By Matt Underwood Vance’s arrival in Greenland is, to put it mildly, unwelcome. The palpable animosity towards his visit is evident in the widespread online commentary, ranging from sarcastic amusement to outright hostility. Many express bewilderment at his casual attire, questioning the lack of a suit for such a significant, and seemingly contentious, trip. The absence of a simple “thank you” for even being permitted to land adds insult to injury, fueling the sentiment that he’s entitled and disrespectful.
The suggestion of detaining and deporting Vance, perhaps even to a Romanian prison, reflects the level of frustration felt by many. The idea that he’s an “international piñata,” ripe for the picking, highlights the widespread perception of him as a contentious figure, someone who inspires strong negative reactions wherever he goes. Replacing Greenland with any other country in this scenario wouldn’t change the outcome; the reaction would likely be similar. The image of polar bear scat snowballs being hurled his way is a darkly humorous, yet telling, representation of the public’s disdain.
The comparison to the Trump administration’s handling of UK submarines attempting to enter US waters is apt. The suggestion that Vance’s plane should have been made to refuel and return to the US points to a shared desire to prevent his visit from taking place at all. It also underscores the irony – that a headline reading “Vance Lands in USA, a Place That Doesn’t Want Him” could just as easily be accurate. Essentially, the question of whether anywhere actually *wants* Vance is a resounding no.
The anecdote of Vance calling his father to describe Greenland as “more white than green” is indicative of his perceived detachment from the reality of the situation and the concerns of the Greenlandic people. Further fueling the resentment is the fact that his visit follows an administration’s pattern of actively threatening to seize Greenland. This is far from a simple diplomatic visit; it is a highly sensitive political act.
The idea of leveraging Vance’s presence for a trip to Ukraine to assess his American investments, or even a tour of the frontlines orchestrated by Zelensky, is darkly comic. Yet, it underscores the bizarre incongruity of his visit – a distraction from more serious matters and a potential opportunity for political maneuvering. The sentiment that he should “fuck off and leave those people alone” is repeated frequently, reflecting the widespread desire for him to simply go away.
The suggestion that Greenland officials should have denied his plane permission to land, or at least prevent him from leaving the military base, highlights a missed opportunity to avoid the current controversy. Further suggestions of road closures to keep him contained within the base, while perhaps extreme, again exemplify the intense desire to minimize his impact and limit his interactions with the local population.
The image of Vance being egged in Nuuk represents the potential for escalation of public disapproval into more direct forms of protest. The description of him as “a human blank slate who molds itself to what’s around him” or, more bluntly, “a cunt in better cunts clothing,” shows the wide spectrum of opinions and the consistent negativity surrounding his person. The fact that he would even visit a place openly hostile to his presence is baffling to many.
Carl Bildt’s comments, highlighting Vance’s fabricated claims of Russian and Chinese incursions into Greenland, reveal the depth of his misrepresentations. The former foreign minister’s assertion that Vance and Trump live in a “fantasy world” underscores the broader concern about their motivations and the potential for detrimental consequences of their actions. The widespread bewilderment at his arrival is summarized by the question: why was he even allowed to land? The idea of a secret meeting with Putin, in contrast with his actual visit to Greenland, further fuels the suspicions around his true intentions.
Ultimately, Vance’s Greenland trip serves as a case study in unwanted attention and the deep-seated resentment that can arise from perceived political maneuvering and disregard for local concerns. It’s a stark reminder that actions have consequences, and ignoring the will of the people can have far-reaching negative repercussions. The consistent refrain of “we don’t want him” from both Greenlanders and Americans underscores a universal sentiment of disapproval.