European military personnel arrive in Greenland as Trump says US needs island

Risk of a US Attack on Greenland and NATO’s Future

• Many commenters argue that any US attempt to seize Greenland would shatter NATO: either through direct intra‑alliance war or through such a breach of trust that the alliance effectively collapses.
• Some foresee this opening a “once in a generation” window for Russia against the Baltics or Poland, potentially sliding into a wider European war or even WW3.
• Others think Russia lacks resources for major new offensives while bogged down in Ukraine, but note that “stupidity” or miscalculation is still a risk.

Feasibility and Costs of Seizing Greenland

• Broad agreement that the US could defeat Greenland militarily; the issue is cost and occupation.
• Several compare it to Iraq/Afghanistan/Vietnam: conquering is easy, holding hostile, harsh terrain with a skilled local population is hard.
• The Arctic environment, sparse but highly adapted population, and distance from US logistics are cited as major advantages for defenders.

Purpose of Small European Deployments (“Tripwire Forces”)

• The small French/German contingents are widely interpreted as a “tripwire” force: militarily insignificant but politically huge if attacked or killed.
• This is seen as a way to raise the political and escalation cost of any US move, not to repel an invasion.
• Some think a handful of troops makes Europe look weak; others argue their symbolic value is precisely the point.

Europe’s Power, Decline, and Response

• Debate over whether Europe has “dropped the ball”:
  • One side cites relative economic decline, expensive energy, weak tech/industrial policy, and internal political sabotage as undermining its global leverage.
  • Another side blames concentrated US tech platforms and foreign disinformation for destabilizing European politics.
• Multiple comments stress that Greenland matters less for its intrinsic value than as a test of whether Europe will resist a US ally going rogue and destroying the rules‑based order.

Public Anxiety and War Probability

• Some commenters report growing personal fear that dying in war is no longer far‑fetched, citing recruitment advertising and “tripwire” deployments.
• Others think the perceived risk is being amplified by media and online echo chambers, and still judge the probability of large‑scale war as low but rising.

Motives Behind US Interest in Greenland

• Suggested drivers include:
  • Personal ego and “legacy” (being remembered for acquiring Greenland).
  • Corruption and donor interests tied to Greenlandic business.
  • Strategic positioning in the Arctic and control of emerging sea routes, though some dispute the geographic logic.
• Several conclude there is no strong rational need, only political theatrics and destabilizing opportunism.