this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2026
111 points (98.3% liked)

politics

27600 readers
2998 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. 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.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In a whiplash-inducing U-turn, U.S. President Donald Trump suddenly dropped his insistence on taking control of Greenland, mere hours after laying out at great length his rationale for ownership of the Arctic island.

For weeks, Trump stuck firmly to a take-it-or-leave-it position on Greenland, insisting that nothing short of the U.S. owning the Danish territory would address his national security concerns.

On Wednesday, Trump made a detailed case for U.S. control of the island during an hour-plus speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

Then, barely four hours after leaving the stage, Trump demolished any shred of validity to his claims.

The president posted on social media that he "had formed the framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland and, in fact, the entire Arctic Region" as a result of a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte that lasted less than an hour.

all 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 3 points 6 days ago

Tzeench watching taco: im a huge fan

[–] CombatWombatEsq@lemmy.world 53 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I’d bet donuts to dollars they printed out a copy of the 1951 accord and let him sign it like it was a new agreement. Told him he was a genius for negotiating a “deal.”

[–] aceshigh@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I wonder at what point they’ll move Trump to the same office his father worked at.

[–] Donjuanme@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Interesting that these days doughnuts are worth dollars...

[–] CombatWombatEsq@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The donut place by my house sells a dozen for $40, so like $3.34.

[–] YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Wtf‽ Do you live on the beach in metropolitan California?

[–] CombatWombatEsq@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Seattle. West Coast Best Coast, baby.

[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

That’s ridiculous.

They had to add some gold foil and slather his stupid name all over it, first.

[–] mister_flibble@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

demolished his case for owning it

The "case":

[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

She was a bad egg.

[–] JackBinimbul@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 1 week ago

This is how he's always conducted "business".

Threaten to destroy something, thinks that he's pulled the "value" down as a result, then "offer a deal". This is just how he operates.

He never had the intention or ability to take control of Greenland. He just wants to force them to the table.

[–] Geobloke@aussie.zone 11 points 1 week ago

This is how he always worked. When he loses, just keep saying he's won, until some one believes him

[–] Otiz@sopuli.xyz 10 points 1 week ago (5 children)

What? So like its over now?

[–] sunbrrnslapper@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago

Probably the immediate threat, but the long tail of consequences will go on for a while. Who would want to work with us when we have twice elected a guy like Trump? We are pretty unreliable partners at this point. 😕

[–] CombatWombatEsq@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

Well, maybe for Trump. I suspect it won’t be over for the Danes and Greenlanders for quite some time.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I doubt its over, to me this seems more like they are gonna find a way to take it without military force and with less of a media spotlight. Probably through some kind of manipulatation or strong arming greenland to declare independence from Denmark and become a US territory/vassal state.

As we've seen with Venezuela, many leaders around the world are too afraid to condemn his actions and instead want to appease him to keep themselves out of the spotlight.

[–] thefluffiest@feddit.nl 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Now Greenland and Iceland will join the European Union. The EU will set up its own army, integrate its defense industry and boost defense spending. It will also protect its markets from US abuse and use its industrial leverage geopolitically. It will form international alliances with the likes of China and India.

It might slowly (or not) unwind its 8tn holdings of US debt, form a dedicated European financial infrastructure, and aggressively push for the euro as an alternative to the dollar.

In short, the US will lose its primary foreign market, and its closest ally.

[–] Otiz@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 week ago

That sounds pretty awesome, not gonna lie

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 week ago

Trump demolished his case for owning it

Half of his case was: "I'm mad the Norwegian government didn't give me a non-governmental organization's peace prize". You can't demolish something if it was already a pile of construction rubble.

[–] itsgroundhogdayagain@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 week ago

He won't remember any of that and even if he did, he's not a logical person.

[–] nocteb@feddit.org 7 points 1 week ago

He should meet with other politicians more often, it seems to make him more grounded in reality.

[–] Nastybutler@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

His "case" was always nonsensical.

[–] DrFistington@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They threatened to collapse the us bond market and he slurped on every dick in the room like a good little bitch

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I really, really doubt this is true.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

With Trump all it takes, most of the time, is

A) to suck up and tell him how great he is

B) tell him how good something will make him look

C) be the last one to have talked to him

And sometimes D) how whatever it is that you're proposing lines up with something he is convinced is true. Which you tell him is true and how smart he is for being the only one to figure it out.