Denmark took it centuries ago, and that's how it should stay unless or until the Greenlandic people decide otherwise.

The regular incidence of war going on on our globe suggests that's not sustainable. Why do you think countries spend so much money on their militaries? Me, I'd love it if we could zero out the US defense budget. Unfortunately, that would be a disaster for us.

What kind of argument is that!?

Who controls what territory in the world is hardly stable. At some point, if one is not a military power, one will have to take sides. If, for example, valuable resources are discovered in Greenland.

What are you talking about? Greenland is already a NATO member (via Denmark), so it has already taken a side. The obvious scandal, of course, is that Greenland is being openly threatened by the US - a fellow NATO member!

> Greenland is being openly threatened by the US

Not really. It's just bluster.

Denmark/Greenland certainly thinks differently. And empty threats are still threats.

There's been no followup on the "threat".

First, a threat stays a threat, even if you don't "follow up".

Second, there are stories about alleged covert CIA operations. The topic is certainly not off the table.

Don't you see any problem with the US expressing desires to annex parts of a fellow NATO member, let alone not ruling out military action?

The Henry Kissinger argument.

Well, US has the base near Guantanamo; I haven't been to that side but I have been to Guantanamo proper... trust me, that place is hot and has mosquitoes and two decades ago the naval base was almost as infamous as North Korea. And then there's the newly opened "alligator Alcatraz"... I think Mr. President have gotten some ideas for Greenland :-)

/s