Brutish peacock Donald Trump is humiliating Keir Starmer and emasculated EU buddies

Keir Starmer struggling to manage a rubber dinghy full of migrants hardly inspires confidence when it comes to standing up to global superpowers so how could he possibly challenge the US Seventh Fleet over Greenland?

If Santa Claus really does live in Greenland, he might want to get the elves busy building a few Patriot missile batteries, because things could get tense very quickly. Donald Trump, fresh off a highly publicized operation in Venezuela, has set his sights on Greenland. Meanwhile, Starmer, alongside a group of EU leaders, has responded with a strongly worded letter to the US President. It’s the kind of response you’d expect from a lawyer but the reality is, there’s very little the UK or the EU could actually do to stop Trump.

Trump’s bold approach to expansion highlights a harsh truth: Britain and Europe are increasingly weak, both militarily and diplomatically. For decades, the UK and EU nations have relied on the US to carry the weight, enjoying influence at the table without contributing proportionately.

It’s unlikely the US would launch a traditional invasion of Greenland. A mix of strong-arm negotiation and financial incentives similar to the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 seems more probable. But should a military option arise, it’s worth noting that the US Seventh Fleet alone surpasses the entire Royal Navy in size, with multiple additional fleets available.

Europe’s reliance on past achievements is showing its limits. Britain, which can barely manage a minor border crisis, cannot realistically confront a modern American naval powerhouse. The fact is, Starmer and the UK will likely follow the lead set by Washington.

Concerns have been raised about Greenland’s status as part of Denmark, meaning an attack could trigger NATO’s Article 5. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned that a takeover could spell the end of NATO, and Starmer has echoed similar fears. Yet in reality, NATO and Europe needs the US far more than the US needs NATO.

Strategically, Trump’s interest in Greenland isn’t baseless. The island sits at a critical junction between the West and potential rivals in the east, and it contains abundant rare earth resources crucial for global technology and defense. If the US doesn’t act first, it’s highly likely that Moscow or Beijing would.

Trump may express himself in blunt, unpolished terms, but he isn’t entirely wrong. Greenland’s strategic importance cannot be ignored. While Starmer and European leaders compose formal letters, US officials like Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller are candidly emphasizing the realities of global power: strength and force govern international relations, not diplomacy alone.

The lesson for Britain is clear: if Starmer wants the UK to be treated as a serious player on the world stage, relying on letters and social media won’t suffice. Rebuilding military strength and asserting strategic influence is essential if Britain wants a seat among the world’s decision-makers.