this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2026
162 points (100.0% liked)

News

36233 readers
2502 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

BERLIN, Jan 14 (Reuters) - Germany will send 13 soldiers to Greenland on Thursday as part of a reconnaissance mission with other European nations, the German government and defence ministry said on Wednesday, following demands by President Donald Trump for Washington to have control of the island. The mission, which comes at the request of Denmark, will take place from Thursday to Saturday, aiming to explore possible military contributions to bolster the security of the region, a defence ministry statement said. This could, for example, include maritime surveillance, it added. Trump has repeatedly said in recent weeks that Greenland, an autonomous territory of Denmark that is strategically located and rich in minerals, is vital to U.S. security, and that the United States must own it to prevent Russia or China from occupying it.

top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 37 points 1 month ago (2 children)

the United States must own it to prevent Russia or China from occupying it.

Or, you know, Europe could own it to prevent Russia, China AND the US from occupying it?

[–] metallic_substance@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

Can someone more informed than me explain why it's in contention for being occupied by any nation in the first place?

[–] etuomaala@sopuli.xyz 24 points 1 month ago

@vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works is right. This isn't about arctic security or deterrence at all. The US military already has unlimited access to the whole island and its airspace. The only reason Trump wants it to be a part of the US is because he is a manbaby and the grown-ups have all told him he can't have it.

[–] jake@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Trump also thinks it's 50x larger than it really is because of map projection effects.

[–] FishFace@piefed.social 2 points 1 month ago

It's really big though; it's the largest island and one fifth the size of the usa, and the twelfth largest country.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 month ago

Trump is stupid and wants it and MAGA wants to restart manifest destiny.

[–] etuomaala@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 month ago

Oh wait, I see I haven't answered your question. The land has strategic value because it sits between Russia and North America. During the Cold War in particular, it was a good place to put early warning radar to detect nuclear launches. Now, for example, the waters around the island are patrolled for Russian submarines and stuff. And as the Arctic Ocean's surface ice thaws, there are valuable trade routes there that different states want to control. And there might be some fancy minerals on the island itself.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 month ago

Because of its strategic geographic location as the land ice melts, and all the untapped resources under that ice, AND the fact that in 300 years, it will likely be prime real estate.

[–] jimmy90@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

there is already a US military base in greenland

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 month ago (2 children)

This is both frustratingly symbolic and meaningfully symbolic. More would be better. But even a single soldier is a serious and important symbol of commitment and literal “skin in the game”.

[–] ViatorOmnium@piefed.social 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Denmark sent a group to prepare the logistics for larger troops deployments, so Greenland probably can't support much more troops right now. I assume the immediate goal is to have troops of as many countries as possible in the ground, and increase the numbers later.

[–] bstix@feddit.dk 7 points 1 month ago

I think the number of nations represented there is more important than the number of soldiers.

I don't know what military operation Trump has in mind, but even his most aggressive war mongers would hesitate to attack representatives from all of the NATO countries at once.

[–] invictvs@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

Why do you need to take control over an ally's territory? The US already has a shot of pretecting Greenland from China or Russia occupying it, because it will be essentially attack on Denmark which is a NATO member.

If there is still anyone out there that believes that the orange turd wants Greenland for security reasons, they must have some negative IQ.

Now, those minerals mentioned... They are another story. That will be for the financial security of Trump's family and friends.

[–] sircac@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Is not like Europe could grant protection from a USA all-out military action, but it must grant that such attempt must have reasonable consequences, from not making it a free looting or make it dissuasori in cost for USA due to the losses with Europe to not dilapidate European resources (Orange's words are worthless, only actions should matter), then it will be their call.

[–] santa@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago

With t at the helm — WWIII here we go!