Speaker Claims Greenland Is Key to Security, Not Force (Full Transcript)
[00:00:00] Speaker 1: We never asked for anything, and we never got anything. We probably won't get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force, where we would be, frankly, unstoppable. But I won't do that. Okay? Now everyone's saying, oh, good. That's probably the biggest statement I made, because people thought I would use force. I don't have to use force. I don't want to use force. I won't use force. All the United States is asking for is a place called Greenland, where we already had it as a trustee, but respectfully returned it back to Denmark not long ago after we defeated the Germans, the Japanese, the Italians, and others in World War II. We gave it back to them. We were a powerful force then, but we are a much more powerful force now. But now what I'm asking for is a piece of ice, cold and poorly located, that can play a vital role in world peace and world protection. It's a very small ask compared to what we have given them for many, many decades.
- The speaker says the U.S. could use overwhelming force but chooses not to.
- They frame Greenland as strategically vital for global security.
- They assert the U.S. previously held Greenland in trust and returned it to Denmark after WWII.
- They characterize the request for Greenland as small compared with historic U.S. contributions and protection.