By John Q. Hosedrinker 
France is collaborating with international partners to formulate a response plan in anticipation of potential U.S. actions regarding Greenland. This follows reports of the White House considering the purchase of Greenland, including the possibility of military intervention. As tensions rise, European nations are actively addressing President Trump’s interest in the region. The situation is being closely monitored by various international bodies.
Read the original article here
France working with allies on plan should US move on Greenland… is a headline that frankly, feels like it’s ripped from a dystopian future thriller. The idea of the United States, a close ally, eyeing Greenland with expansionist intentions is, to put it mildly, unsettling. The fact that France, along with its allies, is already formulating a plan to respond speaks volumes about the gravity of the situation. It’s a testament to the current precarious state of global geopolitics.
The situation has rapidly escalated beyond simply a hypothetical. The prevailing sentiment is that Denmark, as the owner of Greenland, needs the full support of its allies, particularly in any potential negotiations with the US. There’s a palpable fear that the US might try to steamroll Denmark, mirroring a perceived past pattern of bullying, similar to what was attempted with Ukraine. The preferred outcome, as expressed, is for such a meeting not to happen at all.
The narrative has indeed shifted at an alarming pace. It’s almost surreal that the focus has turned so dramatically. The initial concerns about a Russian invasion have, to some extent, been supplanted by anxieties surrounding potential US actions. The very fact that we need to even consider the possibility of a superpower “gobbling up” territory is deeply troubling. It raises the specter of a new era of geopolitical competition, a modern-day land grab, which is chilling.
If it came to it, there is concern that a significant portion of the American population wouldn’t support such an action, making the internal divisions within the US even more pronounced. The hypothetical scenario is further highlighted with extreme scenarios. There are even wild suggestions about using extreme methods of deterrence, like the nuclear option, including detonating a weapon at sea off the coast of the United States. While such talk seems extreme, it underscores the level of anxiety and determination that is being voiced.
NATO is clearly feeling the strain. It’s being suggested that a proactive approach is needed, maybe even staging a large NATO training exercise with a focus on defense against an aggressor. A clear show of solidarity would be one way to show that any action against Greenland would be met with swift and unified resistance. It would serve as a powerful signal to the US that such an action would have serious consequences.
The US military strength can’t simply be relied upon as it should be. The US has plenty of internal conflict that is slowing its strength. The sentiment expressed here is that the US, despite its military might, is vulnerable from within. There’s a strong sense of urgency. The time to prepare is now. It’s a call to action. The suggestion to utilize Ukrainian expertise in drone technology highlights the need for concrete steps to bolster defense capabilities.
France is taking a strong stance. A clear line in the sand has been drawn: any move against Greenland will be considered an attack on France itself, triggering a full military response, including all available options. This strong warning underscores the seriousness with which France views the situation. This includes the call for the removal of all US bases in Europe. This kind of declaration makes the stakes incredibly clear. It is a declaration of intent.
Furthermore, there is a call for a unified European response, with a very specific, aggressive approach. Some propose a combination of military presence on Greenland, alongside coordinated actions within Europe. The intent is to make the consequences of any US action abundantly clear and to potentially deter any such move. The sentiment is that they must make it clear that the US will be fighting Europeans if they want Greenland. The need for aggressive action is apparent.
The feeling is that any invasion of Greenland is a declaration of war, and a devastating one at that. There is a sense of betrayal. The United States is being accused of violating the principles of alliance and cooperation. There is a call to use unconventional tactics. The tone is highly charged, reflecting the intensity of feeling surrounding this situation.
The nuclear deterrent is being brought up again. There’s a stark reminder that nuclear weapons are a legitimate response to an invasion of NATO soil, a point being emphasized by the UK as well. This highlights how serious this would be. The level of destruction would be so great that the USA would gain nothing from their actions. This is not about winning, it’s about not allowing it to happen.
There are many hypothetical scenarios and historical references. The tone of the conversation is dark and foreboding. The idea of the US losing, of internal collapse, is being weighed as a possible outcome. The mention of the Simpsons is a particularly dark joke. The stakes are extraordinarily high, and it’s a very difficult path forward.
There are many people in Europe that are very concerned with this situation. The feeling is that the US has no chance to win against the EU. The idea of alienating the US from its allies, as a result of such actions, is a scary prospect. The comparison to historical events emphasizes the potential for long-term damage to global stability. The reaction highlights the potential for widespread conflict and the end of any remaining trust. The level of distrust in US leadership is significant.