Maroon Dawn said:

---

amercer said:

---

At the beginning of Trumps insane take over Greenland push, the Danes came out and said that they had no issue with the bases, or new bases, or the treaty that existed that allowed for bases.

But congrats on the huge win on one of the most pressing issues for Americans. I look forward to this being front and center in all the mid term advertising

---

The Danes never said "we will give you full military control of the island and effectively cede Greenland to the US Military"….until today

And the fact that you don't get its importance just shows Lefty's don't need to have opinions on anything besides which shade of blue to dye their hair this week

---

.....they only have opinions on what they are told to have opinions on by the msm and democrat power brokers .

HTownAg98 said:

---

YouBet said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Trump: I demand Greenland!

Denmark: No.

Trump: Ok, how about you agree not to let Russia and China establish military bases there?

Denmark: Well I mean we weren’t going to do…you know what? Deal!

Trump: My enemies fold again.

— Richard Hanania (@RichardHanania) September 18, 2026

---

Dumb logic. Denmark has virtually no military nor reach to Greenland so if Russia or China wanted it they weren't going to ask. They would just show up and take it.

Now that we have more free rein to do what we want defensively, that threat is essentially moot now.

---

We have a presence there now. If Russia or China decided they want an outpost there, we would have said, not only no, but hell no, and if you try it again, you won't like our response.

---

A small one and now we are going to be able to have an unconstrained presence. I simply don't see the issue with any of this. Bigger picture here is us further securing and solidifying assets and resources in our part of the world.

Also, I'm going to bet Denmark did this deal partly because Europe is starting fret that Russia might actually invade them. I listened to a presentation last week from General Sir Nick Carter (former UK Chief of Defense) and Mark Pascale (former Chief CIA Chief of Station in China, Russia, and Syria) and both give it a 50/50 chance that Russia infiltrates the Baltic States under cover and starts sowing discord and civil war in those countries.

Alot of us will probably laugh at that notion, but Europe is scared about it regardless of likelihood and they probably want to placate Trump with easy to agree to deals like this to try and keep us engaged with NATO.

flashplayer said:

---

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-declares-victory-historic-deal-greenland-secures-permanent-us-military-rights

Hopefully a good thing for our mineral rights / development there. Definitely a good thing that it legally bars the axis powers.

---

Say you want to annex the country then end up getting exactly what you want in negotiation. Genius.

Just came back from hunting there last month. Got a muskox and caribou. Anyway, I had a long wait at little town hotel before my flight to reyjavik and we got kicked out of a seating area for the "military". The Danish Artic patrol was there in full uniform. They were such a joke, an elderly lady a bunch of dorks and fat dudes. All drinking in full uniform at 1pm.

I'm sure there are more competent people that are actually on patrol, but it was not a good look.

Every single Dem talking point on here has been debunked and they're still huffing the Copium because Trump won and America won and they can't stand it because we aren't playing nice with the EuroCommies who are busy turning themselves into a 3rd world theocratic dictatorship

Maroon Dawn said:

---

Every single Dem talking point on here has been debunked and they're still huffing the Copium because Trump won and America won and they can't stand it because we aren't playing nice with the EuroCommies who are busy turning themselves into a 3rd world theocratic dictatorship

---

fascinating but expected to see them twist themselves into pretzels to avoid having to admit Trump did something good for the country.

EFR said:

---

It's not a treaty ratified by Congress, I don't think it really carries much more weight than most of the other "deals" we have seen.

---

God you are insufferable and eat up with division politics.

This is good for America. That's first and foremost. I don't care who does good things for America.

https://theworlddata.com/american-bases-in-greenland/

Absolutely good for America. Don't have to spend 18 months in negotiations to get a military installation in place.

Regardless of historical permissions, this one is yuge for USA and will benefit ALL AMERICANS for the foreseeable future. I'm expecting dems to find some fault with this, but this is paramount for northern security.

Great Trump.

techno-ag said:

---

Trump wins again. Permanent control of Greenland while Denmark pays all their welfare.

It's a beautiful thing.

---

I don't know if we have the same definition of what "permanent control" means, but according to the Google:

Quote:

---

Sovereignty Preserved: Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic Premier Jens-Frederik Nielsen issued statements confirming that the new pact explicitly "recognizes the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Kingdom and the Greenlandic people's right to self-determination.

1. Relief Over the Preservation of Sovereignty
The overwhelming feeling among many Greenlanders is relief that Greenland was not sold or annexed. Prior to this deal, there were deep public anxieties fueled by Trump's aggressive rhetoric, which included threats of forced acquisition or harsh economic tariffs. The fact that the deal explicitly preserves Greenlandic self-determination and territorial integrity has eased major fears

---

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

The Danes are loyal allies so they probably would have agreed to all of this even without the threats to "do this the hard way" (actual trump language), but I guess you should never pass up an opportunity to repeatedly threaten to invade an ally that bled on the battlefield for our defense after we were attacked on 9/11.

---

Europeans love to talk about agreeing to things and killing you with the details. Trump understood that and got the details in our favor. He is smart enough to understand the world is changing and the days of soft power are fading and hard power is coming back along with regional control. Locking up Greenland the way we have and detaching our agreement from NATO or Danish permissions is huge. How valuable is Guantanamo Bay to us? No one saw Cuba being hostile to us prior to Castro.

The best example I have seen in why Europe and Canada are living in a dreamworld though is one of the common retorts has been "Acting like a bully to us might make us stop buying military hardware from you!" Think of the stupidity of that statement. They buy military equipment based on economics and trade not on military effectiveness. They would rather buy a Gen 4 fighter than a Gen 5 because they are throwing a hissy fit and they think this hurts the US. Sure, it might cost a few jobs here but the reason you buy military hardware is to protect you country. Imagine being a fighter pilot knowing your country didn't prioritize getting you the best equipment and instead looked at politics as more important. It's the ultimate act of a declining power that has lost the plot.

Fortunately Trump is focused on the future and winning. He is looking at the big board and the long game. Permanently making Greenland a US military asset that we can do anything we want with is a massive strategic win. I expect we will put massive new missile defense and observation equipment there now and this is a huge loss for Russia and China.

No Spin Ag said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Trump wins again. Permanent control of Greenland while Denmark pays all their welfare.

It's a beautiful thing.

---

I don't know if we have the same definition of what "permanent control" means, but according to the Google:

Quote:

---

Sovereignty Preserved: Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic Premier Jens-Frederik Nielsen issued statements confirming that the new pact explicitly "recognizes the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Kingdom and the Greenlandic people's right to self-determination.

1. Relief Over the Preservation of Sovereignty
The overwhelming feeling among many Greenlanders is relief that Greenland was not sold or annexed. Prior to this deal, there were deep public anxieties fueled by Trump's aggressive rhetoric, which included threats of forced acquisition or harsh economic tariffs. The fact that the deal explicitly preserves Greenlandic self-determination and territorial integrity has eased major fears

---

---

The cope is strong with you I see.

Username (as usual) does not check out.

Well, here's the tell as to why we are doing this:

Quote:

---

Duration: The 1951 deal lasted only as long as NATO existed and Greenland remained part of NATO. Trump's 2026 deal lasts indefinitely, even if NATO implodes or Greenland becomes independent.

---

Trump and Rubio have been saying for a while now NATO is going to get blown up so they clearly made this move in advance of that as part of our new Defense Doctrine focused on the Western Hemisphere.

schmendeler said:

---

Maroon Dawn said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

Maga are so desperate for a win that they will crow over a nothing burger announcement that matches the status quo before we started posturing to take the area by force.

---

So just to be clear, according to you we've ALWAYS had a deal that:

-Gave us complete military control over Greenland with zero permission needed from either Denmark or NATO

-Kicked China and Russia out forever

Go on. Be that much of a TDS consumed hack and say "yes"

---

I'm saying that before we showed our ass as bullies to close allies, we could have just made a phone call to put a stop to any of those things. But after a year plus of Trump's bull**** we have secured an agreement that gives us the same situation. But now we've shown that we have no soft power any longer.

---

You have no clue what efforts were made behind closed doors before Trump went the direction he went. So don't state assumptions as facts!!

Eliminatus said:

---

Would like a citation please for the US base that was denied. Not calling you a liar but I am unaware of such a thing and would like to educate myself.

The rest of the points are readily dismiss-able btw.

---

Here you go. It's on page 860...

Quote:

---

[url=https://www.fondazioneintorcetta.info/pdf/biblioteca-virtuale/documenti/Science.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com][/url]
[url=https://www.fondazioneintorcetta.info/pdf/biblioteca-virtuale/documenti/Science.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com][/url]Preparations for the establishment of Station Nord commenced in the autumn of 1951 when, even before the exact location was decided, the Americans promised to provide technical assistance and transport of necessary personnel and material from Thule. The Station Nord site was selected in April 1952, construction began in the summer of 1953, and the 2.5 km gravel runway at Nord became operational in 1954. The station however formally remained under Danish authority, and US requests for Danish permission to establish an outlying base' under US control on the East Coast opposite the Thule
Base recurred several times. The permission was never given, and in 1953 the USA formally relinquished all plans to establish their own base in North East Greenland. Station Nord remained under Danish control, allowing the US Air Force to use the airfield for emergency landings only. Such landings appear to have occurred only three times: in January 1957,
October 1957 and February 1958 (DUPI 1997).

---

The US was denied opening a US base at Station Nord.

We were also restricted as to what we could do on the Danish base...


BTW, please give me your citations to dismiss the other points.

techno-ag said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Trump wins again. Permanent control of Greenland while Denmark pays all their welfare.

It's a beautiful thing.

---

I don't know if we have the same definition of what "permanent control" means, but according to the Google:

Quote:

---

Sovereignty Preserved: Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic Premier Jens-Frederik Nielsen issued statements confirming that the new pact explicitly "recognizes the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Kingdom and the Greenlandic people's right to self-determination.

1. Relief Over the Preservation of Sovereignty
The overwhelming feeling among many Greenlanders is relief that Greenland was not sold or annexed. Prior to this deal, there were deep public anxieties fueled by Trump's aggressive rhetoric, which included threats of forced acquisition or harsh economic tariffs. The fact that the deal explicitly preserves Greenlandic self-determination and territorial integrity has eased major fears

---

---

The cope is strong with you I see.

Username (as usual) does not check out.

---

Cope?

No, just remembering all that Trump said, Vance going to Greenland, etc., and the end result being, well, something, but not at all what was initially said to be wanted.

But, hey, I mean, if token-like victories are to be celebrated, then pour the champagne, I'll partake.

GAC06 said:

---

Maroon Dawn said:

---

amercer said:

---

The US has had the right to build and use a bunch of bases in Greenland for over 70 years.

That's part of what makes Trumps position on this so crazy in the first place.

---

Came here to post your TDS fueled lies but as usual you need to stop listening to Reddit

Quote:

---

The 1951 Defense Agreement: Denmark and the U.S. signed a treaty that governs military operations in Greenland.Approval Required: The treaty states that the Danish government must approve new U.S. military bases or major expansions.

---

But not anymore

Try again there Lib because Daddy Trump got us a major deal and now we don't need their permission and can do whatever we want. America winning is your vampire's sunlight

---

Before that, during WWII when Denmark didn't approve and were conquered by Germany, we seized Greenland and did what we wanted. This is another nothingburger that didn't need the clownish theatrics to "achieve"

---

So, we can just seize Greenland and do what we want right now?

So, you're saying that Trump can just take over Greenland like he said before?

TxAG#2011 said:

---

That's cool. More policy that is great for defense contractors and not helpful at all to the citizens. Fill the swamp.

---

Hey look everyone.

Someone doesn't know where Russian nukes overfly when they're on the way to the US.

No Spin Ag said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Trump wins again. Permanent control of Greenland while Denmark pays all their welfare.

It's a beautiful thing.

---

I don't know if we have the same definition of what "permanent control" means, but according to the Google:

Quote:

---

Sovereignty Preserved: Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic Premier Jens-Frederik Nielsen issued statements confirming that the new pact explicitly "recognizes the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Kingdom and the Greenlandic people's right to self-determination.

1. Relief Over the Preservation of Sovereignty
The overwhelming feeling among many Greenlanders is relief that Greenland was not sold or annexed. Prior to this deal, there were deep public anxieties fueled by Trump's aggressive rhetoric, which included threats of forced acquisition or harsh economic tariffs. The fact that the deal explicitly preserves Greenlandic self-determination and territorial integrity has eased major fears

---

---

The cope is strong with you I see.

Username (as usual) does not check out.

---

Cope?

No, just remembering all that Trump said, Vance going to Greenland, etc., and the end result being, well, something, but not at all what was initially said to be wanted.

But, hey, I mean, if token-like victories are to be celebrated, then pour the champagne, I'll partake.

---

Negotiations do not start at "desired position". They start closer to extremes and then work their way toward the "desired position". Duh!

Democrats will be butthurt well because Orange Man Bad

Meanwhile Trump rolling his balls around in a BIG wheel barrow

Ag with kids said:

---

Eliminatus said:

---

Would like a citation please for the US base that was denied. Not calling you a liar but I am unaware of such a thing and would like to educate myself.

The rest of the points are readily dismiss-able btw.

---

Here you go. It's on page 860...

Quote:

---

[url=https://www.fondazioneintorcetta.info/pdf/biblioteca-virtuale/documenti/Science.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com][/url]
[url=https://www.fondazioneintorcetta.info/pdf/biblioteca-virtuale/documenti/Science.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com][/url]Preparations for the establishment of Station Nord commenced in the autumn of 1951 when, even before the exact location was decided, the Americans promised to provide technical assistance and transport of necessary personnel and material from Thule. The Station Nord site was selected in April 1952, construction began in the summer of 1953, and the 2.5 km gravel runway at Nord became operational in 1954. The station however formally remained under Danish authority, and US requests for Danish permission to establish an outlying base' under US control on the East Coast opposite the Thule
Base recurred several times. The permission was never given, and in 1953 the USA formally relinquished all plans to establish their own base in North East Greenland. Station Nord remained under Danish control, allowing the US Air Force to use the airfield for emergency landings only. Such landings appear to have occurred only three times: in January 1957,
October 1957 and February 1958 (DUPI 1997).

---

The US was denied opening a US base at Station Nord.

We were also restricted as to what we could do on the Danish base...


BTW, please give me your citations to dismiss the other points.

---

Thanks for the info. I was unaware of that occurrence.

As to the other points, no citations needed. It's common sense. Of course the US could not simply establish new bases unilaterally. That was never part of the original agreement. It as a two party consent format. Two allies working in concert. Same with nukes and chemical weapons. Danes needed to give consent. In line with the with our mishap and something we agreed to. Same with the 2004 agreements. Just reiterated additional bases needed agreement and agreement was reached by both parties that Thule would be the only US military base.

None of those were "restrictions". Restrictions are something imposed upon a body that is not agreeable. We agreed to literally everything on there. Readily too from my understanding.

The Nord outlying base seems to be outlier but yes, you are correct there.

We can tit for tat this but ultimately the point still remains. We had great latitude in doing all sorts of military and science stuff in Greenland and have had that consistently in modern times. Trump throwing a hissy fit out of nowhere was unnecessary in my eyes and did a lot of harm on the global stage. Yes, this deal does cement a benefit for us and I will not deny that but to spark it up as an amazing 5D, art of the deal, big brain, this was always the plan from the start, power move is so eye rollingly cringe.

All of the rhetoric of using military force to subjugate the Greenland populace honestly was pretty f'ing disgusting to witness and extremely unbecoming of our country's leader's position. Guess we "owned" those dumb Euros though in the end so all good.

Ag with kids said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Trump wins again. Permanent control of Greenland while Denmark pays all their welfare.

It's a beautiful thing.

---

I don't know if we have the same definition of what "permanent control" means, but according to the Google:

Quote:

---

Sovereignty Preserved: Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic Premier Jens-Frederik Nielsen issued statements confirming that the new pact explicitly "recognizes the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Kingdom and the Greenlandic people's right to self-determination.

1. Relief Over the Preservation of Sovereignty
The overwhelming feeling among many Greenlanders is relief that Greenland was not sold or annexed. Prior to this deal, there were deep public anxieties fueled by Trump's aggressive rhetoric, which included threats of forced acquisition or harsh economic tariffs. The fact that the deal explicitly preserves Greenlandic self-determination and territorial integrity has eased major fears

---

---

That means that Greenland is still Danish. They also get to pay all the welfare for people there.

But, we still get to build any base we want anywhere we want. So, think of it as the US having a permanent easement that covers the entire country of Greenland.

---

Works for me.


That's about as win-win as it gets.

Thunderstruck xx said:

---

AMAZING TRUMP

HAPPY I VOTED FOR HIM

POUND SAND CONCERNED MODERATES AND LIBS

---

I approve this message.

Eliminatus said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Eliminatus said:

---

Would like a citation please for the US base that was denied. Not calling you a liar but I am unaware of such a thing and would like to educate myself.

The rest of the points are readily dismiss-able btw.

---

Here you go. It's on page 860...

Quote:

---

[url=https://www.fondazioneintorcetta.info/pdf/biblioteca-virtuale/documenti/Science.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com][/url]
[url=https://www.fondazioneintorcetta.info/pdf/biblioteca-virtuale/documenti/Science.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com][/url]Preparations for the establishment of Station Nord commenced in the autumn of 1951 when, even before the exact location was decided, the Americans promised to provide technical assistance and transport of necessary personnel and material from Thule. The Station Nord site was selected in April 1952, construction began in the summer of 1953, and the 2.5 km gravel runway at Nord became operational in 1954. The station however formally remained under Danish authority, and US requests for Danish permission to establish an outlying base' under US control on the East Coast opposite the Thule
Base recurred several times. The permission was never given, and in 1953 the USA formally relinquished all plans to establish their own base in North East Greenland. Station Nord remained under Danish control, allowing the US Air Force to use the airfield for emergency landings only. Such landings appear to have occurred only three times: in January 1957,
October 1957 and February 1958 (DUPI 1997).

---

The US was denied opening a US base at Station Nord.

We were also restricted as to what we could do on the Danish base...


BTW, please give me your citations to dismiss the other points.

---

Thanks for the info. I was unaware of that occurrence.

As to the other points, no citations needed. It's common sense. Of course the US could not simply establish new bases unilaterally. That was never part of the original agreement. It as a two party consent format. Two allies working in concert. Same with nukes and chemical weapons. Danes needed to give consent. In line with the with our mishap and something we agreed to. Same with the 2004 agreements. Just reiterated additional bases needed agreement and agreement was reached by both parties that Thule would be the only US military base.

None of those were "restrictions". Restrictions are something imposed upon a body that is not agreeable. We agreed to literally everything on there. Readily too from my understanding.

The Nord outlying base seems to be outlier but yes, you are correct there.

We can tit for tat this but ultimately the point still remains. We had great latitude in doing all sorts of military and science stuff in Greenland and have had that consistently in modern times. Trump throwing a hissy fit out of nowhere was unnecessary in my eyes and did a lot of harm on the global stage. Yes, this deal does cement a benefit for us and I will not deny that but to spark it up as an amazing 5D, art of the deal, big brain, this was always the plan from the start, power move is so eye rollingly cringe.

All of the rhetoric of using military force to subjugate the Greenland populace honestly was pretty f'ing disgusting to witness and extremely unbecoming of our country's leader's position. Guess we "owned" those dumb Euros though in the end so all good.

---

That's a lot of words to say you were wrong.

Ag87H2O said:

---

Eliminatus said:

---

Thanks for the info. I was unaware of that occurrence.

As to the other points, no citations needed. It's common sense. Of course the US could not simply establish new bases unilaterally. That was never part of the original agreement. It as a two party consent format. Two allies working in concert. Same with nukes and chemical weapons. Danes needed to give consent. In line with the with our mishap and something we agreed to. Same with the 2004 agreements. Just reiterated additional bases needed agreement and agreement was reached by both parties that Thule would be the only US military base.

None of those were "restrictions". Restrictions are something imposed upon a body that is not agreeable. We agreed to literally everything on there. Readily too from my understanding.

The Nord outlying base seems to be outlier but yes, you are correct there.

We can tit for tat this but ultimately the point still remains. We had great latitude in doing all sorts of military and science stuff in Greenland and have had that consistently in modern times. Trump throwing a hissy fit out of nowhere was unnecessary in my eyes and did a lot of harm on the global stage. Yes, this deal does cement a benefit for us and I will not deny that but to spark it up as an amazing 5D, art of the deal, big brain, this was always the plan from the start, power move is so eye rollingly cringe.

All of the rhetoric of using military force to subjugate the Greenland populace honestly was pretty f'ing disgusting to witness and extremely unbecoming of our country's leader's position. Guess we "owned" those dumb Euros though in the end so all good.

---

That's a lot of words to say you were wrong.

---

Aye, it makes me feel better

lol, MAGA spinning this as a "win".

Classic TACO.

Total beatdown of the lefties by Maroon Dawn , AWK and others in this thread

Nice job.

Ag CPA said:

---

lol, MAGA spinning this as a "win".

Classic TACO.

---

Tell me you didn't read or understand the terms of the agreement without telling me you didn't.

You're conflating methodology and results into one when we should actually analyze them separately. Greenland has been a vital strategic interest since the early Cold War (maybe earlier, I don't know my history that well). Everybody acknowledges its historical and continued importance, so getting more access there is a strategic positive for us (the results).

What horrified most people is not the interest, but the methodology. Look at a map: Denmark straddles the waterways between Russia (St. Petersburg) and the North Sea, which means that Russia will always view Denmark as a quasi threat since Denmark can restrict Russia's sea access. Denmark knows this which is why they've always cozied up to the USA and supported us even to their detriment.

So, if you want to argue that during a period of peak Russian westward aggression, we asked Denmark for more military rights in Greenland to counter Russia in the North Sea (almost perfectly overlaps with Denmark's interests since they're scared of Russia), and they said no, I'm going to conclude you're delusional or not seriously analyzing the situation.

No, this deal was always easily attainable without the invasion threats, but trump wanted to show what a transactional hardass he was, so he made a bunch of threats at a loyal ally. That's where most people have a problem. This is like 6'8 jacked JJ Watt threatening to beat the **** out of his 5'6 best friend when all JJ had to do was ask "hey can I borrow your truck for an hour to move a dresser?" and the answer would have been "yea sure man, no problem."

Ag CPA said:

---

lol, MAGA spinning this as a "win".

Classic TACO.

---

Wow. I'm even more impressed someone else starred this.

Never change.