7h ago

NATO allies discussed sending troops to Greenland after Trump threats

www.telegraph.co.uk Nato allies discussed sending troops to Greenland after Trump threats

European countries held informal talks on options if US president moves to seize Danish island

Summary

NATO allies informally discussed deploying troops to Greenland after Trump threatened military action to seize the Danish territory.

Germany and other European nations explored possible responses, including invoking NATO’s Article 5, though it was ruled out due to US veto power.

Denmark pledged $1.5 billion to bolster Arctic security, while NATO considered expanding its presence.

Trump cites strategic concerns over Russian and Chinese influence and US missile defense. NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte acknowledged Arctic security needs but sought to defuse tensions.

news @hexbear.net

InevitableSwing [none/use name] @hexbear.net

9h ago

Nato allies discussed sending troops to Greenland after Trump threats

www.telegraph.co.uk /world-news/2025/02/07/nato-countries-discuss-sending-troops-to-greenland/

37 6

World News @lemmit.online

Lemmit.Online bot @lemmit.online

BOT

8h ago

Nato countries discuss sending troops to Greenland after Donald Trump threats

www.telegraph.co.uk /world-news/2025/02/07/nato-countries-discuss-sending-troops-to-greenland/

1 0

You're viewing a single thread.

28 comments

Germany and other European nations explored possible responses, including invoking NATO’s Article 5, though it was ruled out due to US veto power.
And this is the only reason why Trump didn't pull the US out of NATO.
Because of the veto power, he can effectively block them from taking action against the United States.
NATO is dead.
If other world leaders had half a brain between them, they would be forming a new alliance without the United States as we speak.
- The new alliance already exists. It’s called the European Union.
  
  The EU doesn't include the UK, Canada, Norway, or Turkey. It isn't really a good NATO substitute.
  
  Yet
  
  Yeah, we really need some kind of external European defence sphere to cover us in Canada. No amount of maple syrup (or rare earth metals) is too great a cost.
  
  Two of those are Commonwealth countries. Maybe a common defense mechanism could be agreed. Instead of Iron Dome, it could be called King Dome.
  
  You could make all kinds of jokes about king dome come.
  
  I guess, but the UK is a pretty shit-tier nuclear power. I'd really want it to include France.
- They could also kick out the United States.
  
  They literally can't, the US is a permanent member.
  
  We're seeing from the White House that written words, rules, and laws are meaningless to them. They're only a permanent member because words say so, and the members are willing to honour those words. If the USA were to attack another NATO member I'm sure those words can and will be ignored.
  
  They could reorganize as “NOT-U” under all the same terms but without the US.
  
  NATO has no provision to remove members. It's even worse than the EU where a single other member is enough to veto it.
  Stop doing that, Western leaders. 3/4 vote should be enough for anything.
- Yes, a new military alliance and other new non-US Western treaties needs to happen. Badly.
  Although, he's saying he wants 5% spending from all members now, so maybe he's still planning to "shoot himself in the foot" by leaving.
- "We'll make our own NATO, with blackjack and hookers!"
  
  That was the CSTO and Armenia says the only good thing it had was the hookers...

28 comments