Our mercurial president’s meanderings this week on his desire to possess Greenland have been so, well, all over the map, tanking Wall Street markets when he threatened war, allowing stocks to recover when he said he was just joshing about an invasion, that it can be awfully hard to keep up with the latest: Threatening actions that would lead to the end of the 80-year post-war transatlantic alliance. Mocking European leaders for their “stupidity.” Claiming that the United States itself was “stupid” to return Greenland to Denmark after World War II when we never owned it in the first place.
The latest at press time is that President Trump is working on a compromise that, short of ownership, would update an agreement about U.S. military bases on the island nation.
Earlier in the week we asked some Southern California representatives for In-House Opinions on Greenland, and they replied:
Rep. Jay Obernolte, R-Hesperia: “Greenland occupies a critical position in the Arctic, making it important to U.S. national security interests ranging from missile defense and space monitoring to countering expanding Russian and Chinese influence in the region, which is why I understand the president’s interest in its acquisition. The United States has a long and legitimate history of acquiring territory through peaceful purchase agreements with other nations including such transactions as the Louisiana Purchase and the Alaska Purchase, and those decisions have proven essential to our security and prosperity. Pursuing a voluntary, negotiated agreement that respects Denmark’s sovereignty and the will of Greenland’s people is a reasonable and historically grounded path. However, in this case it seems there is no willing seller, and I believe strongly that it would be unacceptable to use either military force or economic coercion to compel a sale. Doing so would undermine not only international norms and America’s credibility, but also seriously damage the coherency of NATO, which the United States has spent generations building and strengthening.”
Rep. Young Kim, R-Yorba Linda: “Greenland is a strategic linchpin that sits at the center of Arctic security. China and Russia know it, and so do we. President Trump has proven time and time again that he can get serious agreements done faster and more effectively than past administrations, always with America’s interests front and center. He is a battle-tested dealmaker, and I look forward to hearing more about the recent framework that the president and NATO Secretary General Rutte negotiated. As negotiations continue, I’m optimistic about a deal that will continue to strengthen our partnerships with NATO allies, lock down strategic land access, help secure critical minerals supply chains, and ensure the Arctic remains a bastion of American strength and security for generations to come.”
Rep. Mike Levin, D-Dana Point: “Trump’s threat to invade Greenland is all about himself — not what’s best for Americans or our national security. The United States does not need to own Greenland in order for the territory to support national security, and the U.S. should not be threatening to invade an ally. Doing so would upend NATO, push Europe closer to China and play right into Putin’s hands. Denmark already allows the United States to maintain an extensive military presence in Greenland and has shown a willingness to allow that presence to expand through diplomacy, not war. We should be treating allies like allies, not like enemies.”
Rep. Pete Aguilar, D-Redlands: “Any military action against a NATO country or efforts to ‘buy Greenland’ would endanger one of the most important alliances in history and would have severe consequences for the United States and the entire world. Instead of inflaming tensions abroad and embarrassing America on the world stage, Donald Trump needs to focus on governing the United States and lowering costs for the American people. While working families across the country are struggling to make ends meet, Donald Trump has been using the threat of reckless tariffs on our European allies that would drive up costs even more as a bargaining chip. Democrats and Republicans agree, we do not need to take Greenland in order to preserve America’s national security. Our European allies have repeatedly offered to work together on matters of national security and on access. I was proud to recently meet with leaders from Denmark and Greenland with a bipartisan group of lawmakers to discuss the strength of our alliance and ways to work together on our strategy in the Arctic. We will not stand by as Donald Trump continues to threaten our NATO allies.”
Related Articles
Editorial: Los Angeles unions declare war on job creators Editorial: Newport Beach takes its own wrong path on housing Editorial: Trump’s increasingly unhinged bluster on Greenland Editorial: Remember the great Lysander Spooner Editorial: MLK showed us the way Rep. Ken Calvert, R-Corona: “I am encouraged by the framework agreement being worked out this week in Davos between President Trump, Denmark and our NATO allies. An agreement that avoids tariffs and strengthens the security of America as well as our NATO allies is in our best interest.”Rep. Derek Tran, D-Irvine: “President Trump’s threats against our ally, Denmark, regarding the territory of Greenland are profoundly alarming. Instead of focusing on lowering costs and protecting health care, President Trump is shredding our alliances abroad and dismantling America’s credibility as the leader of the free world.”
Rep. George Whitesides, D-Santa Clarita: “I oppose President Trump’s proposed military action in Greenland and any other decision that puts the NATO alliance at risk. As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I have repeatedly pushed this administration on their use of military force without congressional approval, and have not received any clarity. Every single day, my constituents talk about the rising cost of housing, health care, groceries and gas. This is what Americans want their government to focus on, not some ill-advised foreign policy decision that could cost taxpayer dollars, manpower and our global reputation.”
Hence then, the article about editorial in house opinions on greenland from socal representatives was published today ( ) and is available on The Orange County Register ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Editorial: In-House Opinions on Greenland from SoCal representatives )
Also on site :
- Suspect in deadly San Jose police shooting identified
- South Africa pushes for renewable energy investment
- Zelensky is ‘a man in a desperate position’ – Orban