So...I kept wondering why Trump wants to grab Greenland. Random.

[WaltonWanderer]

Today I saw a headline in a paper (OK the Guardian) saying his very rich mate Ronald Lauder suggested it to him (because he has been buying everything he can there). Am I alone in being fed up with rich white billionaires risking war (end of NATO) and a further world mess, just because they just want to fill their pockets and the rest of us can go........Seriously these men! I'm personally not going to buy any more Estee Lauder products. Just be happy with the billions you inherited Ronald. AIBU to be fed up with this behaviour?

My husband informed me that the reason Trump wants Greenland is because there's a giant weather manipulating UFO melting out of the ice on Greenland.... 🤣🤣🤣 probably as plausible as the nuke theory when you consider Alaska is about 20 miles from Russia.

This is utter rubbish, I'm not saying I agree with the US but they have been trying to acquire Greenland as far back as 1867 and successive administrations have tried but Trump has pushed it more due to increasing focus on China and it's purely due to security reasons.

Claiming it's because of his rich friends is just absolute rubbish, you don't need to believe everything you see online because you don't like Trump.

And this wouldn't be the first time the US has bought territory from Denmark, they bought the US Virgin Islands from Denmark, bought Alaska from Russia etc.

"But while American expansionism has regained steam under Trump, the idea of the US controlling the self-governing Danish territory long predates the current president.

US interest in Greenland dates back to the 19th century, when then-Secretary of State William H. Seward, fresh off the purchase of Alaska from the Russians in 1867, floated the idea of buying Greenland and Iceland from Denmark.

While the sale never materialized, the US continued to eye the world’s largest island at multiple moments throughout history, at one point discussing a possible swap with Denmark for US territory in the Philippines.

In 1946, following World War II, during which the US took over the defense of Greenland, President Harry Truman offered Denmark $100 million in gold for the island, though Denmark rejected the bid."

@WaltonWanderer now this is facts based common sense.

Imagine a poster on mumsnet is able to share proper facts compared to a professional journalist with the Guardian, and we wonder why journalism has fallen to where it is today, all chasing sensational headlines.

It’s hard to defend the position that Greenland should belong to a random European nation because of history. And not Another random country that’s richer and closer. I think Greenland should be independent.

I guess being danish gives them the protection of the EU and NATO (for all that’s worth).

Sure, "facts" such as apparently not knowing that the US already operates a space base in Greenland. I'd also love to know the source of the "facts" that Greenland is vulnerable to Russia or China.

I never said the US doesn't operate there but that doesn't change the fact that the US isn't trying to buy it for Trump's friend Lauder

I do agree with you that their objectives can be accomplished by cooperating with the Danish and Greenland authorities but OPs post is just absolute rubbish and now she's never going to buy Este Lauder products anymore 😂

@WaltonWanderer here is some more detail explaining why they are so intent, again I'm not saying I agree but at least let's understand what's going on before creating posts on mumsnet with information that's not only false but make no sense.

"An acquisition of Greenland would give the United States control of an island that it sees as crucial to its defense.[57][58] Reuters described Greenland in October 2020 as "a security black hole" for the United States and allies, and said its 27,000 miles (44,000 km) of coastline was difficult to monitor. "On several occasions since 2006, foreign vessels have turned up unexpectedly or without the necessary protocols, in waters that NATO-member Denmark aims to defend", the news agency reported. Detection of foreign vessels, including a Russian submarine, has often been by chance. A potential security threat are Russian ships believed to have the ability to tap undersea cables or sever them during a conflict.[29"

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/arctics-attractions-mount-greenland-is-security-black-hole-2020-10-20/

You do know that Greenland has been wanted by the US since 1946?

I never said the US doesn't operate there but that doesn't change the fact that the US isn't trying to buy it for Trump's friend Lauder

I do agree with you that their objectives can be accomplished by cooperating with the Danish and Greenland authorities and having and increased presence but OPs post is just absolute rubbish and now she's never going to buy Este Lauder products anymore 😂

@WaltonWanderer here is some more detail explaining why they are so intent, again I'm not saying I agree but at least let's understand what's going on before creating posts on mumsnet with information that's not only false but make no sense.

"An acquisition of Greenland would give the United States control of an island that it sees as crucial to its defense.] Reuters described Greenland in October 2020 as "a security black hole" for the United States and allies, and said its 27,000 miles (44,000 km) of coastline was difficult to monitor. "On several occasions since 2006, foreign vessels have turned up unexpectedly or without the necessary protocols, in waters that NATO-member Denmark aims to defend", the news agency reported. Detection of foreign vessels, including a Russian submarine, has often been by chance. A potential security threat are Russian ships believed to have the ability to tap undersea cables or sever them during a conflict.

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/arctics-attractions-mount-greenland-is-security-black-hole-2020-10-20/

And to add, I don't see the US invading Greenland, I think it's pressure to force them to the table. I think they may end up making a deal that gives the US more access rather than full takeover but remains to be seen. I know a Danish and Greenland delegation was in DC this week so they seem to be talking.

What do Greenlandic people want? Do they even want independence?

He's not going to invade Greenland but he wants everyone to think he will.

All of the Trump admin has been at pains to point out that it's not what he says but what he does that is important. All of a sudden, since the assault on Venezuela that messaging has changed to - this is a president who does what he says. And the timing of the threat is important because we are now to believe that he is capable of a military invasion of a NATO ally.

It suits the purpose of the current US administration to throw their weight around but really what they want is to ensure access to new shipping lanes, have the Europeans spend more on NATO defence and bully the world into concessions because they won't test the theory that the US is bluffing. Trump and his minions have seen how Europe has been ineffective in pushing back against Russia and is using their natural tendency towards appeasement in his favour. And let's not forget that this isn't Trump as he's a numbskull - this is the like of Stephen Miller and his ilk pushing an extreme agenda so that Rubio and Vance can come in and offer a compromise which makes the US look reasonable and Europe can then justify their compromise because they diverted chaos.

This is a game of statecraft and diplomacy but the US is using extreme language and easy wins against vulnerable countries to imply that they are bigger and badder than they really are. It's messaging dressed up as threats which is why the Republicans are not pushing back. It suits them for the world to think Trump is authoritarian and has gone rogue. He's an old man daft enough to be manipulated by the party extremists into saying the unthinkable.

Trump has backed down with tariffs, backed down with Russia, backed down with Iran but his extreme starting positions have allowed him to extract compromises that wouldn't otherwise have been offered. If this was the playground, we would see it for what it really is.

Then Greenland doesn’t belong to Denmark.

Yes, a poll last year showed 84% favour independence.

True, but Denmark are fine for Greenland to gain independence if that is the will of the people. At the moment it's not because the Greenlanders wasn't independence but with Danish subsidies to continue. It's an option open to Greenlanders as and when they can be self sustaining though.

If they are part of the US, they can kiss any thoughts for independence goodbye and will have day less autonomy than present.

Yes, I saw the article too, OP - link here for thise who haven’t read it https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/15/ronald-lauder-billionaire-donor-donald-trump-ukraine-greenland

I wish I could boycott Estee Lauder too but I don’t buy their stuff!

I would take any John Bolton says with a pinch of salt. This whole article is based on "John Bolton said"

It’s all to do with strategic defence , US needs Greenland to stop all the Chinese and Russian ships that are already there(using top of the range cloaking devices )and to prevent them taking the island over and using it to host weapons that threaten the US, it has absolutely nothing to do with the potential vast amounts of oil, rare minerals etc that Greenland sits on and that would make Donald, ooops sorry, the US, very rich.

It's almost certainly the rare earths that tip the balance. These are required for military applications and the Chinese pretty much have a monopoly on them atm. Apparently each F35 requires about half a ton of them (which knowing something about them (rare earths) I find a bit hard to believe but there you go).

Trump pretty much can't do anything against the Chinese without them bringing up the rare earth weapon in negotiations. So the US needs its own supply, especially since China is likely to be the US's great military rival going forwards.

You've got a country that is mostly frozen wasteland, governed by another bloc (Europe) who for years have relied on US spending and assistance for defence. Now the US is asking for something back that they require for both US and European security (countries like the UK use the F35 as much as the US does).

Unfortunately Greenland is trapped in the middle of all this. I hope that some sort of solution can be found that allows them to have autonomy while allowing the US some proportion of the country. Given the fact it is huge and mostly empty frozen wastes and very sparsely populated it should be possible for both sides to negotiate a solution that partially meets their objectives. Neither side being 100% happy but having an outcome that they can live with.

Idealism is great if you are willing to accept the cost of it. Here the cost is the potential security of approx. 1 billion people vs about 60,000 - I suspect realpolitik is going to come into play at some point.

Nope. Not. Their. Country.

Sorry you are right, I meant semi conductors, rest of what I said I stand by.

https://www.innovationnewsnetwork.com/why-world-turning-to-greenlands-rare-earth-metals/32694/

Apparently it is full of natural resources. It's greed nothing more. It's a complete nonsense to say it's for security

Pittuff Space Base: The U.S. Air Force awarded a $3.95 billion contract in late 2022 under the Biden administration to keep this vital northern base operational, highlighting its importance for missile defense and satellite monitoring, according to Stars and Stripes.

I don’t think that would have invested so much money into this program if they didn’t think it was strategically important.

Remind me:

Which country was the driving force behind the creation of NATO?

Which is the only country to have ever invoked Article 5, requiring assistance from the other NATO countries?

Which NATO country is by far and away the most influential in shaping NATO's strategic policy?

Which country is undermining the rest of NATO's efforts in constraining Russian aggression?

I'm pretty sure that all of these questions have the same answer...

I have an Iceland & Greenland cruise booked for 2027 and never did I think for one minute that there could be any issues in that remote part of the world! Blooming Trump!