Is Donald Trump really going to invade Greenland?
Ezra Levant examines President Trump's quest to get control of Greenland for national security purposes.
BECOME A MEMBER
Tonight, Ezra discusses why the U.S. buying Greenland isn't the crazy idea the establishment media claims—it's rooted in American history and vital national security.
From the Louisiana Purchase and Alaska (once mocked as "Seward's Folly") to the U.S. Virgin Islands acquired from Denmark in 1917, America has a long tradition of strategic land deals.
Even President Truman offered Denmark $100 million in gold for Greenland in 1946, recognizing its Arctic importance. William Seward eyed it back in the 1860s.
Ezra highlights Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule)—the U.S.'s northernmost installation, crucial for detecting Russian ICBMs with its prime location overlooking potential launch paths.
During WWII, the U.S. protected Greenland after Denmark fell to Nazis; they've maintained a presence ever since. With Russia and China eyeing the Arctic, Trump argues the U.S. needs full control—Denmark's defence budget is just 1% of America's.
Ezra cites President Trump's joke about Denmark's "one more dogsled" contribution, exposing Europe's reliance on U.S. protection while they issue press releases but little action. This isn't bullying—it's Art of the Deal negotiation, pushing outrageous positions to secure real gains, he argues.
Offending NATO? They take Trump seriously on defence spending but reject sovereignty changes. Ezra warns it could strain the alliance, yet Trump aims to make history and assert U.S. leadership over figures like Ursula von der Leyen.
For Canada: Ezra suggests offering joint northern bases—an asymmetrical deal that could ease trade tensions.
GUEST: True North investigative journalist Melanie Bennet discusses her latest report detailing how a school board in Ontario is embedding Islamophobia lessons in its curriculum while neglecting antisemitism.
COMMENTS
-
Fran G commented 2026-01-08 15:02:47 -0500Thanks Rebel news for informing myself and others on the Greenland issue. I love most things Trump is doing but dont agree with all. Greenland concerned me before as going to far for Trump. However I now have been educated by you and now understand. I always knew Greenland was strategically positioned to protect North America but now thanks to you I feel much better on US interest in Greenland. -
Joe Boudreault commented 2026-01-07 22:24:26 -0500Ezra, your idea of a joint military base with the USA in our north is a great one. I served during the Cold War when we shared resources with the Americans (ie via NORAD) against the Soviet Unuin. It worked fine. Why not again?
-
Bruce Atchison commented 2026-01-07 21:48:28 -0500It would be a great idea to have a joint military base in Inuvik. We need to defend our north so the Chinese and Russians don’t take it over.
Learn + disrupt + build = communism. Why aren’t more parents up in arms about this Marxist indoctrination? -
Paul Scofield commented 2026-01-07 21:13:04 -0500Mr. Jatzeck makes some good points. No, the U.S. military is not going to invade Greenland — that is Trump being Trump. I could see some kind of mutual pact between Greenland and the U.S., however, less formal than a State or a Territory, more like a Protectorate or, what diplomats used to call in the 19th Century, “a sphere of influence.”
BTW, tidbit on the original rationale for NATO, courtesy something Victor Davis Hanson noted on his podcasts in the last year or so: “to keep the Russians out, the Germans down and Americans in.” FWIW. :-) -
Paul Scofield commented 2026-01-07 21:05:36 -0500Thanks for having Melanie Bennet on again. I like her style. True North/Juno News has star with her.
-
Bernhard Jatzeck commented 2026-01-07 20:41:27 -0500What many people forget is that this is similar to something that went on roughly 150 years ago.
Back then, Russia and Britain were playing what has been referred to as The Great Game, in which both countries were vying for control of central Asia. The British wanted to be in the region because of India (which, back then, consisted of the region now comprised not just of what we know today as India but also Pakistan and Bangladesh) and its resources and access to trade routes. Russia was interested for the same reasons.
Similarly, Greenland has become important. The Americans are interested in its resources and its strategic location for both military and commercial purposes. (For example, Thule is about 3000 km from Edmonton, while Halifax is 3700 km away. There’s a reason why it’s a refuelling stop for airliners.) Russia and China, on the other hand, could use it as a base for military forces, being right next to Canada and supplementing what had been, until a few days ago, a convenient location in Venezuela.
I’d wager that the resources are of lesser concern than geography. I don’t think that an invasion of Greenland is being seriously considered. Instead, purchasing it, such as what the Americans did when they acquired Alaska, would be more logical. Better yet would be if the Greenlanders themselves volunteered to come under American control.
