Orsisi:

Invoking “Goebbels” - calling foul!

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Saturday, January 17, 2026 - 11:52 pm: Edit

You're right, Chuck: he's pretty foul.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Sunday, January 18, 2026 - 02:26 am: Edit

Jessica, behave, no more Nazi allusions. Like the race card, playing the nazi card means YOU lose, immediately, totally.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Sunday, January 18, 2026 - 05:40 am: Edit

Well, some EU nations are threatening to scrap the zero tariffs US Industrial Exports to Europe.

I don't think World Markets will have a good day tomorrow.

A good question raised has been - what would the West do if it was Russia or China threatening another nation like this?

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Sunday, January 18, 2026 - 10:38 am: Edit

Fair enough, Steve.

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Sunday, January 18, 2026 - 11:28 am: Edit

IIRC Sweden also did some similar eugenic sterilizations.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Sunday, January 18, 2026 - 04:59 pm: Edit

Well Israel has said there was 'no co-ordination' with Isreal on the Board of Peace and it runs 'contrary to its own policy'.

What next will go wrong - for 'world peace and harmony'?

By Carl-Magnus Carlsson (Hardcore) on Sunday, January 18, 2026 - 05:19 pm: Edit

Mike, scientific racism was all the rage in the first half of the past century. I expect to find human rights violations justified by that in most countries once I start looking.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Sunday, January 18, 2026 - 11:57 pm: Edit

I've been debating with myself whether I wanted to jump into the All-Greenland-All-The-Time website to comment on Dana Madsen's posts from Friday night and Saturday morning. I have finally decided to do so. Unless I misunderstand his posts, Dana believes that the purported value of mineral deposits in Greenland is severely exaggerated because weather and geology will make them far more difficult and expensive to extract than most people realize.

I wanted to add my belief that, for related reasons, Greenland is, while not unimportant, not nearly so critical in a national security context as a lot of the talking heads and armchair strategists claim. It has some importance, yes. But on a 1 - 10 scale; maybe a 6 or a 6.5 rather than a 9.8 or so.

There are several specific issues to address and frankly I'm too tired at the moment (still recovering from cancer surgery from a week and a half ago). But in a nutshell, Greenland is a useful location from which to make certain types of observations but it is a really lousy place from which to conduct operations. I further claim that we have other options for anything we can do from Greenland in any case.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, January 19, 2026 - 05:57 am: Edit

Apparently, Trump is more musing about those tariffs than actually ordering them. Which is less stupid than I feared.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Monday, January 19, 2026 - 07:08 am: Edit

Alas for the UK, it would seem PM Starmer has rolled over like a dog and wants his belly rubbed - and he thinks that will make it all OK?

Lots of Talk - but zero protection on trade or tariffs for the UK.

One can only hope the Tariffs are just bluster - and any Military intervention even more hot air.


I can only guess Russia and China thinks it's a great idea (and if non-political) does anyone in the US think it's a good idea?

By Carl-Magnus Carlsson (Hardcore) on Monday, January 19, 2026 - 07:52 am: Edit

SVC, it ain't over yet. Trump's recent letter to the pm of Norway made that clear:
"Dear Jonas: Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 Wars PLUS, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace, although it will always be predominant, but can now think about what is good and proper for the United States of America. Denmark cannot protect that land from Russia or China, and why do they have a “right of ownership” anyway? There are no written documents, it’s only that a boat landed there hundreds of years ago, but we had boats landing there, also. I have done more for NATO than any other person since its founding, and now, NATO should do something for the United States. The World is not secure unless we have Complete and Total Control of Greenland. Thank you! President DJT”

The authenticity of the letter has been confirmed by the norwegian PM:
"Støre explains the background to the message:

– In our message to Trump, we conveyed our position against his increased tariffs against Norway, Finland and other selected countries. We pointed out the need to de-escalate the exchange of words and requested a phone call between Trump, Stubb and me during the day. The response from Trump came only shortly after we had sent the message. It was Trump's choice to share the message with other leaders in NATO countries, he tells VG."

Source Verdens Gang

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Monday, January 19, 2026 - 08:36 am: Edit

Like I keep saying; just lease some land in the boonies and build a base.

If Trump tries this is would be the end of NATO and probably lead to his impeachment.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Monday, January 19, 2026 - 09:00 am: Edit

Carl, I saw the same in the news this morning. I... I really don't know what to say at this juncture, when the President of the United States thinks that that is an appropriate communique with another head of state.

Given that the agreement we've had with Denmark since 1953 already allows us what amounts to carte blanche with regard to bases and forces in Greenland, this is absurd.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Monday, January 19, 2026 - 10:40 am: Edit

Eeeek.

Is about the only polite thing to say.

I assume the Message was delivered attached to a Brick and thrown from a moving vehicle, through a window in the Norwegian PM's home?

Just in case the the intent of the message wasn't strong enough.

On a military aspect - Russia probably can't invade an uninhabited island at the moment, without losing a 1,000 men and afew ships due to incompetency... and unless the North West passage is permanently open (and Canada might have afew things to say there).... not sure if China can realisticallty get there, to invade??

By Mike Erickson (Mike_Erickson) on Monday, January 19, 2026 - 10:58 am: Edit

The only place to invade Greenland is really on the W and SW coast along Baffin Bay. That's right along one of the best NW passage routes.

So much of Greenland is super cold, and covered with glacier (literally millions of tons of ice) that its really not practical to invade. It's like trying to invade a deep freezer. Sure, you could exert a lot of effort and arrive there, but then what? The troops on the glacier will require extensive support to survive. And it's not like you've taken control over something with short term value. You've literally captured a big chunk of ice.

That's why, aside from Thule (which needs to be in the northern very inhospitable part of Greenland for the OTH radar to work well) all larger settlements, airfields, ports, mines, etc, are on the W/SW coastal areas. It's much warmer and greener, relatively speaking.

--Mike

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Monday, January 19, 2026 - 11:18 am: Edit

Going back to real world military for a moment, there was a pod cast posted on you tube byPeter Zeihan, commentator and analyst from wall street journal research center.

After pointing out that Russia started the 2022 war with Ukraine with 3,000+ tanks in its active duty forces and 20,000 tanks in their various locations (storage depots, stock piles, reserve units etc…) at present Russia has only about 5% left after three plus years combat and more than a million casualties.

His main point seems to be that Russia no longer has the industrial base to continue producing the men and war materials to participate in a global or regional war with either NATO or the United States.

The monthly production of less than 150 tanks (modern tanks such as the T-90 or later models) is offered as proof that Russia is no longer a “peer” of either the U.S. or any of the primary powers making up the European union.

If President Trump really wants to dissolve NATO, now may be the best opportunity to do so since 1949.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Monday, January 19, 2026 - 11:46 am: Edit

The Simpsons was on over the weekend....

...the one where Homer is given the command of a Sub (and fires the Captain at the enemy sub!) and gets lost and ends up in Russia...

At the UN, the Russians annouce assylm for the crew - and it ends up with a comment about the USSR - "that is what we wanted you to think".... and they press a button, the Russian name sign flips over back to the USSR, the Berlin Wall 'Pops up' - Lenin burts out of his Glass Coffin and the Civlian Parade has secret tanks drive out of the carnival floats?

Surprise - we only have looked weak and incompetent for 35 years to fool you into thinking we was weak!!

Although that perhaps is a tad far fetched!!!

By MarkSHoyle (Bolo) on Monday, January 19, 2026 - 01:09 pm: Edit

Was it Greenland the U.S. built the extensive base under the snow, then the moving Glaciers caused it's downfall and withdrawal of troops....

By Carl-Magnus Carlsson (Hardcore) on Monday, January 19, 2026 - 01:43 pm: Edit

Bolo, yes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Iceworm

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, January 19, 2026 - 03:58 pm: Edit

I don’t think we have heard the whole story yet.

By Carl-Magnus Carlsson (Hardcore) on Monday, January 19, 2026 - 04:37 pm: Edit

"SERIOUS WARNING: The 11th Airborne Division alert for deployment to “Minnesota” is likely a feint … they were trained for terrain in Greenland."
- Malcolm Nance on Substack

I see on wikipedia that the 11th is called the "Arctic Angels" and are indeed trained and equipped for that environment. If they are ordered to got to Greenland it will at least mean the Insurrection act will be on hold (small blessings and all that).

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Monday, January 19, 2026 - 04:49 pm: Edit

The 11th Airborne Division was initially created as an active uni5, u.s. army in 1943. Services mainly in the Pacific, deactivated in 1965, was inactive until reactivated June 6, 2022.

By Carl-Magnus Carlsson (Hardcore) on Monday, January 19, 2026 - 05:04 pm: Edit

Apparently it was the U.S. Army Alaska that was redesignated as 11th Airborne Division.

By Dana Madsen (Madman) on Monday, January 19, 2026 - 06:29 pm: Edit

On real world military aspect.

Does anyone on here think it likely that China is going to invade and occupy Greenland in the next 20 years? I don't think so personally, I don't see what is in it for them, what they get from it.

Lets even say that the US washes their hands and says they wouldn't help Denmark/Europe defend Greenland. Therefore from a military aspect the effort required and risk involved would drop substantially.

Now, they might make an offer and ask Denmark / Greenland to extend their belt and road initiative and to build a port to support transit through the North West passage. In 20 years the NW passage might be navigable 3 to 4 months a year, if you believe in global warming. Then some percentage of trade between China and Europe can more efficiently transit shaving some costs. But if they seize Greenland and anger Europe, stopping trade, what did they gain in seizing Greenland?