Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is appearing to acknowledge that the Pentagon has developed plans to take over Greenland and Panama by force if necessary.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth appeared to acknowledge that the Pentagon has developed plans to take over Greenland and Panama by force if necessary but refused to answer repeated questions at a hotly combative congressional hearing Thursday about his use of Signal chats to discuss military operations.

Democratic members of the House Armed Services Committee repeatedly got into heated exchanges with Hegseth, with some of the toughest lines of questioning coming from military veterans as many demanded yes or no answers and he tried to avoid direct responses about his actions as Pentagon chief.

In one back-and-forth, Hegseth did provide an eyebrow-raising answer. Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., asked whether the Pentagon has developed plans to take Greenland or Panama by force if necessary.

  • michaelmrose@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    2 days ago

    Denmark is a NATO country and Greenland is part of it. As soon as we attack all of NATO is obligated to attack us. They can start non violet by stopping all trade and dumping the dollar crashing our economy.

    Even just to the Greenlanders could be a real problem.

    People sabatogue blow up poison and casually murder you after giving in.

    We can’t murder everyone and the us has been shown to be very intolerant to a few thousand troop deaths not to mention civilian deaths on their side live on TV

    It would absolutely be a cluster fuck worse than Iraq

    • pinkapple@lemmy.ml
      12·
      1 day ago

      NATO members can’t interfere in conflicts between NATO members, only in conflicts between NATO and non-NATO. NATO is a cold war relic designed to be used against the Warsaw Pact countries, not some universal defense and peace instrument. Right now it’s either useless or a tool for western imperialism.

      • michaelmrose@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        13 hours ago

        This statement is based on nothing.

        Article 5

        The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

        https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_17120.htm

        • pinkapple@lemmy.ml
          1·
          11 hours ago

          That says nothing about attacks of NATO members on NATO members and there are precedents like Turkey taking over and occupying half of Cyprus leading to war between members Greece and Turkey where the other useless members did absolutely nothing because the standard interpretation is that NATO doesn’t protect members from other members. Stop making up theories and spreading misinformation.