As a Norwegian, I am genuinely curious how US citizens are reacting to Trump’s letter To Norway and demands.
Setting politics aside for a moment: Is there actual public support in the USA for demanding territory from Denmark? I see polling suggesting that the overwhelming majority of Americans, around 75%, oppose the idea of purchasing or seizing Greenland. It clearly isn't a popular demand among the general public. But do the people who voted for Trump actually back him on this specific issue?
To us in the Nordics, this is baffling. Greenland has been Scandinavian territory since the year 10th century. It was part of the establishment of the nation of Norway in 1261 and remained with Denmark after the Kalmar Union ended. The land has been inhabited by the Thule people and Scandinavians for over a millennium. Yet, the US Government now argues it 'should' belong to the USA and is threatening close NATO allies with tariffs to force a sale.
I am especially curious about the 'Golden Dome' justification. President Trump claims full control of Greenland is 'vital' for this new missile defense shield. Do Americans accept this narrative? From our side of the Atlantic, it looks like a pretext—existing treaties already allow the US to operate the Pituffik Space Base for exactly this kind of defense. Why is annexation suddenly considered 'vital' when the current alliance has worked for decades?
High-profile Republican Senators have publicly called the idea 'absurd' and 'weapons-grade stupid.' How is it, then, that the US Congress and Senate seem unable to stop these threats?
I would appreciate an American perspective: Is this seen as a legitimate foreign policy move or an overreach by the executive branch? Are we just witnessing a train wreck in the making on both sides of the Atlantic, with no option to stop it?
I've been thinking: Trump won't settle for less than Greenland unless it's the Nobel Peace Price. So... why not give it to him but with caveats? E.g. It will be presented to him in an extraordinary pompous celebration (to tickle his ego) but will remain in Norway until the day of the end of Trump's presidency. He will receive it again on that day, and can keep it!, in another majestic ceremony.
There have been so many “should be the last straw” moments, don’t see why this’ll be any different. Our government isn’t going to save us. We’re going to have to save ourselves.
FWIW this was a text message, not a letter. As such I think this qualifies as somewhat fake news. As to the content, it's obviously deranged. I hope this Greenland shit stops soon.
8 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 30.9 ms ] threadSetting politics aside for a moment: Is there actual public support in the USA for demanding territory from Denmark? I see polling suggesting that the overwhelming majority of Americans, around 75%, oppose the idea of purchasing or seizing Greenland. It clearly isn't a popular demand among the general public. But do the people who voted for Trump actually back him on this specific issue?
To us in the Nordics, this is baffling. Greenland has been Scandinavian territory since the year 10th century. It was part of the establishment of the nation of Norway in 1261 and remained with Denmark after the Kalmar Union ended. The land has been inhabited by the Thule people and Scandinavians for over a millennium. Yet, the US Government now argues it 'should' belong to the USA and is threatening close NATO allies with tariffs to force a sale.
I am especially curious about the 'Golden Dome' justification. President Trump claims full control of Greenland is 'vital' for this new missile defense shield. Do Americans accept this narrative? From our side of the Atlantic, it looks like a pretext—existing treaties already allow the US to operate the Pituffik Space Base for exactly this kind of defense. Why is annexation suddenly considered 'vital' when the current alliance has worked for decades?
High-profile Republican Senators have publicly called the idea 'absurd' and 'weapons-grade stupid.' How is it, then, that the US Congress and Senate seem unable to stop these threats?
I would appreciate an American perspective: Is this seen as a legitimate foreign policy move or an overreach by the executive branch? Are we just witnessing a train wreck in the making on both sides of the Atlantic, with no option to stop it?
Behind it is "Thank you for your inattention to this Jeffrey Epstein matter for another week"