this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2026
309 points (97.5% liked)

World News

52107 readers
3832 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

US President Donald Trump has said he may impose trade tariffs on countries that do not support his plans to take over Greenland.

"I may put a tariff on countries if they don't go along with Greenland, because we need Greenland for national security," Mr Trump said at the White House.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The other countries can simply not oblige (and thus kill NATO). That’s the more realistic option.

I don't see it.

Sure, the various NATO countries who aren't Denmark can simply say 'sorry man we're out' and dissolve NATO. Or just refuse to comply, damn the consequences.
They won't though, because in many cases the threat of NATO is the only thing protecting them.
Look at Eastern Europe on the Russian border- Finland, Estonia, Latvia. Belarus is a RU puppet and Ukraine might lose their war so we can include Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, and Romania too. Russia has Navy assets in the Black Sea so you can also consider Bulgaria and Turkey.
If NATO went away tomorrow, do you really think Russia wouldn't try to gobble one or two of them up? You really think they wouldn't succeed in at least one or two cases?

And what about Canada? They're a NATO member and they have real military force. Same with UK, Norway, Sweden, Germany.

Do any of them WANT to go up against USA? Of course not.
If the US truly went rogue and invaded a sovereign nation, would they do it? Probably, because if they didn't, there's no guarantee they wouldn't be next.

Lol no they wouldn’t. Neither would they care about who owns Greenland (except probably Russia), neither would they waste immense amounts of money and manpower to fight the biggest military and economy in the world for no real gain, and neither would 2/3 of the listed countries (Ru, NK) be able to do anything serious against US anyway (outside of suicidally throwing nukes at it).

They DGAF about Greenland. Greenland isn't worth shit.
But for any of them to reduce the US's role in the world economy or worldwide diplomacy, that's a golden opportunity.
Thing is they needn't commit huge resources to the war. Just a small force that would be able to make it hurt for the US, and the real war is fought in the media. It gives them a chance to be the heroes and paint US as the villain.

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

Lumping Baltic countries together with Hungary and Slovakia shows you don't actually know much about the political situation there and shouldn't try to make predictions about them.

The rest of your comment is too implausible for me to want to discuss it in detail. I really don't get the impression you've actually thought through any of the scenarios you're coming up with. Canada fighting the most powerful military in the world that completely surrounds it on land? China attacking its biggest individual trading partner (by teleporting soldiers onto the other side of the world somehow) and having anything to gain from destabilising the world economy? Wars aren't carried out in the media, Trump won't be stopped and Greenland won't be defended with a new round of "Trump bad" articles in US media.

Probably, because if they didn’t, there’s no guarantee they wouldn’t be next.

The powerful ones simply wouldn't be next. Weak ones might be, but they in particular won't be able to do shit about Greenland.

The conflict, if it comes to it, will play out through less direct means.