501
Germany, other NATO allies sending troops to Greenland amid Trump threats
(www.newsweek.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2026
501 points (100.0% liked)
World News
54044 readers
4198 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
These are advance troops that will figure out logistics, where it makes sense to deploy a bigger force. What they need, and infrastructure.
They are also a deterrent, if german soldiers are killed shit will hit the fan.
Often called "tripwire forces" when they were NATO troops stationed in Eastern Europe. Their purpose is to force the adversary to kill some people before it can take any territory, ensuring that they can't simply make it a fait accompli and hope there will be no further repercussions.
I mean, we'll see. But if the US really is serious about taking Greenland by force, you've got a US military base already on the island that's been running these defense calculations for decades. It's going to be an uphill climb just to reach parity with the Americans on securing the territory. I hope this isn't perfunctory, and someone is asking the question "How do we deal with one or more US aircraft carriers?" seriously.
You mean like that time when a Swedish diesel sub bypassed all the defenses and "sunk" the US carrier?
Or that time when Netherlands sub "sunk" one?
Or that time when Australia "sunk" one?
Or that time when Canada "sunk" one?
Those carriers are far from invincible.
The USA is historically bad at wars - Afghanistan, Vietnam, Korea - all lost despite their massive military spending.
The only wars they won in modern times are the ones where they received help from their EU NATO allies.
They're only good at "strike and run away" operations, like the one in Venezuela.
If they can't take Greenland overnight, it will cost them very dearly to go to war with NATO, with no certainty of winning.
To add to this, the US is not that great in the Arctic. To occupy Greenland they need boots on the ground, and they are not equipped or manned to do Arctic land operations. EU + Canada surpass them in that. The US only has the one airborne division that are actually cold weather fighters. They also have far fewer ice breakers and the additional units that they were going to buy from Finland (who makes the best ones in the world) will surely be canceled.
To date, no US aircraft carrier has been lost in a military operation. You're using "sunk" to describe military exercises that informed the US of all the strategies potentially deployed by these countries.
If the Europeans want to put a US carrier at the bottom of the ocean, I'm not going to shed a tear. But you're pointing to scrimmage runs and exhibition matches, while you've been letting Americans see your playbooks (hell, write your playbooks) for the last 60 years.
Put up or shut up.
America lost a bunch in World War II. Since then they've been exceedingly careful not to risk losing them, always putting them up against foes that couldn't hit back. Both because they're expensive, of course, but also to cultivate the very myth that you're falling for - that American naval power is "invincible."
It's not.
Typical Americunt, picking and choosing their propaganda points and completely ignoring anything else. Exactly like your orange pedo cunt of a president.
Americunts keep losing their wars against much much weaker militaries and you haven't won a proper war in decades.
Americunts can't win a war without your EU allies because the EU are the ones with successful strategies, like how to bypass the "most advanced navy" defenses and sink their expensive carriers.
Americunts are only good at drive bys and hit and run attacks, you don't know how to fight a proper war. Fact.
So no, Americunts have terrible playbooks. Good luck.
This part is particularly silly:
Do you believe that other countries have been training alongside Americans for decades and have never picked up any knowledge of their skills, methods, strategy, tactics, doctrine, weapons, etc? Never learned anything at all about how Americans fight? The Americans are the most visible military on the planet, and the most gregarious, they're in every country and training with all of these countries, and somehow no one ever figured out how they do it?
I think when you've got 100x players on the field to their 1x, the learning curve tilts in your favor. EU members in subordinate roles and supporting positions, without command and control access to the biggest pieces of hardware, aren't going to have the accumulated experiences of US veterans. Nevermind the amount of time the US has spent in the field relative to their European peers.
I don't think it's a mystery at a high level. But that's like saying "It's no mystery how Tom Brady won all those football games". When you get into the finer details, you discover why 13 years of Superbowls never produced a rival defense that could consistently shut down the Patriots' Offense.
I suspect you have puddle-deep insight into global economic dependencies, the fragility of the US economy, the EU + Canada Arctic warfare capabilities, and the likely outcome of an invasion of a northern neighboring country that looks like you, sounds like you, and can hide in plain sight or hop over the indefensible border to bring violence to your homes. The US has no concept of a war that impacts their home country, and dropping some hardware and troops in a country on the other side of the planet, in a country with no economic connection to the US, is not the same thing. Even when the enemy has different skin and vastly different culture and language, they still end up leaving after decades of slaughter having accomplished nothing but huge debt for taxpayers, huge profits for oil companies and defense contractors, and piles of dead Americans.
So, to you I say - do it. Shit or get off the pot. Nothing will hasten the downfall of the shittiest form of America quicker than trying to go to war with the world. You are fighting for treasure, we are fighting for survival. And don't be surprised if the strategy is to pretend to be humbled before Trump, who is incapable of seeing when he's being manipulated, in order to slow play and draw out the inevitable internal and economic collapse.
Now say it in German.
I don't need to, because my grandfather ran up the beaches of Normandy and fought all the way to the German border, alongside Brits and Americans. But the good Americans, not like you. My country has a proud history of fighting fascists, and we actually participated in both world wars from the beginning unlike you guys who showed up years too late, and then spent the next century bragging about how you won the whole thing. You have no concept of suffering during war. In fact you got a golden ticket after WW2 to tune the global economic system to give you every advantage, so I look forward to the moment of realization when you no longer have the dollar standard and all your TBonds get sold off. You might have to actually pay your debts rather than printing money and spending it all on military hardware to enable your foreign corporate adventures.
Then he'd have told you how much of a bloody mess taking a beach head is with 1930s equipment. Again, nobody in Europe actually wants that noise. That's why there was no major European intervention in Ukraine. Y'all just let the Ukrainians piss away their best and brightest as cannon fodder while up-selling them on Wundertanken that got stuck in the mud.
If I didn't, I'd be significantly more blase about a military engagement in Greenland.
I'll spot you Trump has no concept, and will presumably fling every member of JSOC into the meat grinder if he thinks it'll win him a 51st state and a Nobel Prize in Bribing The Right People. But the fact that folks in the EU do seem to have a meaningful contingent of anti-war locals would suggest they aren't thrilled with the prospect of sending their kids and grandkids to die over an oversized ice cube.
There's simply no appetite for this shit, which is why Trump (very rightly) believes he can take Greenland without a serious fight. That's the nature of imperialism. The cost of opposing the empire is astronomically higher than the cost of acquiesce, so people tend to duck their heads until the pain is intolerable. And Greenland isn't painful enough to fight over.
How do you believe the Axis power will occupy Greenland? Tell me a typical plan. How would it roll out?
And how will it happen without lethal force?
And if EU or Canadian troops are killed, or Greenlanders are killed, do you think it will just be brushed under the rug and dismissed?
Same way they do it anywhere else. A month of artillery bombardment on every hospital, church, and elementary school with a "Fighting Age Male" in line of sight until everyone in the country is afraid to step outside the house.
Send in the jackboots to take major ports and city centers, then loot the surrounding area of valuables.
Start paying half the surviving population a bounty of bread and cigarettes for every "insurgent" scalp they bring in, and set off a civil war that scars the country for a century.
Then fall back to a Green Zone and use anyone left for target practice with your latest AI powered weapons system.
Write the territory off as "ungovernable" in fifteen years, and have your retired grunts sign a multi-million dollar book/movie deal called "Snowmobile Heroes: Liberation Victory Patrol"
Ok so they plan to kill their former allies, as well as any Greenlanders that don't want to be occupied, which is all of them.
If you think this is a feasible sane approach, you're either a troll, or you're out of your fucking mind. The world will turn to China and trash the US economy instantly.
That's been the US modus operandi since Truman.
It's no more feasible or sane than any of our other adventurist wars. But it's crazy to think the Europeans are willing to play the role of Punching Bad to our Imperial Iron Fist. If the US is serious about taking Greenland, the Europeans will back out of the way. Because the US is an enormous, horrifying killing machine and Greenland simply isn't worth that kind of heat.
European reactionaries will be on the side of the US - just like Canadians were in the last election cycle - and they'll likely eat some shit for it in the short term. But the US will continue to pump the continent full of white nationalist propaganda. The liberal European leadership will continue to let it happen. And the reactionaries will win in the end when liberals roll over a few years later.
All the other times you attacked your allies? All the other wars with Europe and Canada?
This has got to be the stupidest comment you've said in our entire exchange, and the bar is pretty high. If you truly believe that you can flatten all US imperial actions and assume the responses will be the same - and you're comfortable building the granddaddy of all false equivalences ever, comparing invading a NATO member country and killing their citizens to, say, Iraq - then you are well and truly brain damaged.
Thank Christ you're not representative of the real and good Americans, and you should frankly be on your knees thanking them everyday for saving you from yourself and giving you a country that isn't a complete moral and economic shithole. That is assuming they beat you shitpumps down and start reversing course, which it seems like they're doing.
From this point on, I'm assuming you're a bot so I don't start to taint my impression of the majority of Americans who have had enough of the Trump dictatorship. So in light of this assumption, I bid you...piss off wanker.
It's sort of our thing
Brother, if you don't want to learn about this country's history, that's on you. But your need to scream "Stupid!" every time I say something you don't want to hear isn't an indictment of my intelligence, just your maturity.
Ok buddy.
You think this is like Iraq. I don't need to comment on your intelligence I just need to underline that.
Your insults mean nothing to me. I've been called worse things by better people.
And frankly it's charming that you think people don't know about "your country". I guarantee I know more about the US than you think, and for damn sure more than you do about mine. Note the quotes and my wording...they are used specifically because I don't believe you're an American. I'll remind you, I assume you're a bot or an agent provocateur so you should know that nothing that you're trying to do is convincing me to hate anyone, nor is it changing my mind on anything that I believe. If you want to keep responding back and attempting to insult me, feel free. Maybe it will mean you don't scam or influence anyone else.
Spilling a lot of ink to suggest otherwise
You don't seem to get it. I don't care about your insults against me, but I like insulting you. It gives me a dopamine hit.
Keep saying that. Maybe you can get someone to believe it
Oh man, this dinner is going to be so good when I have 100 chefs making it.
Are they going to kill German & French troops to do that? If there are UK troops there then goodbye to hundreds of billions in AUKUS $ too.
Europe depends more on the US than the US does on Europe. What would the EU do? Sanctions, send more troops, war?
The entire EU economy depends on American companies and would crumble in a few days, without even having to do any military action in Groenland.
Would you say - 3 days?
Theres a lot of confident comments in this thread.
Any US carrier strike group can probably sink the entire navy of most countries. This calls for a full NATO response because if it doesn't then I don't know what does
Wasn't it one of the Nordics that 'sunk' an American carried in drills a while back?
It did, and the US considered the outcome so concerning that they requested to lease the submarine (but not install a crew - Swedish sailors would operate it in the US navy). Since those were different times, with only mild insanity among US presidents, Sweden granted the request.
Wikipedia tells us:
One of? I thought it was several...
Yes, the Swedish diesel electric subs are really quiet and hard to detect in a war game scenario, but that is done with many artificial constraints to the defending CSG, which is tightly packed in a relatively small patch of ocean that the Swedish sub knew and could plan for.
In reality those subs are stealthy only while traveling at 6 knots and the CSG can travel at 30 over vast expanses of water, with an effective strike range of 2000 miles.
Also, in war they're allowed to use high energy sonars that they can't use in a war game because it kills marine animals, which will detect a turd floating 500 miles away (exaggerating here but you get the idea).
Just interesting math... A singular fully staffed US aircraft carrier anchoring off the coast of Greenland would increase the overall population of Greenland by around 10%.
It just says that they will be participating in some exercises. Nothing about permanent force.
Yo Mr. Mertz brief this guy on the real plan and what orders you gave those soldiers!
Should this article also state what they will be having for breakfast?
I wish I was still so naive I believed EU has some secret plan to defeat US. Especially Germany, country that was blind to the threat Russia posed for two decades. Yeah, I'm sure they will go to war over Greenland now...
It's also funny that they are open about sending this tiny group of soldiers, something they could easily hide, but are hiding the plan to send a bigger force, something that will be impossible to hide. Kind of silly, really. Almost like thinking that Germany would commit any permanent force to Greenland without informing their own public.
It's all a show yes, they try to show tough now, but will fold once Trump makes any real move for Greenland.