By John Q. Hosedrinker 
French President Emmanuel Macron expressed grave concern over the US’s potential seizure of Greenland from Denmark, stating that such an action would trigger “unprecedented” consequences. Macron’s remarks were in response to US President Donald Trump’s insistence that US control of the Arctic island was crucial for his planned missile defense system, the Golden Dome, and national security. Denmark’s government and Greenland’s leadership have staunchly opposed Trump’s intentions, with Greenland’s Prime Minister clearly stating the island’s refusal to be under US control. Trump has intensified his push for ownership, despite the existing agreement allowing the US to station soldiers there.
Read the original article here
Greenland: Macron warns of ‘cascading consequences’ if US seizes island, this scenario unfolds in a geopolitical landscape riddled with anxieties and potential economic upheaval. The specter of a US move to “acquire” Greenland, or even worse, invade, sets off alarm bells, particularly within Europe.
The core concern revolves around the potential for an economic war, a conflict fought not with bullets, but with financial instruments and trade policies. Should the US attempt to seize Greenland, the fear is that the European Union, holding substantial US debt, could trigger a financial crisis by calling in those debts, selling off US dollars and bonds, and effectively causing a freefall in the dollar’s value. This action, potentially followed by China and other countries holding US debt, would resemble a bank run, crippling the US economy and potentially leading to a stock market crash. The implications of such a scenario are nothing short of catastrophic.
The potential for such devastating consequences stems from a perceived lack of global trust in the US. The article suggests that America has eroded international goodwill and may be pushing itself into a corner. Should Trump pursue this course of action, the US could find itself isolated and vulnerable on multiple fronts. The article also suggests that this crisis would not only affect US relations with other countries but could also lead to internal conflicts.
The repercussions would extend far beyond the economic realm. Europe, already wary of US policies, might respond with forceful measures, potentially leading to a severing of ties and a reassessment of alliances. NATO’s very structure could be put under threat, with the possibility of the US being expelled, and its troops stationed in Europe being treated as enemy combatants. It creates an atmosphere of distrust and fuels speculation about Trump’s motives and agendas.
Some believe the seizure of Greenland would be a catastrophic move and there are other actions that could also be triggered. The value of the dollar will tank, and all of Trump’s billionaire buddies would beat down the door to stop him. Europe has already threatened this and gotten Trump to back down on once before when he threatened to pull all support for Ukraine overnight. The cost is going to be huge, and America is going to end itself.
Adding to the gravity of the situation is the perception that Trump may be acting in a self-serving manner, prioritizing his own legacy over the interests of the country. This sentiment suggests that the acquisition of Greenland is more about personal ambition than strategic gain.
The acquisition of Greenland, even if unsuccessful, has already damaged trust, creating a climate of suspicion and making it harder for the US to cooperate with its allies. The article suggests that this is what Putin wants.
The article suggests that the international community is running out of patience with the US. It’s time for Europe to act, the article argues. They must prepare for war on an Eastern and Western front.
In this scenario, Greenland becomes a pawn in a larger game, and the actions of the US could unleash a chain reaction with dire consequences. It’s a reminder that political decisions can have far-reaching and unintended impacts and that the stability of the global order is fragile. The focus here is on the economic realities of a potential crisis, with the conclusion that the US may be leading the world toward some sort of economic collapse.