The Dangerous Fantasy of Owning the World - This Will Backfire

The conversation around the United States threatening to claim Greenland feels dumb and irrational. More importantly, it is dangerous. Saying that a powerful country has the right to occupy or own another nation sets a terrible precedent. It doesn’t just create immediate tension; it creates long-lasting consequences that reshape how power works in the world.

The real issue is not even the idea of the US owning Greenland. The bigger problem is that the US gains almost nothing from it. The United States already has military bases in Greenland. Denmark has already offered to expand those bases. It has also shown willingness to give American companies easier access to mining and resources. So the argument that the US needs Greenland for minerals or for a strategic military position against Russia and China simply falls apart.

This makes the entire justification look hollow.

There was an interview where Trump was asked about Greenland. When questioned on why the US would want to claim it despite already getting everything it needs, he brushed that aside. He focused on ownership. To him, ownership meant everything. He compared Greenland to property, saying he doesn’t rent or lease—he owns. That comparison revealed the real motivation. Not security. Not strategy. Just possession.

He went on to say, “I’ve been right about everything so far, and this will be the right decision too.” That statement alone shows how personal this idea was, less about national interest and more about ego.

What people often forget is why the United States is a superpower in the first place. It’s not just advanced technology or motivated citizens. It’s geography. Two massive oceans act as natural defenses. It’s alliances, especially with Canada, and the global systems built after World War II. NATO, for all the criticism the US throws at it, has been one of America’s strongest tools for influence and stability.

The US often undermines NATO publicly, yet quietly uses it to shape global politics. That balance, complain but cooperate has worked. Reckless decisions like territorial ambition disrupt that balance. They weaken trust, unsettle allies, and shake the very stability that keeps the US powerful.

These moves are not bold. They are unnecessary. And they come at a time when the world doesn’t need more historical chest-thumping.

We live in a modern age, yet some leaders seem obsessed with legacy, trying desperately to carve their names into history books
The images are from the NYT.