this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2025
315 points (98.2% liked)

politics

24139 readers
3268 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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 during 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 plans to take Greenland or Panama by force if necessary.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 9 hours ago

Let’s be honest here, the US likely has comprehensive plans for invading every country, including multiple backups to account for different contingencies.

The concerning part here is that someone in a top position is just casually talking about it.

[–] catty@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

It's noise, junk to get attention away from other things.

[–] billwashere@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (3 children)

What the fuck?!? Why do these nazi’s have such a hard on for Greenland?

I mean I understand that with the melting ice, there are strategic shipping lanes and some rare elements that you’d get with Greenland but for fucks sake we can’t just take it because it’s the new hotness.

[–] pleasegoaway@lemm.ee 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It all ALWAYS just boils down to MONEY and resources.

Capitalism requires constant, unnecessary growth. Maybe Greenland has resources that could support US’s unregulated, unrestrained capitalism.

And control of Panama controls trade routes and hidden offshore money laundering.

That’s it. That’s why. Money. The ultra elite wealthy NEED THIS.

[–] CircaV@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago

The billionaires want the island of Greenland for their climate change bunkers

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 3 points 1 day ago

It's big. That's all. HitlerPig wants it because it's big.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

Has he forwarded the plans to the signal group chat yet?

[–] Red_October@lemmy.world 28 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The Pentagon has contingency plans for every situation they can imagine. This is not news so much as it's just another example of Hesgeth being a fucking moron. They have plans to invade everywhere, they have contingency plans to counterattack against a Canadian invasion for fuck sake. They have these plans because if a situation arises, you don't have the time to be cooking up new plans. Hesgeth acting like this is actually a plan that's being considered it just another example of why he's not fit to manage a godamn Mcdonalds, much less anything important.

[–] MutilationWave@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I guarantee you food service is more difficult than any job he's ever had.

[–] stringere@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I hate to defend the turd at all, but he was in the military.

That only means he can follow orders, though, which he is doing phenomenal job of doing.

[–] MutilationWave@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] stringere@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago

I didn't say you were wrong, either. :)

Vaguely related: I wasn't a fan of the Hogsbreath nickname folks were using. It wasn't targeted enough. I like Pete Kegs'n'Death.

[–] Deflated0ne@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

If necessary.

We expecting Greenland to launch nukes or something?

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Seriously? Invade Greenland? Who's going to even allow that. The Whitehouse can't just declare war without provocation.

It would literally take an act of congress to ratify such an act.

[–] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

Did you miss the news? The US is a kingdom again. Trump can do whatever he wants.

[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

...Honestly, it would be best if Fascist America attacked Greenland, Canada, Mexico, and California simultaneously. That kind of malicious action would almost certain get the Trump Regime's dick stuck into a hornet's nest.

Not saying it should happen. But if the regime is dead set on attacking Greenland, it should be in the stupidest way possible.

[–] Transform2942@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Don't forget the wars they are thirsting to start in Iran and Taiwan

[–] nullptr@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago

lmao that would be a wild time... also attacking California would be hilarious 🤣

[–] Carmakazi@lemmy.world 93 points 2 days ago (2 children)

To be clear, the Pentagon has dusty filing cabinets full of playbooks and wargaming scenarios ranging from plausible to outrageous that various think tanks have cooked up over the years. There is almost certainly a plan to fight an extraterrestrial invasion. I recall one being made about a zombie outbreak during that pop culture craze. We've had plans to invade Canada and Mexico wholesale for decades at least. Their existence doesn't inherently mean that anyone at the Pentagon takes the possibility of the scenario seriously. They're thought exercises as much as they are preparation for the unlikely.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 13 points 1 day ago

Hint: it's not necessary and never will be.

[–] nthavoc@lemmy.today 3 points 1 day ago

The only silver lining is that he will text all the strategies out to the world so everyone has a heads up of where to be or not to be.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 42 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Greenland isn't a particularly hard place to conquer. It's a tiny population and we literally already have military there. The challenge isn't tactical, it's diplomatic. It'd be a lot more meaningful to ask whether we have contingencies for war with Europe or losing all our bases there.

[–] drunkpostdisaster@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

until NATO steps in.

[–] ArchmageAzor@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

And I'm sure the EU has plans to defend it, next question.

[–] Zenith@lemm.ee 14 points 2 days ago

Or is he just saying that so we’ll talk about that not his signal chat?

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 19 points 2 days ago (2 children)

If we invade Greenland, I vow to do what I can to not die an American citizen.

I'd be ashamed to be buried here at this point already.

Buried? Ok, moneybags.

[–] AngrySquirrel@lemm.ee 14 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I mean, I definitely get your point, but I wouldn't be ashamed to be buried here or to die as an American citizen, even in such an instance or worse, as long as I died doing all that I could to resist.

[–] P00ptart@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

That's the (original) American spirit!

[–] billiam0202@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago

"Contingent" on what, Kegsbreath?

Greenland making fun of Trump?

Denmark still refusing to "sell" it?

Trumpy needing yet another distraction from some stupid shit he's doing he wants to hide?

You getting cranky from the DTs?

[–] FartsWithAnAccent@fedia.io 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They have plans for all sorts of shit and 99% of them are never used.

[–] Mirshe@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

While that's true, we have to remember that nothing about this admin is usual. I'm sure we've had plans to invade Panama and Greenland and Canada for generations, surely since after WWII, but now we have an admin run by someone stupid enough to actually try it.

Before WW2 in the cases of Canada, Mexico, and weirdly enough Siberia, not western Russia mind you just Siberia.

[–] crystalmerchant@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

This is decades old policy. Contingency plans for every crazy unlikely scenario you can dream up

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] RejZoR@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 days ago

I'm waiting for more ingo on that on Signal. We should get more info from these idiots any moment now...

[–] frezik@midwest.social 4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

A contingency in case of...what?

[–] JacksonLamb@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

In case they need a massive public distraction from something else.

[–] MisterD@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 days ago

In case the orange baby has a tantrum he can't own Greenland

"If necessary"

[–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 3 points 2 days ago

The OPSEC will be uncanny, one reckons