The United States Territory of Greenland?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Grey Havoc

Grey Havoc

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
9 October 2009
Messages
21,979
Reaction score
13,647
www.wsj.com

President Trump Eyes a New Real-Estate Purchase: Greenland

The idea of the U.S. acquiring Greenland has captured the president’s imagination, according to people familiar with the discussions, who said he has repeatedly expressed interest in the notion.
www.wsj.com www.wsj.com

www.reuters.com

"We're not for sale", says Greenland's foreign minister

Greenland's foreign minister said on Friday the world's biggest island is not for sale, commenting on media reports that U.S. President Donald Trump has privately discussed with advisers the idea of buying Greenland.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com

www.nytimes.com

Trump Is Said to Ask: Can We Buy Greenland? (Published 2019)

At a meeting last spring in the Oval Office, President Trump joked about buying Greenland for its resources, according to a person who was in attendance.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com

www.bbc.com

Greenland: Trump warned that island cannot be bought from Denmark

Officials on the island say it's keen for trade and cooperation but it's not on the market.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com
 
Greenland was a strategic location during the Cold War.
 
bobbymike said:
Grey Havoc said:
www.reuters.com

Greenland tells Trump it is open for business but not for sale

Greenland on Friday dismissed the notion that it might be up for sale after reports that U.S. President Donald Trump had privately discussed with his advisers the idea of buying the world's biggest island.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com
Click to expand...
Maybe we can finally get Project Iceworm going
Click to expand...

Well, technically it WAS going... South :) Which was the whole problem of trying to put missile silo's inside a moving ice sheet and all that :)

Randy
 
RanulfC said:
bobbymike said:
Grey Havoc said:
www.reuters.com

Greenland tells Trump it is open for business but not for sale

Greenland on Friday dismissed the notion that it might be up for sale after reports that U.S. President Donald Trump had privately discussed with his advisers the idea of buying the world's biggest island.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com
Click to expand...
Maybe we can finally get Project Iceworm going
Click to expand...

Well, technically it WAS going... South :) Which was the whole problem of trying to put missile silo's inside a moving ice sheet and all that :)

Randy
Click to expand...
I was visualizing Hoth with ICBMs :D
 
Would continental drift qualify for mobile?
 
Last edited:
Historical perspective:

Initial US interest in purchasing Greenland was by Secretary Of State Seward (same one who bought Alaska).

Greenland occupied by US during WWII.

US again looks at buying Greenland in 1946 for $100Million. Denmark turned down the offer.

Denmark currently spends ~$600Million per year to support Greenland.

China inquired into possible purchase of an abandoned naval base in 2017 but Denmark blocked the effort.
 
We'll see. Technology has advanced to the point where the deployment of drones with long loiter times, more satellites dedicated to watching certain areas and the deployment of beam weapons like lasers will result in greater warning time and better detection. Some weapon systems will no longer be viable if they can be shot down shortly after launch or detected early enough. Military planners are planning only for what they call "low intensity conflicts." The major powers know what's at stake should anyone, including minor powers, try anything stupid.
 
Speaking about technology (and joking), the US might do better buying back the Silicon Valley from the Russian Hackers...
 
RanulfC said:
Well, we HAD been discussing "mobile" ICBM's earlier and they movement of the ice sheet would pretty much cover that aspect so...
Click to expand...

Nuclear powered subterrenes would do the trick.
 
Orionblamblam said:
TomcatViP said:
Speaking about technology (and joking), the US might do better buying back the Silicon Valley from the Russian Hackers...
Click to expand...

Or we could sell Detroit to Canada. Maybe trade them for something like Yukon or British Columbia.
Click to expand...
Nope Alberta and the largest heavy oil reserves on planet earth solidify total energy dominance
 
If the US were to buy Greenland would it be a state or a territory? (Yes, I know I have better odds winning the lottery.)
 
Grey Havoc said:
Oh, I say we'll seeing a lot more of colonialism in the foreseeable future.
Click to expand...

Yep. I would not be at all surprised to see China shove Africans into Europe. (Not by war or conquest, but by shipping Chinese there to support their interests. IIRC this is happening at the Russian/Chinese border.)
 
sferrin said:
If the US were to buy Greenland would it be a state or a territory? (Yes, I know I have better odds winning the lottery.)
Click to expand...
There's no mechanism to purchase a country into statehood, the Congress must pass a law admitting it into the Union. So, a territory at least to begin with.
 
Perhaps it would be good, for the US, to purchase Greenland. I actually think it would be good for the existing population as well.

It's location is strategic.
It would add significantly to US claims in the Arctic.
Trump would be the guy that added the largest National Park, about 30x the next one.
Access to fisheries.
With any US-EU trade deals, manufacturing or processing in the "US" would be possible much closer to Europe.
Power in Greenland may be extremely inexpensive. Hydro-power is predominate with room for expansion.
There may even be a significant opportunity for the Boring Company and their small tunnels. Transportation is notoriously difficult in Greenland.

Perhaps how this came about?

Danes; We can't increase our commitment to our military. We are are a small country. Not even 6 millions of people... and we are supporting 50k citizens in Greenland to the tune of 600-800 billion dollars each year. If we weren't spending that we could increase our spending 15-20%. But alas...

Trumps brain; AAARRRGHHROOO?!?! Weakness?...Opportunity...Deal?!?!

Trump; That's the worst catastrophe ever! You're going to go broke at that rate. Think about how devastating this is for the majority of your people. What a drain on your economy. You can't let this continue!


;-)
 
sferrin said:
Grey Havoc said:
Oh, I say we'll seeing a lot more of colonialism in the foreseeable future.
Click to expand...

Yep. I would not be at all surprised to see China shove Africans into Europe. (Not by war or conquest, but by shipping Chinese there to support their interests. IIRC this is happening at the Russian/Chinese border.)
Click to expand...

Well the conversion of Siberia into Chinese territory has long been a desire of the People's republic, just one way of achieving that goal.
 
sferrin said:
If the US were to buy Greenland would it be a state or a territory? (Yes, I know I have better odds winning the lottery.)
Click to expand...

With a population of only 50,000, it seems unlikely to become a state anytime soon. However, if it became US territory, almost certainly more people would move there for various reasons.
 
Hood said:
I don't often make political points here, but its hard to resist commenting that such rather colonial viewpoints seem rather antiquated and hypocritical.
Click to expand...

I am well known on this forum for avoiding politics; my non-partisanship is justly famous. And yet... I have difficulty seeing how an interest in acquiring through legal and mutually consensual means new territory is "antiquated and hypocritical." *IF* the United States bought Greenland, or Haiti, or Wales, or the Yukon, from the legal owners and paid a fair price and everyone was more or less happy... what's the problem?

If the United States marched right into Greenland and annexed the place on the grounds that ethnic Americans were being put at risk by the prior government, that might be a tad hypocritical. But buying it? That's no worse than, say, Denver buying a chunk of an unincorporated neighboring county for the purposes of expansion.
 
galgot said:
They spend 600-800 BILLIONS each years for Groenland ?!
Click to expand...
Six hundred MILLION. Numbers, tricky stuff.
Greenlanders reactions to 'the notion' of a US territory of Greenland vary from a short 'No' through 'We were just getting used to autonomy' to disbelief in many forms. Greenland has been a constituent country of the Kingdom of Denmark for several decades now, with considerable autonomy.
Danish prime minister Frederiksen said Greenland isn't Denmark's to give because it belongs to the people who live there. I haven't heard/read of any Danes in favour of 'the notion'. I have heard/read of many Danes expressing disapproval in sometimes colourful terms.

The way 'the notion' was released was less than helpful to its acceptance - if there ever was any chance of that. This leaves me to consider why this was ever released the way it was. There may be a plan there. On the other hand...

Can we put this to rest?
 
If they were to promote the thought of investment in infrastructure they might get bases there which is as good as it gets really, no muss no fuss and NO political commitment that might get more expensive than the USA wants in the long term.
 
Lease portions of the uninhabited parts "in perpetuity" to administer independently for hard cash. Danes collect taxes on any economic development. Win-win

Like Panama.. Without the revolution thing.

Or organize, fund, and arm the Inuits who make up 90% of the population, start a revolution for independence from the Danes, recognize the new Republic of Thuleland, freeing them from the Danish imperialism and colonialism and make it even more similar to Panama. ;)

It's a strategically placed rock. I cannot imagine the Danes are interested in selling, but I could see them leveraging its use to ease their own budget. The ethnic Danes would have no interest, but they are pretty well concentrated in small pockets. The large rural native population might not care if they are left mostly alone and well-concentrated. Everybody retains Danish citizenship.

I don't think the idea is as bizarre as some think. Especially if we're talking about a small region or regions of administration that let the US build bases, missile defense, etc. The US could lease or buy. Wouldn't come cheap.
 
From what I understand (and as mentioned before) Groenland already have a large autonomy from Denmark, and they will gain independence at one point I believe.

Anyways won’t append (the buy), the fuss is more about the way…
 
_Del_ said:
I don't think the idea is as bizarre as some think. Especially if we're talking about a small region or regions of administration that let the US build bases, missile defense, etc. The US could lease or buy. Wouldn't come cheap.
Click to expand...
The idea of leasing land for a new base or bases in Greenland isn't at all bizarre. The idea of the President babbling about how much he wants to buy the whole country often enough that his own inner circle leaks it to get him to shut up, followed by his cancelling an official visit to a NATO ally because they won't discuss selling said country, is a bit bizarre.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom