Japan Today
world

Hegseth says the Pentagon has contingency plans to invade Greenland, Panama if necessary

33 Comments
By LOLITA C. BALDOR and TARA COPP

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2025 GPlusMedia Inc.


33 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

The military leadership of the US has always had contingency plans gamed out, as do other countries for that matter. For example, during WWII the Roosevelt administration had a contingency plan for confronting Great Britain and its empire, amongst others. Fun fact: they were all color coded. Wonder if that is the case now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_color-coded_war_plans

-12 ( +1 / -13 )

“Speaking on behalf of the American people, I don’t think the American people voted for President Trump because they were hoping we would invade Greenland”

Those who voted for him have very selective memories, able to convince themselves of anything. Facts won’t matter.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

This is the psychological dysfunction in a certain group of American,they know who they are they claim too be the majority , but they crazy ideas are what they are

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Overpowering Panama may be easy, but has anyone factored in additional shipping costs for transport through a hostile area ?

No ?

Didnt think so.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

he should not be subject to such “flagrant disrespect.”

Yes, he should. He’s an incompetent and dishonest fool.

Every answer was directed to his Lord ‘n’ Savior Donald Trump and the MAGA propaganda sphere.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

The Defense Department has a doctrine that prohibits troops from participating in political activity while in uniform. Members of the 82nd Airborne Division were directed to stand behind Trump at Fort Bragg, and they booed and cheered during his incendiary remarks, including condemnation of his predecessor, Joe Biden.

Shameful and indefensible.

Or maybe our MAGA friends can provide a justification.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

Under any other U.S. president, you would probably say, “This is nuts!”

However, under this one, you have to ask yourself, “Is this president very different from any other dictator?”

In all honesty, Trump has more in common with Putin (and other infamous dictators) than the likes of Lincoln or FDR.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

Now it's all of Panama? I thought the original threat was "just" the Panama Canal. Let's call that imperialist creep.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

I'm sure the tough guy has plans for a lot of things but won't have the guts to carry them out.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

That's a good photo of our lethal(ly incompetent) SecDef.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

We have contingency plans for everything, yes.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

plasticmonkeyToday  07:39 am JST

The Defense Department has a doctrine that prohibits troops from participating in political activity while in uniform. Members of the 82nd Airborne Division were directed to stand behind Trump at Fort Bragg, and they booed and cheered during his incendiary remarks, including condemnation of his predecessor, Joe Biden.

Shameful and indefensible.

Or maybe our MAGA friends can provide a justification.

They already have one: "we won". They believe that winning an election means that an administration gets to do literally anything it wants, be it legal / constitutional or not. Course when the other side wins, they watch everything like a hawk.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

"You’re an embarrassment to this country. You’re unfit to lead," Rep. Salud Carbajal snapped, the California Democrat's voice rising. “You should just get the hell out.”

Agreed. Hegseth is an idiot.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Adam Smith, D-Wash, is the fool - if he is in government and doesn't understand countries have contingency plans in place for a wide range of scenarios, he is out of his paygrade.

For example, imagine if Copenhagen left NATO, switched into an alliance with Moscow/China and then jointly declared GL to be in their sphere of influence.

Not hard to presume certain quarters would change their opinion about Denmark's inherent sovereignty over that landmass in a heartbeat.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

This has to be too much - even for his cult-like supporters...

Come on - plans to "invade" one of our NATO partners?

If this is true, then Hegseth should be fired immediately and Congress should start impeachment and 25th Amendment action today...

This is madness...stand up Repubs in Congress - show some guts and prove you're not Putin's Puppets like Dancing Donald..,

0 ( +4 / -4 )

They believe that winning an election means that an administration gets to do literally anything it wants, 

the last one did. We just following the precedent of AUTOPEN.

Supreme Court ruled against them? No problem, just do it anyway.

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

Tell me again how anti-war MAGA is?

Oh that’s right, they aren’t. They’re happy to hurt any amount of people and invade any country if it means they get what they want.

Imperialism and authoritarianism are the goals for MAGA. Not peace and cooperation.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

I would guess, given the American proclivity for spending 150% of their budget on the military, it would be the work of an afternoon to invade Greenland. One wonders why they haven't done it yet, if they want it so much.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

The people of Greenland and Panama will be concerned, but will be stronger trying to keep their sovereignty.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

JJE

Adam Smith, D-Wash, is the fool - if he is in government and doesn't understand countries have contingency plans in place for a wide range of scenarios, he is out of his paygrade.

You usually don't have contingency plans for attacks on your allies.

For example, imagine if Copenhagen left NATO, switched into an alliance with Moscow/China and then jointly declared GL to be in their sphere of influence.

I'm pretty sure that is on nobodies radar and nobody would have a contingency plan for it.

Not hard to presume certain quarters would change their opinion about Denmark's inherent sovereignty over that landmass in a heartbeat.

Only an idiot would think that Denmark would leave NATO for an alliance ith Russia.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Blacklabel

They believe that winning an election means that an administration gets to do literally anything it wants, 

the last one did.

No they didn't.

Supreme Court ruled against them? No problem, just do it anyway.

Clearly, they didn't.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

How about Canada?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Scenario 2 - GL declares its independence from Denmark. Preceding this a group of business-influential groups there are paid off by Beijing, quietly, to make such declaration with the caveat that the former enters into an alliance with Beijing, with military reinforcements and assets shipped/air-bridged in.

GL has every right to do that you know. Washington, irrespective of which party held the WH, would consider that a violation of a certain doctrine. Not hard to guess how they would react - a fair bet a contingency has been in place before the current administration.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

He is Trump's Yes man. He will do and say whatever Trump tells him to do. But I don't think it is Canada or Greenland that need to worry right now, but rather the US itself. Trump plans to destroy "the enemy from within", and will use all forces now at his disposal towards that aim first. He will politicize the army to make it loyal to him, and use it against his opponents. After doing that he will turn his attention to other countries. As Trump said "I need the kind of generals that Hitler had."

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Of course, the Pentagon has contingency plans, especially in places like Greenland where the US maintains military bases = Common Sense.

China and Russia will not control Greenland, EU simply unfit as they've under-invested in defense for 80 years

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

JJE

GL has every right to do that you know.

Not without agreement with Denmark.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Oh, I see.

The colonial power gets to decide their fate irrespective of their wishes.

How convenient.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

People of Greenland FULLY understand the world is increasingly a very dangerous place and that Denmark cannot possibly ensure their sovereignty.

Above, why US is now busy growing its Commercial and US Govt. presence in Greenland, as partner quality matters

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

“Our job at the Defense Department is to have plans for any contingency,” Hegseth said 

Of course it is.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

HopeSpringsEternal

People of Greenland FULLY understand the world is increasingly a very dangerous place and that Denmark cannot possibly ensure their sovereignty.

Quite the opposite. Greenland is happy being part of Denmark and NATO protection.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

BlacklabelToday 08:38 am JST

They believe that winning an election means that an administration gets to do literally anything it wants, 

the last one did. We just following the precedent of AUTOPEN.

Supreme Court ruled against them? No problem, just do it anyway.

Biden stretched the law to try to get student loan relief. Trump breaks the law and court orders to try to put troops on the street.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

JJEToday 08:25 am JST

Our team doesn't fall apart because the yuan is deposited like your team does.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites