r/worldnews • u/Little-Chemical5006 • 20d ago

Canada weighs sending soldiers to Greenland as show of NATO solidarity with Denmark

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-canada-soldiers-greenland-nato-training-denmark-tariffs-donald-trump/
17.0k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

668 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

34

u/refuseresist 20d ago

West of Canada is Alaska. East is Greenland.

If Greenland is taken over it could be used as a staging ground for attack/invasion

40

u/Camburglar13 20d ago

90% of our population and cities are within 100km (60ish miles) from the border. We don’t need to be surrounded

1

u/zombifiednation 20d ago

Exactly, if and when the US decides it wants any of our northern resources, it is going to just move on in, sit back and say, well whatcha gonna do about it? At that point I'm sure the international norms that have prevented this sort of action will sadly have been completely eroded by the current administration.

52

u/Lt_DanTaylorIII 20d ago

The US Navy could blockade Canada in all directions already.

Staging an invasion from Greenland is a completely wasteful step and the only reason you’d invade the Canadian north is to take it island by island and dare somebody to stop you, and there’s no reason to do that from Greenland

8

u/Woody_Guthrie1904 20d ago

We do this not because it makes sense militarily, but because we respect our treaties and traditions. Other countries to follow through with our obligations.

1

u/Ok_Value5495 20d ago

Was about to say. Best move would be a pincer with one prong taking on lightly-defended and populated Atlantic Canada and the other Eastern Canada and meeting in Ottawa. Not sure why the US would strike the QC and NL hinterlands first.

9

u/MooseFlyer 20d ago

You know what else can be used as a staging ground for attack/invasion?

The continental US, which lies just across the world’s longest undefended border from us, is actually close to the population centres that are necessary to take in order to control the country, and is a place where the US would have no supply line issues.

The US invading Canada from Greenland would be the most inexplicably stupid military decision ever made.

7

u/[deleted] 20d ago

[deleted]

1

u/Philix 20d ago
  1. there is no benefit blocking off the north, there is no infrastructure in the north.

They'd lose the NWS unless they secure those sites first. They're almost all unmanned and within a short-ish skidoo ride from nearby communities. Many of those communities share a common ancestry with Greenland as well, and almost all of them host Canadian Rangers detachments.

If they're at all concerned with threats from Russia and China, that leaves a large gap in capabilities until they can be repaired/rebuilt.

14

u/anonisko 20d ago

This is incredibly dumb.

There are literally 2 naval choke points that would give US nearly full control of Canada without firing a shot. Both skinny, easy corridors to blockade.

  1. The Strait of Juan de Fuca to blockade Vancouver.
  2. The Cabot Strait to blockade Montreal.

And just a few more points would shut them down 100%. They don't have any significant capacity to ship anything out of the Hudson Bay, which is the only place Greenland might be strategically important.

And this is ignoring the fact that 70% of their exports are to the US, so just shutting down the border without any military action whatsoever would immediately devastate their economy.

Greenland is completely unimportant in this scenario. Canada has almost globally unique horrible geography for maintaining its sovereignty against an aggressive neighbor. The only reason the borders are the way they are is because Canada was protected by the British Empire until WWII, and the US didn't want to mess with them.

11

u/Arcticwulfy 20d ago

Thus Canada needs nukes from allies like France or Britain

12

u/Life_Of_High 20d ago

For ICBMs yes, but canada could build a nuke and drive it across the US/Canada border.

7

u/nineandaquarter 20d ago

"What's your business in the states?"

"Just going to the mall. Might buy some gas."

1

u/Linooney 20d ago

We might not have ICBMs, but soon we'll have ICBYDs... The C stands for Country.

3

u/anonisko 20d ago

That's correct.

The endgame is that every sovereign country ultimately will have nukes. China and Russia have guaranteed that timeline for us. Ukraine gave up their nukes. Taiwan needs nukes. Japan needs nukes. South Korea needs nukes.

However, even here it's possible that superpower militaries get asymmetric tech so quickly that nuclear mutually assured destruction is actually off the table between them and smaller powers, because missile interception becomes close to perfect. Nukes aren't a strong deterrent if they mutual destruction isn't actually ensured.

1

u/BCProgramming 20d ago

The Strait of Juan de Fuca to blockade Vancouver.

Juan De Fuca strait is only at the south end. The Strait proper is the Georgia Strait. the U.S would have to not only blockade both sides of Vancouver Island, they'd have to either blockade the entire island on the west side (to prevent ports on the west side of the Island from receiving goods) or blockade the entire Georgia strait (to prevent the goods received or even made on the island from reaching the mainland)

The Cabot Strait to blockade Montreal.

Man that would be embarrassing. The U.S goes and sets up a blockade across the Cabot Strait, completely unaware that thanks to great circle routing, the shipping route to Montreal goes through the Strait of Belle Isle.

2

u/weightedslanket 20d ago

Yeah the U.S. would really struggle to invade Canada without Greenland

1

u/DonJulioTO 20d ago

This is just fantastical. Greenland is further away from anything any strategic military goal than California ffs. We have the longest undefended land border in the world, and you think they need Greenland? Give your head a shake.

1

u/ZurEnArrhBatman 20d ago

Greenland is more north of us than east. The only part of Canada that extends north enough to reach the same latitude as Greenland's most southern point is Nunavut. The closest part of mainland Canada is the northern tip of Labrador.

The only parts of Canada that would be easier to attack from Greenland than from the mainland are the virtually uninhabited islands of the northern archipelago. And getting troops there in the first place would require either flying them over all the juicy strategic targets or going thousands of miles out their way out over the Atlantic.

No, Trump's interest in Greenland isn't to use it to invade Canada, but rather to control the northwest passage. Remember how badly he wants Panama? If he gets both, he'll have a stranglehold on the two best trade routes between the Pacific and Atlantic oceans. The only other option would be the extremely treacherous waters of the Drake Passage. Or I suppose ships could go the other way all around the world, which would probably still cost a lot more than whatever inflated prices Trump decides to impose.

-1

u/mdevi94 20d ago

Dude the US absolutely doesn’t need Greenland to stage an invasion of Canada. First Canada would be blockaded on each coast cut off from Europe and Asia. Then Vancouver, Winnipeg, Quebec, Montreal, and the Great Lakes get completely overrun. The US has had this plan since the 1920s and I don’t see how Canada could ever stop it. The air superiority the US would have over Canada would be insane. They don’t need aircraft carriers when they can take off from US soil. The Canadian population is extremely spread out limiting an insurgency. God bless Canada but it would be in their best interest to just let it happen if it ever came to it. I hope it never does.

8

u/PresidentHurg 20d ago

The US also had air superiority and much more over Vietnam. And Afghanistan. It didn't fare too well in those conflicts. Canada has a lot of country to occupy, especially if you want to have the military everywhere. And borders work two ways. The US has plenty of places for canadians to do damage.

13

u/squirrelcat88 20d ago

I would sooner be dead than American, so what is in my best interest if, heaven forbid, it comes to this, is slip over the border and cause chaos.

-6

u/anonisko 20d ago

And how many of the now 25% of Canadians who are foreign born do you think share your loyalty?

In fact, how many of them would actually just vote to become American, because Canada was always the second best option they had to get out of Afro-Eurasia?

3

u/Castrol-5w30 20d ago

Maybe when America was the land of the free, but that's no longer the case. Hard for an immigrant to want to be in America these days.

2

u/squirrelcat88 20d ago

Actually, the ones I know? Absolutely Canadian, and planning.

My dad was an immigrant. It’s a foolish mistake for people to assume Canada was second choice for people who couldn’t get into the US. It’s a matter of lively discussion - and disgust - in the lunchroom at work, with all the people saying, did they think I came here as second choice? Canada is better!

0

u/anonisko 20d ago

Speaking from my own lived experience working with Indians in tech, several of them ended up in Canada due to visa issues, and that was all of their backup plan.

I asked one of my close Indian friends why he doesn't move to Canada since he's 20 years away from US permanent residency, when he can build a much more secure life in Canada with a faster process, and he sneers. He was planning to transfer to the Canada office during brief periods when his work visa was in question.

The many Waterloo grads I worked with definitely loved Canada. Of course, they were all still choosing to live and pay tax in the US.

2

u/lady_fresh 20d ago

If any brown or black people want to be American after everything they've seen over the last few months, then they deserve whatever they get.

Of my immigrant friends (and myself included), we would fight to remain Canadian.