How Trump's 'Arctic Angels' would seize Greenland: Black ops. Futuristic weapons. Death-defying raids. Nuuk could fall in minutes... and destroy NATO forever | Retrui News | Retrui
How Trump's 'Arctic Angels' would seize Greenland: Black ops. Futuristic weapons. Death-defying raids. Nuuk could fall in minutes... and destroy NATO forever
SOURCE:Daily Mail
Military analysts say that if diplomacy fails - and if Donald Trump decides to act - a US takeover of Greenland would be swift, overwhelming and deeply destabilizing.
This time, President Donald Trump and his advisers are not ruling out the use of American military force against a NATO ally, if the island is not for sale.
On Tuesday, the White House confirmed that Trump is weighing 'options' for acquiring the vast Arctic island, calling it a US national security priority needed to 'deter our adversaries in the Arctic region.'
European leaders and Canada rushed to Greenland's defense, warning that any attempt to seize it would shatter NATO unity and redraw the rules of the Western alliance.
Yet military analysts say that if diplomacy failed – and if Trump decided to act – a US takeover of Greenland would be swift, overwhelming and deeply destabilizing.
From a purely operational standpoint, Greenland - which is owned by Denmark - would be one of the easiest targets the US has ever faced, they claim.
Barry Scott Zellen, an Arctic expert at the US Naval Postgraduate School, has argued that any American invasion would be 'a quick and largely bloodless affair,' more like the 1983 invasion of Grenada than the grinding wars in Iraq or Afghanistan.
In any US military annexation of Greenland, Green Berets and other special forces units would be deployed to control key targets
Experts say there would be little resistance from the remote island of 60,000 people, scattered across just 16 towns and around 60 villages
'Because Greenland has long been an ally that has welcomed America's role as its defender,' Zellen wrote, 'an invasion could feel somewhat friendlier and face less armed opposition.'
That assumption alarms European officials – and reassures Pentagon planners.
Greenland is enormous – larger than Mexico – but sparsely populated. Fewer than 60,000 people live there, scattered across just 16 towns and around 60 villages. There is no army. No air force. No navy.
Its biggest challenge is the country's brutal terrain: fjords, glaciers, mountains and cliffs.
The tip of the spear would likely be America's Arctic specialists: the US Army's Alaska-based 11th Airborne Division.
Known unofficially as the 'Arctic Angels,' they are ready for extreme cold, mountains and polar warfare.
They are trained to parachute out of planes and can fight enemies while on snowmobiles, skis, snowshoes, or out of cold weather all-terrain vehicles.
They're also kitted out with the latest cold-weather tech and experts at electronic warfare.
Experts say any operation would begin from a position of strength the US already holds.
Pituffik Space Base, in northern Greenland, is already under US control and is a linchpin of America's missile warning and space surveillance network.
It can handle large transport aircraft, supports Space Force operations, and would instantly become the nerve center of an invasion.
From there, heavy-lift aircraft such as C-17s and C-5s could begin flying in troops, vehicles and supplies.
Special operations aircraft – CV-22 Ospreys and MC-130s – would move elite units rapidly across the island.
This airport at Kangerlussuaq, Greenland, would be among the landing spots quickly seized in a potential US assault, experts said
The Joint Arctic Command in Nuuk, Greenland, coordinates the defense of Greenland by Denmark, which owns the self-governing territory
A US Army special forces unit trains for the kind of icy warfare that would be encountered in Greenland
The Arctic Angel's mission would be simple: move fast, secure key sites, and prevent any organized response.
The political heart of Greenland is Nuuk, the capital, perched on the island's southwest coast, which would be an early target.
Airborne units from the 82nd or 173rd Airborne divisions could be deployed to seize Nuuk Airport and nearby ports, despite the challenges posed by Greenland's lack of roads and rugged terrain.
In Nuuk, experts say key targets would include the parliament, the high commissioner's office, the premier's residence, the Joint Arctic Command headquarters, broadcast centers and communications hubs.
Within hours, Nuuk Airport could be turned into a forward operating base, cutting off civilian air traffic and cementing American control.
Throughout the operation, the US would rely on overwhelming surveillance.
Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft – including RC-135s, AWACS and Global Hawks – would provide continuous monitoring of Greenland and surrounding seas.
Space-based assets would track communications, movement and any foreign response in real time. The goal would be isolation: no surprises, no interference.
Once key towns and airfields were secured, the focus would shift outward.
This Danish navy patrol vessel in Nuuk showcases the European nation's military prowess in Greenland
Carrier strike groups from the US 2nd Fleet could move into the Greenland Sea.
Amphibious Ready Groups would provide flexibility along the coast. Aegis-equipped destroyers would enforce maritime exclusion zones.
Submarines would patrol beneath the ice. In the air, F-35s and F-22s operating from Greenland, Iceland and Norway could enforce a no-fly zone, controlling both military and civilian airspace.
Electronic warfare units would work to dominate the spectrum – disrupting communications while preserving US command and control.
In a hypothetical scenario framed by Kirk Hammerton, a defense analyst, this multidomain dominance would prevent Denmark, NATO or any other power from mounting an effective response.
'What begins as a calculated security intervention,' Hammerton warned, 'could, within weeks, become one of the most significant power grabs in Arctic history – disguised under the language of humanitarian aid and regional stability.'
Still, such an assault does not yet appear to be Trump's preferred option.
Those familiar with the president's thinking stress that the administration would first try to secure Greenland through coercive political and economic means.
The US and Denmark are military allies who regularly train together, like this special forces drill off Greenland's coast
The Nuuk Center shopping mall houses of Greenland's government ministries and the premier's office
US special forces operators train in austere conditions at Pituffik Space Base, Greenland
Green Berets and Danish Special Operation Forces rappel in the mountains of Greenland in a training session
Options being discussed include a purchase, an 'association' deal, or a new security arrangement that pulls Greenland closer to Washington.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio has indicated that peaceful acquisition remains the preferred route.
But White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt made clear that military force is not off the table, saying it exists to deter rivals like Russia and China in the Arctic.
A US military move against Greenland would be unprecedented: an armed seizure of territory from a fellow NATO member.
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has warned that such an act would spell 'the end of NATO.' Leaders from France, Germany, Britain, Italy, Poland and Spain issued a joint statement insisting that 'Greenland belongs to its people.'
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said Greenland's future must be decided by Denmark and Greenlanders alone. Canada echoed that view.
Even some US lawmakers are alarmed, with proposals circulating in Congress to restrict funding for hostile action against an ally.
Experts stress that occupying Greenland would be militarily easy. Holding it politically would not.
Greenlanders overwhelmingly oppose annexation.
Danish officials would contest legality in every international forum. NATO would be thrown into crisis.
China and Russia – both deeply interested in Arctic access and resources – would exploit the rupture.
The Trump administration's recent military operation in Venezuela, which resulted in the capture of Nicolás Maduro, has already unsettled allies. Greenland would take that unease to another level.
The US Air Force has extensive experience delivering supplies to remote science research sites across Greenland
Kangerlussuaq airport, just four hours from New York City, would be one of America's first targets in a Greenland operation
Pituffik Space Base, in northern Greenland, is a linchpin of America's missile warning and space surveillance network
US Vice President JD Vance dined with soldiers at Pituffik Space Base when he visited Greenland in March 2025
Air Force pilots enjoy the scenery as they soar above the sparsely populated Arctic island
Analysts say Washington might try to soften the blow with humanitarian messaging, infrastructure investment and promises of economic opportunity tied to Greenland's mineral wealth.
But the damage to alliances could be permanent.
For now, the military option remains rhetorical. Diplomacy, negotiation and law are still the official path. The backlash from allies has been fierce. The legal obstacles immense.
Yet the fact that a US military annexation of Greenland is being openly discussed – and modeled by experts – marks a turning point.
In the frozen north, a new fault line is forming. And the world is watching to see whether Trump will stop at pressure – or reach for force.