US President Donald Trump has made a statement about his intentions towards Greenland, saying he will not use military force to take control of the island. However, despite this, he did not rule out the possibility of using other means to acquire it.
Denmark's foreign minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen described the US president's statement as positive, even though Trump has not dropped his ambitions to acquire Greenland. According to Rasmussen, what is clear after Trump's speech is that the president's ambition to own Greenland remains intact.
Trump stated that a "future deal" with respect to Greenland and the entire Arctic region has been formed with NATO chief Mark Rutte. He also said he will not impose the 10% tariffs threatened on eight European countries unless they support his bid to take over Greenland.
The US president repeated his claims that Nato has treated the US unfairly, stating that "it's time that Nato steps up" in terms of supporting America in Ukraine. However, his comments have been met with criticism from some EU leaders who see them as a veiled threat.
Meanwhile, Trump also caused confusion during his speech when he referred to "Iceland" instead of Greenland, saying it had caused a drop in stock prices the previous day. The White House quickly denied that there was any mix-up between the two countries.
In related news, Norway's former Nato secretary general Jens Stoltenberg stated that the fact Trump has ruled out using military force to take control of Greenland is an "important message" but does not make the issue go away. He emphasized the need for respect of Denmark's territorial integrity.
Overall, it appears that while Trump's statement on Greenland was seen as a positive step by some, his continued ambitions to acquire the island remain a concern for many.
Denmark's foreign minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen described the US president's statement as positive, even though Trump has not dropped his ambitions to acquire Greenland. According to Rasmussen, what is clear after Trump's speech is that the president's ambition to own Greenland remains intact.
Trump stated that a "future deal" with respect to Greenland and the entire Arctic region has been formed with NATO chief Mark Rutte. He also said he will not impose the 10% tariffs threatened on eight European countries unless they support his bid to take over Greenland.
The US president repeated his claims that Nato has treated the US unfairly, stating that "it's time that Nato steps up" in terms of supporting America in Ukraine. However, his comments have been met with criticism from some EU leaders who see them as a veiled threat.
Meanwhile, Trump also caused confusion during his speech when he referred to "Iceland" instead of Greenland, saying it had caused a drop in stock prices the previous day. The White House quickly denied that there was any mix-up between the two countries.
In related news, Norway's former Nato secretary general Jens Stoltenberg stated that the fact Trump has ruled out using military force to take control of Greenland is an "important message" but does not make the issue go away. He emphasized the need for respect of Denmark's territorial integrity.
Overall, it appears that while Trump's statement on Greenland was seen as a positive step by some, his continued ambitions to acquire the island remain a concern for many.
I'm just worried about how this could escalate into something bigger 
. Trump's comments are super ambiguous and kinda seem like he's trying to play hardball 
. The fact that Denmark's foreign minister thinks it's positive, but Greenland still hasn't dropped off the table for him, is a bit concerning 
. And what about those EU leaders who got upset with his veiled threat? Shouldn't we all just try to chill out and respect each other's borders 
? I mean, I get that Trump's got some beefs with NATO, but can't he just address that in a calm way? 
The mix-up between Greenland and Iceland is just icing on the cake 
- like, come on, Mr. President! Get it together 
And can we talk about how confused Iceland (not Greenland) got him? Like, what's goin' on in that White House? 
, that was just awkward. But for real tho, it's still super concerning that Denmark is gonna have to deal with this whole situation, they gotta be like "Uh, no thanks" 
? We'll see how that plays out... 
He literally can't even get the country names right... Iceland instead of Greenland? 
. And no, Trump, just saying "future deal" with NATO doesn't mean you're gonna magically own Greenland overnight 
. Denmark has their backs and so do we (and other Arctic countries) 
.
.
. That's what we need more of, not Trump-style drama and tantrums 
.
On the EU side, some ppl are saying Trump's comments were a bit too aggressive and veiled threats are never a good thing. 
so like what i'm seeing here is trump being all diplomatic and stuff about not using military force to take over greenland which is def a good thing right? 
, anyone who thinks nato has treated america unfairly and now wants them to "step up" in ukraine needs to get their facts straight 
, meanwhile denmark is like "hey no thanks we got this" 
. And btw, did Trump really think referring to Iceland instead of Greenland was a good idea? 
I mean, who makes that mistake in a speech and expects everyone to be like "oh, no big deal"? 
it sounds like he's trying to flex his muscles and show everyone that america is still a major player on the world stage. newsflash, trump: just because you're the us president doesnt mean you can just take whatever you want 
Yet, he still feels the need to make a big deal about taking over another country's territory. And what's with the mix-up between Iceland and Greenland? 
I mean, how many times does it need to be said? Respect Denmark's territorial integrity! 
. But let's be real, what's gonna happen when Denmark refuses to sell? I mean, have you seen their relationship with the EU lately? It's like, they're not exactly on good terms 
. The guy needs to get his head in the game, you know? It's like, Greenland is one thing, but Ukraine is another 
. The Arctic region is warming at an alarming rate and it's time we focus on sustainability, not territorial disputes 
. Anyway, I guess that's my two cents on the whole thing 
But EU leaders got worried about veiled threat 
Still, unclear what's next for this whole Greenland saga 
, why are you still talking about taking over? 
? Like, it's kinda embarrassing 
. Anyway, I think this whole thing is just a big mess 
...and not in a good way 
.
.
. Not sure if anyone else is buying what he's selling 
.