Dear Trump supporters:

Six months ago you knew you were going to vote for the former president. You had concerns about the border and inflation. However, I am curious where Greenland was on your list of issues. My hunch is, if you are being honest, nowhere. The largest island was not on the political radar then. We knew little about Greenland. Of course, I had heard of the almost mythological Greenlanders, Erik the Red and Lief Erikson, but that was about it until a Borgen season heavily featured Greenland. (I probably should do some explaining about that Danish TV series to my conservative friends because I assume you are not aware of it. Perhaps as Trump tries to bully Denmark, the show will be an item of interest again.) Borgen got me to read Stephen R. Brown’s White Eskimo: Knud Rasmussen’s Fearless Journey into the Heart of the Arctic about that amazing explorer. But I was not aware this campaign season that my presidential vote should consider the future of Greenland. In his seemingly endless election rallies, I did not hear Trump mention Greenland. Yes, he did talk about Greenland in 2019, which provoked much mockery, but then his mind wandered, and he did not refer to the island again. Although nothing has happened since November to change the importance of it, Trump, quiet about Greenland while seeking votes, seems now obsessed with it.

One could ask why, but I have different question for you, Trump follower. Where is Greenland now on your list of concerns? Why is it there at all? The obvious answer is because Trump has said Greenland is crucial to the security and wellbeing of America. You, however, are not woke. No one tells you what to think. You make up your own mind. Other than Trump has spoken, what information has he or anyone else given to make Greenland important to you?

You might answer that your understanding now is that melting ice in Greenland will soon make mining possible for rare and valuable minerals and perhaps there are fossil fuels. In addition, melting ice in Greenland’s environs will open new sea lanes that will be important to the United States.

My questions increase. I assume that you, dear Trump acolyte, do not believe in climate change. After all, Trump has called it a hoax. Why then do you believe that the ice will continue to melt on and around Greenland? By what Trump has said, the melting could stop in an instant because there is no such thing as global warming. Apparently, Trump and you simultaneously believe that there is no climate change but that the climate will inevitably warm. Perhaps you feel that these dual thoughts mean Trump and you have top notch intellects, relying on what F. Scott Fitzgerald said in a 1936 short story: “The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.” Of course, what is ignored about this oft-quoted platitude is that F. Scott said the mind must continue to function, which implies that it was working before. And, of course, what is even more ignored is that Fitzgerald, not a philosopher or psychologist, wrote this unlikely “truism” in a piece of fiction. But I digress.

Another question: Although you don’t believe in climate change but believe it will continue, how do you feel about free enterprise, free markets, capitalism, and small government? I’m guessing you’re in favor of those things. But I ask you, is there anything stopping American companies from contracting for mining rights in Greenland without America’s having to possess the island? Companies get these rights all the time and all around the world. It is part of free enterprise. Why are Greenland’s precious minerals different? When you voted for Trump were you voting for a regime where American taxpayers pay billions, maybe trillions — which is what it would cost for America to buy and maintain Greenland — for the benefit of a few corporations?

Of course, six months ago, Trump minions pronounced concerns about the national debt. Where has this worry gone? Is there a source of money to buy and maintain Greenland other than through more debt? But, of course, just as it was with Trump last time around, deficits and the debt only matter when conservatives don’t control the government, not when they do.

If new sea lanes open as more non-climate-change warming continues, shipping could be easier and, therefore, cheaper. America should have free and fair access to these routes. What information does Trump have that we won’t have that access without owning Greenland? How does purchasing or seizing Greenland assure that? China may wish to be an arctic power, but Russia is the country that has the most at stake in the new sea lanes. Is Trump worried about what Putin is about to do up north? Wait. I thought the two were buddies. When Trump ends the Ukraine war, surely he and Putin can continue to amicably settle the question of arctic access for all. On the other hand, if those sea lanes need to be protected, do we really need all of Greenland? Why not rely on our military base there (which I have not heard Trump mention)? Gosh, I hope Greenland isn’t so mad at us that we can’t negotiate for a new base there. Finally, isn’t it cheaper to rent a room than buy the whole hotel? Trump might actually have some expertise on that topic.

Trump acolytes, I have a related question. Trump has railed against NATO. He has hinted that he would withdraw from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization if other NATO countries don’t pony up more money. Will he pull out? This is crucially important. You can correct me if I don’t understand this, but I thought that NATO countries are not obligated to respond if one NATO country, say Turkey, attacks another, say Greece. On the other hand, NATO must act if a country outside NATO attacks a NATO country. If, for example, Russia invades Lithuania, NATO must defend the Baltic nation. Greenland is covered by NATO, I believe. If the United States is part of NATO and takes military action against Greenland, the rest of NATO can sit it out. But if Trump successfully withdraws America from the organization, NATO, comprising more than thirty countries, several with nuclear capabilities, would be obligated to respond to hostile U.S. military forces in Greenland.

Finally, Trump has indicated that if Denmark does not allow the Trump brand to be put on Greenland, he will impose heavy tariffs on that country. You might think, Fine. But there must be somewhere some Trump supporters who no longer want to be overweight. How do you feel about the tariffs when you learn that Denmark is the sole supplier to the U.S. of Ozempic?

Oh, Greenland. Your sea lanes and minerals. U.S. taxpayer money spent to aid corporations with an interest in those sea lanes and minerals. Increased deficits and debt for America. Possibly World War III. And even more expensive Ozempic. Oh, this could be interesting.