the first has been met with hostility and violence. Trump was initially elected on a wave of xenophobic fear and hatred of South American immigrants. No, not just illegal immigrants either - that's a smokescreen. I do think you're right that the effects of covid will have long lasting cultural and political consequences, but the zeitgeist behind the backlash was already well established, and one must remember intentionally orchestrated to benefit certain political interests.
    - Yeul 1y ago
      I think that's kinda unfair. There are civilized states like New York and California. Unfortunately the US has a strange system in which the most populous and economically vital parts of the country have the least influence in Washington...
      - krapp 1y ago
        >Unfortunately the US has a strange system in which the most populous and economically vital parts of the country have the least influence in Washington... We had to keep the slaveowning states happy or else they might secede - wait... It keeps populist demagogues from taking over - wait... I got nothing.
      - FirmwareBurner 1y ago
        >There are civilized states like New York and California What makes them more civilized than the other states? I think this elitist atitudine is exactly what got Trump supported from the other states. At least in my life I've never met anyone who would like me if I declared myself more civilized than them and they wouldn't spite me back for it. There's probably a good reason South Park crators depicted Californians as smelling their own farts in that episode.
- sneak 1y ago
  We wait. Trump is not in great health and he’s quite old, and constitutional term limits will have him out in a few years. In case he tries another coup, one thing you could do is organize and obtain arms (and train with them) and have you and your group, as well as any other groups you can muster, near DC around late January 2029. The rule of law cannot be taken for granted. There is only one language that tyrants speak.
  - computerthings 1y ago
    [dead]
  - fifticon 1y ago
    There is a problem with this. Trump is just a wrecking ball. The problem is not the ball, the problem is the holes it leaves behind. Whoever replaces Trump, will arrive in the driver's seat of a vehicle which has had plenty of its safety rails removed or disabled. The problem is what happens, when a more capable, less octagenarian replacement arrives.
    - sneak 1y ago
      Not all of us agreed with the previous (or current, for that matter) size of the US federal government. The ideas behind draining the swamp and DOGE were reasonable; the problem is that the POTUS has nowhere near the power to achieve it in any meaningful sense. You cannot dismantle the government using the government. (This is something nobody wants to acknowledge as it lays bare the utter farce that is “democracy” and “a government by the people, for the people”; the United States, just like China and Russia, is an oligarchic dictatorship.) Much of what Trump officially destroyed should never have been built in the first place. Most of the damage he has wrought is not from his actual platform, but from his sheer stupidity. Covid and Russia both come to mind immediately, but also the irreparable harm he has done to the ~century-old carefully crafted global illusion of American legitimacy. As far as we can tell, he doesn’t read, including without limitation the daily intelligence briefing. There is no way to act strategically if you don’t avail yourself of all of the relevant information or you purge the administration of the messengers of news you don’t like. As we know, stupidity is far more harmful to society than malice, as malice is at least zero-sum: someone gains when you lose. Stupid people through their actions simply harm everyone, themselves included. Think of what an improvement it would be (over Trump) to have someone hyperintelligent as POTUS, but with the exact same platform. It would be bad, but not the catastrophe that Trump has wrought by being a moron who can’t think more than 15 minutes in advance and fundamentally doesn’t seem to understand the concept of strategy.
- 0x_rs 1y ago
  You don't "get back to normal". 77 million people voted for this, and 90 million more did not care enough to stop it. This is the "normal" now, what they voted for, and you don't just forget about it.
  - pandemic_region 1y ago
    I doubt they voted for _this_. They voted for a vague promise of a better life through some cool sounding measures, at the time. Now that people are starting to realize the demon they have given full power to, I doubt he would win another (unrigged) election.
    - csa 1y ago
      I have some MAGA-leaning family and professional acquaintances. Here is what I hear from them: > I doubt they voted for _this_. They most certainly did. First, they love the retention of the tax cuts and the OBBB. Second, they were repulsed by most/all things that liberals embraced: DEI, language police, gender topics, loose immigration policy, an obviously over the hill Biden, perceived weakness abroad (Afghanistan, Ukraine, Israel/Gaza), etc. > They voted for a vague promise of a better life through some cool sounding measures, at the time. Ehhh… I don’t think so. They wanted tax cuts and anything that was the opposite of liberal social policy. They got it. As for the people who didn’t vote, I’m not sure anything has changed that would get them out to vote for an opponent to Trump (Biden, Kamala, or whoever other milquetoast candidate lined up). > Now that people are starting to realize the demon they have given full power to, I doubt he would win another (unrigged) election. I think he wins by more if the election is tomorrow. Large swathes of the monied classes in the US are largely ok with the direction things are going. Tariffs, harassment of immigrants, neutering the federal government, and chaotic diplomacy just seem like unfortunate collateral damage to them. Imho, the US is in the midst of a constitutional crisis. If the Dems or some other group don’t approach 2028 accordingly, they may be watching from the sidelines again for who knows how many more years.
      - pandemic_region 1y ago
        That's really sad to hear, in a way. I don't judge the choices people make, but it seems many have gone sour - for lack of a better word. This is something that was in the makings for many years then, people generally not happy with US politics and the way the country is doing things. But T is not the answer long term.
- Hikikomori 1y ago
  Military coup and throwing the fascists in jail. There's no going back or adjusting course otherwise, people like this will only keep going unless punished. Yet we keep going with appeasement.
- MomsAVoxell 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - saubeidl 1y ago
    Does Denmark have any war criminals?
    - tokai 1y ago
      Anders Fogh Rasmussen
    - MomsAVoxell 1y ago
      Any nation participating in the criminal war on terror has plenty of war criminals.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
- elktown 1y ago
  You'd be surprised how many people here will just continue to downplay any kind of anti-democratic creep all the way to its abolishment. And Trump is even a vulgar example rather than a smooth one. Privileged people have a bad habit of assuming they'll be outside of any significantly adverse effects - or may even think "Well, this kinda sucks, but maybe this is actually pretty good for my wallet (read: social-economical status)".
- mna_ 1y ago
  Americans have been doing things like this for a while. It's just that they're doing it to their "allies" now.
- VWWHFSfQ 1y ago
  It's all so ironic considering Denmark took control of Greenland purely by conquest/claim and many Greenlanders view it historically as colonial/imperial. But now Denmark is apparently upset that an even bigger, greedier bully is trying to take it from them? I don't care about it one way or the other. I imagine an agreement will be made where USA gets something like 80% of the resource rights in exchange for Denmark getting to keep the title and then we'll all forget about this.
  - aurareturn 1y ago
    It's all so ironic considering Denmark took control of Greenland purely by conquest/claim and many Greenlanders view it historically as colonial/imperial. Isn't that what the US is doing based on this article? Create a bit of story around the people of Greenland wanting to free themselves from Denmark (even if just minority of Greenland believes so) and then come in as the hero?
    - VWWHFSfQ 1y ago
      Yes and it's unfortunate that Greenlanders don't get a say in who their conqueror is. But Denmark isn't the one that should be complaining about their ill-gotten loot being taken from them.
- AndyMcConachie 1y ago
  There is no going back to "normal". The American Empire is failing, the imperial boomerang is in full effect, and it will continue to destroy American democracy from within. Revolution is required.
  - mcosta 1y ago
    Who is going to fight the revolution?
- nobodyandproud 1y ago
  As much as I take a centrist position; I can’t see a solution that doesn’t involve a civil war that some of the American white supremacists have been begging for. The project 2025 mandate for leadership enabled a dictator in the making to establish himself. The Republican Congress removed the checks in the Supreme Court during Trump’s first term; and refuse to legislate in a way that works against Trump. And this second term, he’s been purging all of the civil servants who are more loyal to the mission than to him. What I’m dreading is 2028: Will he make good on his threat to go for a third term? Will most of the nation be too apathetic?
FirmwareBurner 1y ago
[flagged]
- derelicta 1y ago
  What I like about this comment is also what I like about the current imperial administration. It's blunt, it's openly brutish and evil. And now, European vassals are finally understanding their place in this new world and will fully grasp what it felt like to be a South American, African or Asian nation whose sovereignty only exists on paper.
  - FirmwareBurner 1y ago
    What's evil in what I said? I'm not supporting annexation, I'm just pointing out the lack of evidence in those claims and the hypocrisy when countries/empires that got territories through annexation complain about annexation. I'm not supporting it, I'm just saying it like it is in real life.
    - derelicta 1y ago
      Sorry, I did misinterpret your text as approval of such conduct. Then we agree, there is definitely hypocrisy and on my side, maybe some Schadenfreude too
    - eesmith 1y ago
      If a country's economy profited from child labor, then later that country prohibits child labor, is it hypocrisy for that country to want child labor to be illegal under international law? If a country's industry benefited from Freon-based as refrigerants, then bans their use because of Freon's effect on the ozone layer, is it hypocrisy for that country to urge other countries to agree to the Montreal Protocol? Several countries made a lot of money from whaling. Most of them have agreed to stop commercial whaling. Is it hypocrisy for them to pressure the few holdouts to agree to the ban? The US benefited from genocide of Native Americans, so therefore the US cannot ever condemn genocide without being a hypocrite? We all know about European colonialism and its negative effects on others as they plundered the world to enrich themselves. Now you say that Europe (and its former colonies who followed the same footsteps) cannot call for de-colonialism or a post-colonial world, as doing so makes them hypocrites? Instead they should, what, call for a restoration of the divine right of kings? In real life they've made at least some effort to change. It may be too little for you, but that's where their protests come from.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
kasperni 1y ago
Incidentally, the Danish state is also the majority shareholder of Ørsted, whose wind farm off Rhode Island was halted the other day [1]. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/aug/25/rsted-shares-at-all-time-low-after-trump-halts-work-on-us-windfarm https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/aug/25/rsted-sh...
- pandemic_region 1y ago
  I had a debate with my teenage daughters yesterday whether Trump was evil (all agreed), nice (all disagreed), stupid (they agreed, I did not). I explained that he's a fool wielding a very powerful tool. And we all suffer his greed. But in the end of the day, he's still a fool easily swayed by throwing a couple of dollars his way.
  - jacquesm 1y ago
    At some level the difference between malice and incompetence disappears and you should assume malice.
    - BobaFloutist 1y ago
      They change your strategy. Incompetent people can be steered away from damaging actions. Malicious people are steering themselves towards doing damage, and you need to oppose them directly.
      - Jensson 1y ago
        > Incompetent people can be steered away from damaging actions Not if they think they are competent and know what they are doing, like Trump does.
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
- Hilift 1y ago
curt15 1y ago
> The earlier May report in the Wall Street Journal also referred to learning more about Greenland's independence movement, as well as attitudes to American mineral extraction. > At the time, US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard did not deny the report but accused the Journal of "breaking the law and undermining our nation's security and democracy". lolwut
lkramer 1y ago
The national broadcaster goes into a bit more details: https://www-dr-dk.translate.goog/nyheder/indland/moerklagt/centrale-kilder-maend-med-forbindelser-til-trump-forsoeger-infiltrere?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=wapp&_x_tr_hist=true https://www-dr-dk.translate.goog/nyheder/indland/moerklagt/c... It seems pretty convincing. Greenland is such a small population it's hard to hide something like this.
- ethbr1 1y ago
  > Greenland is such a small population it's hard to hide something like this. I remember reading some impressions of the dating scene in Iceland (almost 7x Greenland's population) and realizing just how well everyone knows of... well, everyone. (At least via friend of friend in cohorts) A country of 56,800 isn't a great target for secretly conducting influence ops...
  - throw0101a 1y ago
    There are 'genetic ramifications' to small(er) population pools, "Kissing cousins? Icelandic app warns if your date is a relative": * https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/kissing-cousins-icelandic-app-warns-if-your-date-is-a-relative-1.1390256 https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/kissing-cousins-icelandic-a... > Íslendingabók. Although it being used to ensure we don't accidentally have sex with our relatives is not true, it's a database of lineages. * https://old.reddit.com/r/Iceland/comments/12tpn4o/what_is_the_name_of_the_app_that_icelandic_people/ https://old.reddit.com/r/Iceland/comments/12tpn4o/what_is_th...
LatteLazy 1y ago
The US has spent decades preventing and delaying the EU becoming a defacto state with a single army and significant foreign policy. Now trump is driving its creation in a single term.
- consp 1y ago
  Same story as Putin trying to weaken NATO. The two might have given the nudge towards a EU army or at least a more tightly integrated defence force. Spending will be through the roof for at least the coming two decades.
  - AndyMcConachie 1y ago
    Russia weaken NATO? Wut? Denmark is in NATO. What does NATO even mean if the leader of NATO (USA) is attempting to take territory from another NATO country? The point of NATO is to keep Europe tied to and subservient to the USA (ie. Atlanticism). Or at least that used to be the point of NATO. I have no idea what the point of it is now.
- tomp 1y ago
  Do you have any source for that? From my perspective, as an European, there's plenty of forces / population within the EU that doesn't want federalization. Even myself, I'm generally pro-federalization (necessary to solve some structural problems, border, army, money), I definitely don't want to give even more power to Germany (biggest and most powerful EU country), so the only way forward would be for Germany to massively diminish their power... but then they probably wouldn't want that.
  - LatteLazy 1y ago
    I think we’re at risk of confusing 2 issues here 1. Has the pressure for more intervention and an EU armed forces gone up? 2. What will that look like, who will pay for it, who will control it, will Germany dominate it etc I am just saying trump is driving point (1). How or whether (2) is solved is another matter and a more complex thing. I personally think as need goes up, ways are found. So far people have been unwilling because the points above (2) outweigh the need (1). If trump invaded Greenland then I imagine people would be much more willing to engage even if it meant paying, accepting German leadership (or Germany accepting less oversight despite paying?) etc. We have already seen France unilaterally extend its nuclear umbrella. That is what happened with finances: Germany wouldn’t accept EU wide debt, and many countries wouldn’t accept German style fiscal constraints. Then the euro crisis forced both sides to compromise and here we are with both. I hope it doesn’t take an actual military crisis to force the matter here. But one (two actually, trump on one side, Russia on the other) is looking available…
aurareturn 1y ago
If the US shows more signs or actually takes Greenland, it will trigger many countries around the world to do the same. China will certainly say it now has the right to take Taiwan because if the US can annex a territory, why not us? Could lead to a very tumultuous decade.
- hearsathought 1y ago
  [flagged]
- attentive 1y ago
  sure, let's ignore russia working on massive annexations in Ukraine
  - aurareturn 1y ago
    I’m not. But Russia is not the US. The US is suppose to be the world police. If the police is doing the bank robbery, then why shouldn’t everyone else?
SanjayMehta 1y ago
The king for 4 years has managed to turn everyone against the US. And he’s only 1/8 of the way through. (But Pakistan has nominated him for the Nobel Peace Prize, that’s something.)
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

153 points by vinni2 1y ago

From a game theory PoV this is interesting. Remember Jan 2025? US back then was allied to Europe, Japan, Australia and a bunch of other places. And these places, largely due to their own volition, outsourced their security to the US (it was a mutually agreed but stupid decision for non-USians). Now Trump, stupidly or not, is using this leverage to extort things: money, land, power, influence. The question is: should you start treating the US as a hostile power now, hope to stem this quickly, but potentially aggregate the hostile power more? Or should you go along, make some concessions, hope he goes away. It is a little like Sudetenland, except we're not 20 years after a world war co-started by the US. And US is still largely a democratic country. What would make the pro-Trump camp lose the next election? Etc etc

saubeidl 1y ago
The correct move is Russian-style hybrid warfare against the US. Botnets manipulating social media with pro-European viewpoints. Paying opposition politicians. Inciting unrest to paralyze the regime. Etc etc.
aaomidi 1y ago
> US is still largely a democratic country Having fixed elections from a pool of candidates that have been pre approved by people you don’t know does not make for a democracy

vincnetas 1y ago

HN readers from USA, what the hell is happening. How do we "get back to normal"?

csa 1y ago
> HN readers from USA, what the hell is happening. How do we "get back to normal"? For the vast majority of Americans, life is “normal”, but perhaps in a slightly different key. Outside of educated liberal circles, there is no discussion of the gutting of our democracy.
- morkalork 1y ago
  If you look back on the USA's history of interference in the middle east and Central and South America: This is normal behaviour.
tastyface 1y ago
Unfortunately, America is an authoritarian country now, and you should not be surprised if things stay this way for literally decades. So it goes.
JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> what the hell is happening. How do we "get back to normal"? To a certain degree, that is what’s happening. Denmark should bolster its military presence on Greenland, potentially up to and including by putting it under a nuclear umbrella. (Ideally European. Pragmatically, homegrown.)
- docdeek 1y ago
  How would that work? The options for a European nuclear umbrella would be a choice between Russia (practically impossible), the UK (unlikely to be outside of US influence) or France (only EU nuclear power). A homegrown nuclear weapon would mean pulling out of the NPT and quite possibly giving a state like the US pretext to annex Greenland in the face of Denmark seeking nucear weapons.
  - rsynnott 1y ago
    France has previously indicated that it's willing to make its nuclear umbrella available to other EU countries, though precisely under what terms is unclear.
  - jmclnx 1y ago
    Canada ? Canada could allow France and maybe the UK to put sites on their soil. That would piss of Trump, always a good thing and will give Canada some security. Also, Denmark should now kick the US Military Sites off Greenland until the US climbs out if its psychotic break.
  - aurareturn 1y ago
    nuclear umbrella would be a choice between Russia (practically impossible) Would be one of the bigger plot twists in history. I wouldn't rule it out. I think it has a decent chance of happening. Maybe 10%? Let's say the Russia/Ukraine war is over. Russia mends its ties with Europe and says it will be good from now on. The US is ready to annex Greenland. Denmark is powerless and will lose Greenland. Russia calls Denmark and says it can help. If you're Denmark, what would you do?
    - 1y ago
aurareturn 1y ago
Maybe Trump found Hitler's fascism playbook. Part of it is to acquire new territory to stay popular. I'm guessing the US will make at least one serious attempt at annexing new land before Trump's term is over. Panama, Canada, or Greenland maybe? Edit: Getting downvoted now. No clue why. It's not me who is making these suggestions. This administration has literally said these things themselves. If you downvote me, at least have the balls to explain why.
- bertili 1y ago
  This has the be the answer. If the approval rating tanks, you gotta disrupt. But I'm trying to understand this... any American here who can elaborate how he would feel "great again" and re-vote for GOP if the US flag was planted in the center of Nuuk?
  - westpfelia 1y ago
    Same reason any leader throughout time has planted flags.
Kenji 1y ago
[dead]
dragonwriter 1y ago
[flagged]
- aurareturn 1y ago
  Luckily US constitution says a president cannot serve more than 2 terms. He's going to try but I don't think the public will allow him. That said, it wouldn't surprise me if he tried to start a world war in order to try to stay as president. It seems like he'll literally do anything to stay in power. Last time he tried to get a mob to kill the vice president and congress. What's he going to do in 3 years?
  - dragonwriter 1y ago
    > Luckily US constitution says a president cannot serve more than 2 terms The US Constitution says a lot of things, but that doesn't mean that they have a lot of effect. > He's going to try but I don't think the public will allow him. I don't think mortality is going to let him, but, absent also losing an internal or external war, the death of the leader is not a reliable end to an authoritarian regime. One of the reasons for rapidly and aggressively moving to institutionalize control and dismantle opposing power centers is to reduce the dependency of the regime on the cult of personality around the leader.
  - jacquesm 1y ago
    > Luckily US constitution says a president cannot serve more than 2 terms. He's going to try but I don't think the public will allow him. The constitution is no longer the pillar it used to be, and if the public didn't act so far I don't think they ever will. You'd have expected nationwide strikes by now a-la Poland 1982, the movement was called Solidarity for a reason. But in a nation full of individualists it is much harder to get something like that rolling. > That said, it wouldn't surprise me if he tried to start a world war in order to try to stay as president. It seems like he'll literally do anything to stay in power. Last time he tried to get a mob to kill the vice president and congress. What's he going to do in 3 years? This is the million dollar question. Some points of hope: he may not be around in three years, some voices are being heard that push back. But there may be a successor with similarly deranged ideas and the people that are getting a taste of real power around them may want to consolidate their position knowing full well that if they don't succeed now they most likely never will. US-Europe and US-Canada relationships will take decades to heal though, if they ever will, no matter what the outcome.
lycopodiopsida 1y ago
We cut all ties with USA and consider them what they de facto are - a rogue state, resembling putinist russia more and more. I've never seen a country disasembling itself with such speed. It took Putin 20 years to get the country and society to where it is now, I am not sure USA will be in a better state after 4 years full with nepotism, oligarchy, anti-scientific freaks in administration, corruption and ignoring laws on a daily basis.
- casenmgreen 1y ago
  I've read it took Putin something like four years. He came into power 1st Jan 2000, and by 2004 people were no longer speaking openly, from fear.
  - lycopodiopsida 1y ago
    We can say there were autocratic tendencies from the beginning, as well as "tightening the screws", but he went full batshit insane only somewhere after the Maidan revolution.
    - 0dayz 1y ago
      No it started on the day of a particular nato meeting (Munich) where putin gave a bizarre speech. Which 1 year after he invaded Georgia.
      - ablation 1y ago
        I take it you mean the 2007 Munich speech: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Munich_speech_of_Vladimir_Putin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Munich_speech_of_Vladimir...
- Swenrekcah 1y ago
  That is what the despots want. The way for democracy to survive is by keeping in contact and business with the regular population where possible, but with enough independent strength to not have to bow to the despotic governments.
jimkleiber 1y ago
I wonder what percentage of this can be attributed to "covid killed a lot of Americans (and emotionally destroyed more), covid was brought to the US by foreigners, we can no longer trust foreigners." I think processing our feelings around covid could help a lot.
- krapp 1y ago
  I think very little. Americans have been deeply prejudiced against foreigners ever since the founding of the country, every wave of immigration since the first has been met with hostility and violence. Trump was initially elected on a wave of xenophobic fear and hatred of South American immigrants. No, not just illegal immigrants either - that's a smokescreen. I do think you're right that the effects of covid will have long lasting cultural and political consequences, but the zeitgeist behind the backlash was already well established, and one must remember intentionally orchestrated to benefit certain political interests.
  - Yeul 1y ago
    I think that's kinda unfair. There are civilized states like New York and California. Unfortunately the US has a strange system in which the most populous and economically vital parts of the country have the least influence in Washington...
    - krapp 1y ago
      >Unfortunately the US has a strange system in which the most populous and economically vital parts of the country have the least influence in Washington... We had to keep the slaveowning states happy or else they might secede - wait... It keeps populist demagogues from taking over - wait... I got nothing.
    - FirmwareBurner 1y ago
      >There are civilized states like New York and California What makes them more civilized than the other states? I think this elitist atitudine is exactly what got Trump supported from the other states. At least in my life I've never met anyone who would like me if I declared myself more civilized than them and they wouldn't spite me back for it. There's probably a good reason South Park crators depicted Californians as smelling their own farts in that episode.
sneak 1y ago
We wait. Trump is not in great health and he’s quite old, and constitutional term limits will have him out in a few years. In case he tries another coup, one thing you could do is organize and obtain arms (and train with them) and have you and your group, as well as any other groups you can muster, near DC around late January 2029. The rule of law cannot be taken for granted. There is only one language that tyrants speak.
- computerthings 1y ago
  [dead]
- fifticon 1y ago
  There is a problem with this. Trump is just a wrecking ball. The problem is not the ball, the problem is the holes it leaves behind. Whoever replaces Trump, will arrive in the driver's seat of a vehicle which has had plenty of its safety rails removed or disabled. The problem is what happens, when a more capable, less octagenarian replacement arrives.
  - sneak 1y ago
    Not all of us agreed with the previous (or current, for that matter) size of the US federal government. The ideas behind draining the swamp and DOGE were reasonable; the problem is that the POTUS has nowhere near the power to achieve it in any meaningful sense. You cannot dismantle the government using the government. (This is something nobody wants to acknowledge as it lays bare the utter farce that is “democracy” and “a government by the people, for the people”; the United States, just like China and Russia, is an oligarchic dictatorship.) Much of what Trump officially destroyed should never have been built in the first place. Most of the damage he has wrought is not from his actual platform, but from his sheer stupidity. Covid and Russia both come to mind immediately, but also the irreparable harm he has done to the ~century-old carefully crafted global illusion of American legitimacy. As far as we can tell, he doesn’t read, including without limitation the daily intelligence briefing. There is no way to act strategically if you don’t avail yourself of all of the relevant information or you purge the administration of the messengers of news you don’t like. As we know, stupidity is far more harmful to society than malice, as malice is at least zero-sum: someone gains when you lose. Stupid people through their actions simply harm everyone, themselves included. Think of what an improvement it would be (over Trump) to have someone hyperintelligent as POTUS, but with the exact same platform. It would be bad, but not the catastrophe that Trump has wrought by being a moron who can’t think more than 15 minutes in advance and fundamentally doesn’t seem to understand the concept of strategy.
0x_rs 1y ago
You don't "get back to normal". 77 million people voted for this, and 90 million more did not care enough to stop it. This is the "normal" now, what they voted for, and you don't just forget about it.
- pandemic_region 1y ago
  I doubt they voted for _this_. They voted for a vague promise of a better life through some cool sounding measures, at the time. Now that people are starting to realize the demon they have given full power to, I doubt he would win another (unrigged) election.
  - csa 1y ago
    I have some MAGA-leaning family and professional acquaintances. Here is what I hear from them: > I doubt they voted for _this_. They most certainly did. First, they love the retention of the tax cuts and the OBBB. Second, they were repulsed by most/all things that liberals embraced: DEI, language police, gender topics, loose immigration policy, an obviously over the hill Biden, perceived weakness abroad (Afghanistan, Ukraine, Israel/Gaza), etc. > They voted for a vague promise of a better life through some cool sounding measures, at the time. Ehhh… I don’t think so. They wanted tax cuts and anything that was the opposite of liberal social policy. They got it. As for the people who didn’t vote, I’m not sure anything has changed that would get them out to vote for an opponent to Trump (Biden, Kamala, or whoever other milquetoast candidate lined up). > Now that people are starting to realize the demon they have given full power to, I doubt he would win another (unrigged) election. I think he wins by more if the election is tomorrow. Large swathes of the monied classes in the US are largely ok with the direction things are going. Tariffs, harassment of immigrants, neutering the federal government, and chaotic diplomacy just seem like unfortunate collateral damage to them. Imho, the US is in the midst of a constitutional crisis. If the Dems or some other group don’t approach 2028 accordingly, they may be watching from the sidelines again for who knows how many more years.
    - pandemic_region 1y ago
      That's really sad to hear, in a way. I don't judge the choices people make, but it seems many have gone sour - for lack of a better word. This is something that was in the makings for many years then, people generally not happy with US politics and the way the country is doing things. But T is not the answer long term.
Hikikomori 1y ago
Military coup and throwing the fascists in jail. There's no going back or adjusting course otherwise, people like this will only keep going unless punished. Yet we keep going with appeasement.
MomsAVoxell 1y ago
[flagged]
- saubeidl 1y ago
  Does Denmark have any war criminals?
  - tokai 1y ago
    Anders Fogh Rasmussen
  - MomsAVoxell 1y ago
    Any nation participating in the criminal war on terror has plenty of war criminals.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
elktown 1y ago
You'd be surprised how many people here will just continue to downplay any kind of anti-democratic creep all the way to its abolishment. And Trump is even a vulgar example rather than a smooth one. Privileged people have a bad habit of assuming they'll be outside of any significantly adverse effects - or may even think "Well, this kinda sucks, but maybe this is actually pretty good for my wallet (read: social-economical status)".
mna_ 1y ago
Americans have been doing things like this for a while. It's just that they're doing it to their "allies" now.
VWWHFSfQ 1y ago
It's all so ironic considering Denmark took control of Greenland purely by conquest/claim and many Greenlanders view it historically as colonial/imperial. But now Denmark is apparently upset that an even bigger, greedier bully is trying to take it from them? I don't care about it one way or the other. I imagine an agreement will be made where USA gets something like 80% of the resource rights in exchange for Denmark getting to keep the title and then we'll all forget about this.
- aurareturn 1y ago
  It's all so ironic considering Denmark took control of Greenland purely by conquest/claim and many Greenlanders view it historically as colonial/imperial. Isn't that what the US is doing based on this article? Create a bit of story around the people of Greenland wanting to free themselves from Denmark (even if just minority of Greenland believes so) and then come in as the hero?
  - VWWHFSfQ 1y ago
    Yes and it's unfortunate that Greenlanders don't get a say in who their conqueror is. But Denmark isn't the one that should be complaining about their ill-gotten loot being taken from them.
AndyMcConachie 1y ago
There is no going back to "normal". The American Empire is failing, the imperial boomerang is in full effect, and it will continue to destroy American democracy from within. Revolution is required.
- mcosta 1y ago
  Who is going to fight the revolution?
nobodyandproud 1y ago
As much as I take a centrist position; I can’t see a solution that doesn’t involve a civil war that some of the American white supremacists have been begging for. The project 2025 mandate for leadership enabled a dictator in the making to establish himself. The Republican Congress removed the checks in the Supreme Court during Trump’s first term; and refuse to legislate in a way that works against Trump. And this second term, he’s been purging all of the civil servants who are more loyal to the mission than to him. What I’m dreading is 2028: Will he make good on his threat to go for a third term? Will most of the nation be too apathetic?

FirmwareBurner 1y ago

[flagged]

derelicta 1y ago
What I like about this comment is also what I like about the current imperial administration. It's blunt, it's openly brutish and evil. And now, European vassals are finally understanding their place in this new world and will fully grasp what it felt like to be a South American, African or Asian nation whose sovereignty only exists on paper.
- FirmwareBurner 1y ago
  What's evil in what I said? I'm not supporting annexation, I'm just pointing out the lack of evidence in those claims and the hypocrisy when countries/empires that got territories through annexation complain about annexation. I'm not supporting it, I'm just saying it like it is in real life.
  - derelicta 1y ago
    Sorry, I did misinterpret your text as approval of such conduct. Then we agree, there is definitely hypocrisy and on my side, maybe some Schadenfreude too
  - eesmith 1y ago
    If a country's economy profited from child labor, then later that country prohibits child labor, is it hypocrisy for that country to want child labor to be illegal under international law? If a country's industry benefited from Freon-based as refrigerants, then bans their use because of Freon's effect on the ozone layer, is it hypocrisy for that country to urge other countries to agree to the Montreal Protocol? Several countries made a lot of money from whaling. Most of them have agreed to stop commercial whaling. Is it hypocrisy for them to pressure the few holdouts to agree to the ban? The US benefited from genocide of Native Americans, so therefore the US cannot ever condemn genocide without being a hypocrite? We all know about European colonialism and its negative effects on others as they plundered the world to enrich themselves. Now you say that Europe (and its former colonies who followed the same footsteps) cannot call for de-colonialism or a post-colonial world, as doing so makes them hypocrites? Instead they should, what, call for a restoration of the divine right of kings? In real life they've made at least some effort to change. It may be too little for you, but that's where their protests come from.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

kasperni 1y ago

Incidentally, the Danish state is also the majority shareholder of Ørsted, whose wind farm off Rhode Island was halted the other day [1]. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/aug/25/rsted-shares-at-all-time-low-after-trump-halts-work-on-us-windfarm https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/aug/25/rsted-sh...

pandemic_region 1y ago
I had a debate with my teenage daughters yesterday whether Trump was evil (all agreed), nice (all disagreed), stupid (they agreed, I did not). I explained that he's a fool wielding a very powerful tool. And we all suffer his greed. But in the end of the day, he's still a fool easily swayed by throwing a couple of dollars his way.
- jacquesm 1y ago
  At some level the difference between malice and incompetence disappears and you should assume malice.
  - BobaFloutist 1y ago
    They change your strategy. Incompetent people can be steered away from damaging actions. Malicious people are steering themselves towards doing damage, and you need to oppose them directly.
    - Jensson 1y ago
      > Incompetent people can be steered away from damaging actions Not if they think they are competent and know what they are doing, like Trump does.
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
Hilift 1y ago

curt15 1y ago

> The earlier May report in the Wall Street Journal also referred to learning more about Greenland's independence movement, as well as attitudes to American mineral extraction. > At the time, US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard did not deny the report but accused the Journal of "breaking the law and undermining our nation's security and democracy". lolwut

lkramer 1y ago

The national broadcaster goes into a bit more details: https://www-dr-dk.translate.goog/nyheder/indland/moerklagt/centrale-kilder-maend-med-forbindelser-til-trump-forsoeger-infiltrere?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=wapp&_x_tr_hist=true https://www-dr-dk.translate.goog/nyheder/indland/moerklagt/c... It seems pretty convincing. Greenland is such a small population it's hard to hide something like this.

ethbr1 1y ago
> Greenland is such a small population it's hard to hide something like this. I remember reading some impressions of the dating scene in Iceland (almost 7x Greenland's population) and realizing just how well everyone knows of... well, everyone. (At least via friend of friend in cohorts) A country of 56,800 isn't a great target for secretly conducting influence ops...
- throw0101a 1y ago
  There are 'genetic ramifications' to small(er) population pools, "Kissing cousins? Icelandic app warns if your date is a relative": * https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/kissing-cousins-icelandic-app-warns-if-your-date-is-a-relative-1.1390256 https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/kissing-cousins-icelandic-a... > Íslendingabók. Although it being used to ensure we don't accidentally have sex with our relatives is not true, it's a database of lineages. * https://old.reddit.com/r/Iceland/comments/12tpn4o/what_is_the_name_of_the_app_that_icelandic_people/ https://old.reddit.com/r/Iceland/comments/12tpn4o/what_is_th...

LatteLazy 1y ago

The US has spent decades preventing and delaying the EU becoming a defacto state with a single army and significant foreign policy. Now trump is driving its creation in a single term.

consp 1y ago
Same story as Putin trying to weaken NATO. The two might have given the nudge towards a EU army or at least a more tightly integrated defence force. Spending will be through the roof for at least the coming two decades.
- AndyMcConachie 1y ago
  Russia weaken NATO? Wut? Denmark is in NATO. What does NATO even mean if the leader of NATO (USA) is attempting to take territory from another NATO country? The point of NATO is to keep Europe tied to and subservient to the USA (ie. Atlanticism). Or at least that used to be the point of NATO. I have no idea what the point of it is now.
tomp 1y ago
Do you have any source for that? From my perspective, as an European, there's plenty of forces / population within the EU that doesn't want federalization. Even myself, I'm generally pro-federalization (necessary to solve some structural problems, border, army, money), I definitely don't want to give even more power to Germany (biggest and most powerful EU country), so the only way forward would be for Germany to massively diminish their power... but then they probably wouldn't want that.
- LatteLazy 1y ago
  I think we’re at risk of confusing 2 issues here 1. Has the pressure for more intervention and an EU armed forces gone up? 2. What will that look like, who will pay for it, who will control it, will Germany dominate it etc I am just saying trump is driving point (1). How or whether (2) is solved is another matter and a more complex thing. I personally think as need goes up, ways are found. So far people have been unwilling because the points above (2) outweigh the need (1). If trump invaded Greenland then I imagine people would be much more willing to engage even if it meant paying, accepting German leadership (or Germany accepting less oversight despite paying?) etc. We have already seen France unilaterally extend its nuclear umbrella. That is what happened with finances: Germany wouldn’t accept EU wide debt, and many countries wouldn’t accept German style fiscal constraints. Then the euro crisis forced both sides to compromise and here we are with both. I hope it doesn’t take an actual military crisis to force the matter here. But one (two actually, trump on one side, Russia on the other) is looking available…

aurareturn 1y ago

If the US shows more signs or actually takes Greenland, it will trigger many countries around the world to do the same. China will certainly say it now has the right to take Taiwan because if the US can annex a territory, why not us? Could lead to a very tumultuous decade.

hearsathought 1y ago
[flagged]
attentive 1y ago
sure, let's ignore russia working on massive annexations in Ukraine
- aurareturn 1y ago
  I’m not. But Russia is not the US. The US is suppose to be the world police. If the police is doing the bank robbery, then why shouldn’t everyone else?

SanjayMehta 1y ago

The king for 4 years has managed to turn everyone against the US. And he’s only 1/8 of the way through. (But Pakistan has nominated him for the Nobel Peace Prize, that’s something.)

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]