‘To make Greenland a part of the U.S.’: Trump appoints new special envoy

Stopped_lurking · Dec 23, 2025

ThatRobGuy said:
I don't think they should be "forced", I'm mainly objecting to the notion that they wouldn't be made better.

Why the quotes around forced?

ThatRobGuy said:
Foreign interest and foreign investment has a way of creating demand for certain upgrades and modernizations to be built/constructed.

Nothing is stopping the US from investing right now. What foreign investments have been put on the table so far?

ThatRobGuy said:
Do you think places like Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico would be as modern and developed as they are today had they not become part of the US?

How are the numbers looking for the native alaskan population? I think both Hawaii and Puerto Rico would have done just fine on their own. If the US won't invest in their own native populations, what reason is there to assume they would do it for the people of Greenland.

Don't get me wrong, if the US put together a good enough offer perhaps they could convince the population to vote for it. They should be the ones with the final say. But as it stands now only a rather small minority is willing to become part of the US.

essentialsaltes · Dec 23, 2025

At the news conference on Dec. 22, Trump dismissed Denmark’s claims to Greenland.

"Denmark has spent no money there, they have no military protection," the president said. "They say Denmark was there 300 years ago or something with a boat. Well, we were there with boats too, I’m sure."

We'll learn all about it in next year's ~~250th~~ 300th birthday celebration for the United States.

President Trump says US needs Greenland for 'national security'

President Donald Trump told reporters on Dec. 22 that the special envoy he appointed would "lead the charge."

www.usatoday.com

ThatRobGuy · Dec 23, 2025

Stopped_lurking said:
Why the quotes around forced?

Because that's the word other people were using (with certain undertones implied)

Stopped_lurking said:
Nothing is stopping the US from investing right now. What foreign investments have been put on the table so far?

Because the kinds of investments we'd have a national interest in, would be ones that would require us to own the land.

A) The national security reasons - it's a strategic area to keep an eye on certain bad international actors (Russia and China and their ongoing efforts on the "Northern Sea Route" shipping lanes)

Let's face it, Denmark doesn't exactly convey the "Try some nonsense and see what happens" vibe that would be a deterrent to funny business. There's only one country that has the power, capabilities, and stroke to give the Russians and Chinese pause about getting out of line... (Hint: It's not Denmark or Iceland)

B) Greenland has deposits of key minerals including graphite, copper, nickel, zinc, tungsten and lithium, and are currently doing little to no mining.

If Greenland wasn't the territory of an EU nation, then perhaps investment without full fledged ownership would be a possibility, but with the EU's FDI regulations, foreign investment for those kinds of initiatives has become burdensome. Nobody wants to wait 3 years to break ground on a critical project (aimed at counterbalancing the Chinese) while the proposals and applications are tied up in Brussels waiting on every member state to agree on it.

Stopped_lurking said:
How are the numbers looking for the native alaskan population? I think both Hawaii and Puerto Rico would have done just fine on their own. If the US won't invest in their own native populations, what reason is there to assume they would do it for the people of Greenland.

Don't get me wrong, if the US put together a good enough offer perhaps they could convince the population to vote for it. They should be the ones with the final say. But as it stands now only a rather small minority is willing to become part of the US.

If not for the US, Alaska (and their population) would be under Russian control in all likelihood. Hawaii would've likely ended up as a Japanese territory, and as far as Puerto Rico, how have other former colonies of the Spanish Empire (that didn't eventually end up under US control) faired?

ThatRobGuy · Dec 23, 2025

Larniavc said:
39% of people in Puerto Rico live in poverty. America in general is 18% with Greenland at about 9%.

Greenland needs America like a hole in the head.

Compared to other former colonies of the Spanish empire that the US doesn't control, how do they measure up?

Poverty in South America - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

(central America is even worse)

where are you getting your 9% figure from

Addressing Poverty in Greenland - The Borgen Project

Climate-induced erosion is also hitting the already limited road structures, impacting poverty in Greenland.

borgenproject.org

And it also goes without saying poverty is often one of those subjective things where it's looked at through a industrialized lens
In comparison to the different states of the United States, Puerto Rico is poorer than Mississippi, the poorest state of the United States, However, when compared to Latin America, Puerto Rico has the highest GDP per capita in the region.

GoldenBoy89 · Dec 23, 2025

Larniavc said:
Good job America has such a good track record in uplifting other Nations isn't it. And don't forget that America has and order of magnitude more gun deaths than Greenland so I can't imagine them wanting that.

Seriously. If they have the choice to join some other country, why on earth would Greenlanders choose to become Americans? It’s like people here don’t realize just how off putting we are coming across the rest of the world at the moment.

ThatRobGuy · Dec 23, 2025

Larniavc said:
Good job America has such a good track record in uplifting other Nations isn't it. And don't forget that America has and order of magnitude more gun deaths than Greenland so I can't imagine them wanting that.

We also have a higher gun death rate than Cambodia, what's your point? Is Cambodia a more capable nation than the US?

And I'd argue that the very existence of the US military alone has uplifted a lot of other countries. We patrol the world's seas and skies, which has allowed other nations to use their money for other things (and prevented them from falling victim to conquest of nefarious actors on the world's stage)

Larniavc · Dec 23, 2025

ThatRobGuy said:
We patrol the world's seas and skies, which has allowed other nations to use their money for other things (and prevented them from falling victim to conquest of nefarious actors on the world's stage)

With obvious exceptions of the places annexed by Russia.

Larniavc · Dec 23, 2025

ThatRobGuy said:
We also have a higher gun death rate than Cambodia, what's your point?

My point is that America is a poor choice of society to invite into your county as the new administration and that your equivocation about racist dog whistles and Greenland not wanting anything to do with American rulership is asinine.

Larniavc · Dec 23, 2025

GoldenBoy89 said:
It’s like people here don’t realize just how off putting we are coming across the rest of the world at the moment.

This. While I’m sure there are some nice places to live in America to many people not from the -hole countries Trump dislikes so much it sounds like a nightmare; kids shot up in school, religion in politics, racism, drugs (both prescribed and street), poor working conditions, poor health care etc.

Unless you’re from a -hole country it’s a poor proposition.

Stopped_lurking · Dec 23, 2025

ThatRobGuy said:
Because that's the word other people were using (with certain undertones implied)

Have the administration said that military force is of the table as of yet?

https://www.npr.org/2025/03/30/nx-s1-5344942/trump-military-force-not-off-the-table-for-greenland

This is an implicit threat otherwise.

ThatRobGuy said:
Because the kinds of investments we'd have a national interest in, would be ones that would require us to own the land.

A) The national security reasons - it's a strategic area to keep an eye on certain bad international actors (Russia and China and their ongoing efforts on the "Northern Sea Route" shipping lanes)

Let's face it, Denmark doesn't exactly convey the "Try some nonsense and see what happens" vibe that would be a deterrent to funny business. There's only one country that has the power, capabilities, and stroke to give the Russians and Chinese pause about getting out of line... (Hint: It's not Denmark or Iceland)

There is already a treaty in place that allows the US to have bases on Greenland as long as the US and Denmark are members of NATO.

ThatRobGuy said:
B) Greenland has deposits of key minerals including graphite, copper, nickel, zinc, tungsten and lithium, and are currently doing little to no mining.

If Greenland wasn't the territory of an EU nation, then perhaps investment without full fledged ownership would be a possibility, but with the EU's FDI regulations, foreign investment for those kinds of initiatives has become burdensome. Nobody wants to wait 3 years to break ground on a critical project (aimed at counterbalancing the Chinese) while the proposals and applications are tied up in Brussels waiting on every member state to agree on it.

IANAL! Greenland is not subject to danish or EU FDI laws, I think. They just voted to implement their own, by it is not in place yet. FDI laws in the EU are determined by the each member state, there is no unanimous requirement as of now I think.

ThatRobGuy said:
If not for the US, Alaska (and their population) would be under Russian control in all likelihood.

Why? After the Russian revolution many former part of the russian empire got their independence.

ThatRobGuy said:
Hawaii would've likely ended up as a Japanese territory,

After WW2? I don't think that is likely.

ThatRobGuy said:
and as far as Puerto Rico, how have other former colonies of the Spanish Empire (that didn't eventually end up under US control) faired?

It depends on your favorite metric. GDP per capita (PPP) is ok for some of them. But, GDP per Capita is high for Puerto Rico, but it is already higher for Greenland.

mindlight · Dec 24, 2025

MarcusGregor said:
‘To make Greenland a part of the U.S.’: Trump appoints new special envoy

The leaders of Denmark and Greenland insisted Monday that the United States won’t take over Greenland and demanded respect for their territorial integrity after U.S. President Donald Trump ‍announced the appointment of a ‌special envoy to the semi-autonomous territory.

www.ctvnews.ca

We're still doing this, huh? sheesh.

Trump should invade or buy the place or jettison this idea once and for all. Or is this all posturing for the midterms?

They are not going to do this willingly and he cannot persuade them with words and posturing alone. Though maybe for a million euros a piece they might be become Americans. - net cost $56bn. Of course buying or invading would probably cause a split in NATO.

Valletta · Dec 24, 2025

mindlight said:
Trump should invade or buy the place or jettison this idea once and for all. Or is this all posturing for the midterms?

They are not going to do this willingly and he cannot persuade them with words and posturing alone. Though maybe for a million euros a piece they might be become Americans. - net cost $56bn. Of course buying or invading would probably cause a split in NATO.

Denmark recently upped their annual payment, but if we offered them 1 billion dollars a year in subsidies that would exceed what Denmark is giving them. Offer that on top of a fair purchase agreement. Realize the Democrats in Minnesota looked the other way at 9 billion dollars in fraud, that's 9 years worth of payments to Denmark. Make Walz and those involved pay it back.

Pommer · Dec 24, 2025

GoldenBoy89 said:
Seriously. If they have the choice to join some other country, why on earth would Greenlanders choose to become Americans? It’s like people here don’t realize just how off putting we are coming across the rest of the world at the moment.

Be reasonable, do the things that we want and it’ll be good for you…and maybe bad for you if you’re not reasonable!?

Pommer · Dec 24, 2025

Valletta said:
Denmark recently upped their annual payment, but if we offered them 1 billion dollars a year in subsidies that would exceed what Denmark is giving them. Offer that on top of a fair purchase agreement. Realize the Democrats in Minnesota looked the other way at 9 billion dollars in fraud, that's 9 years worth of payments to Denmark. Make Walz and those involved pay it back.

Maybe Greenland isn’t up-for-sale?

ThatRobGuy · Dec 24, 2025

Larniavc said:
With obvious exceptions of the places annexed by Russia.

Which would've been the majority of Europe from the cold war up through present day had there not been a global deterrence.

Larniavc · Dec 24, 2025

ThatRobGuy said:
Which would've been the majority of Europe from the cold war up through present day had there not been a global deterrence.

Which has what to do with Greenland? Only America is threatening Greenland.

Larniavc · Dec 24, 2025

Stopped_lurking said:
But, GDP per Capita is high for Puerto Rico, but it is already higher for Greenland.

And as part of America it has both high GDP AND poverty. Because America is the land of the .1%.

ThatRobGuy · Dec 24, 2025

Stopped_lurking said:
It depends on your favorite metric. GDP per capita (PPP) is ok for some of them. But, GDP per Capita is high for Puerto Rico, but it is already higher for Greenland.

How much of that is coming from domestic production vs. being subsidized?

Denmark provides an annual block grant to Greenland of roughly 4-5 billion Danish kroner. This subsidy accounts for around 25-30% of Greenland's GDP and covers roughly half or more of Greenland's government budget, depending on the year.

Stopped_lurking said:
Greenland is not subject to danish or EU FDI laws, I think. They just voted to implement their own, by it is not in place yet. FDI laws in the EU are determined by the each member state, there is no unanimous requirement as of now I think.

EU: European Parliament adopts proposal to harmonise and expand foreign investment screening processes across all EU Member States

On 8 May 2025, the European Parliament adopted an amended proposal to revise the EU Foreign Direct Investment Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2019/452) (the "FDI Regulation"), amending the proposal originally published by the EU Commission and significantly deviating from it in certain important...

foreigninvestment.bakermckenzie.com

From what I've read, with regards to what's considered "strategic sectors" and things that have potential security implications. Denmark has obligations to the EU to "keep their dependent territory within the guardrails" (which is why Chinese interest in Greenland's minerals has become something of a sticking point)

Oompa Loompa · Dec 24, 2025

Stopped_lurking said:
Can I ask you why? Also do you support the use of military force if the greenlanders don't want to be part of the US?

Sarcasm: Milary force? We can just give them blankets as a peace offering.

ThatRobGuy · Dec 24, 2025

Larniavc said:
Which has what to do with Greenland? Only America is threatening Greenland.

You had mentioned the "annexed by Russia" thing.

I was replying by pointing out that absent the juggernaut that is the US military, Russia would've already annexed them along with large part of Europe beyond just the nations that were absorbed into the USSR & Soviet Bloc.

We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

‘To make Greenland a part of the U.S.’: Trump appoints new special envoy

Well-Known Member

Fact-Based Lifeform

Part of the IT crowd

Part of the IT crowd

We're Still Here

Part of the IT crowd

"Larniavc sir, how are you so smart?"

"Larniavc sir, how are you so smart?"

"Larniavc sir, how are you so smart?"

Well-Known Member

See in the dark

Well-Known Member

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

Part of the IT crowd

"Larniavc sir, how are you so smart?"

"Larniavc sir, how are you so smart?"

Part of the IT crowd

Well-Known Member

Part of the IT crowd

Similar threads