Persuasion: why the US must "have" and control Greenland

 

Persuasive Argument: Why the United States Must "Have" and Control Greenland

Ladies and gentlemen, today I stand before you to advocate for a bold but necessary vision: the United States must take control of Greenland. This is not a matter of mere ambition or territorial expansion, but a critical step to secure our national security, economic prosperity, and global leadership in an increasingly uncertain world. Allow me to lay out why this is not just a desirable outcome, but an urgent imperative for our nation’s future.

Establishing Credibility (Ethos)

First, let me establish why this perspective carries weight. As a nation, the United States has a proven history of stepping into strategic roles when global stability and our interests are at stake—think of our stewardship of critical regions post-World War II or our role in securing vital trade routes. I draw on insights from military experts, geopolitical analysts, and economic strategists who have long highlighted Greenland’s unparalleled importance. My argument is rooted in their consensus: Greenland is not just an island; it is a linchpin of Western security and influence in the Arctic.

The Logical Case (Logos)

Let’s turn to reason and evidence. Greenland, an autonomous territory of Denmark, sits at a geopolitical crossroads. With a landmass of over 2.1 million square kilometers, it is the world’s largest island, strategically positioned between North America and Europe, and a gateway to the Arctic. Control of Greenland offers the United States several undeniable advantages:

1. National Security and Military Dominance: Greenland is home to Thule Air Base, a critical U.S. military installation under the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD). It serves as an early warning system against missile threats and a hub for monitoring Russian and Chinese activities in the Arctic. Direct control would ensure uninterrupted access and the ability to expand operations as Arctic tensions rise. According to a 2022 report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), the Arctic is becoming a new theater of great power competition, with Russia militarizing the region and China seeking influence through its “Polar Silk Road.” Without full control, we risk vulnerabilities in our northern defense perimeter.

2. Economic Power through Resources: Greenland holds vast untapped natural resources, including rare earth minerals critical for technology and renewable energy—resources the U.S. currently imports heavily from adversaries like China. A 2019 U.S. Geological Survey estimate suggests Greenland could supply up to 25% of global rare earth demand if fully developed. Additionally, its potential oil and gas reserves could bolster energy independence. Controlling Greenland means securing these assets for American industry, reducing reliance on foreign powers, and driving economic growth.

3. Climate and Scientific Leadership: As the Arctic warms at twice the global rate, Greenland’s melting ice sheet is a frontline indicator of climate change. Direct oversight would position the U.S. as a leader in climate research and mitigation, with access to data that shapes global policy. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) notes that Greenland’s ice loss impacts global sea levels, threatening U.S. coastal cities. Control ensures we lead the response, not follow others.

These facts form an airtight case: Greenland is not a luxury, but a necessity for our strategic and economic survival. Without it, we cede ground to rivals who are already circling.

The Emotional Appeal (Pathos)

Now, let’s speak to the heart. Imagine a future where our children face a world of uncertainty—where our northern borders are exposed, our economy is strangled by resource shortages, and our planet’s health slips beyond repair. Greenland is more than land; it’s a shield for our way of life. As Americans, we’ve always risen to protect what matters most. Think of the sacrifices made to secure freedom in past conflicts—now, we face a quieter but no less critical battle for our future. Controlling Greenland means we stand tall, safeguarding our homeland and leading the world with courage. Can we afford to look away when the stakes are this high?

Leveraging Scarcity and Urgency (Cialdini’s Principle)

Consider this: the window of opportunity is closing fast. China has already expressed interest in Greenland’s resources, offering infrastructure investments that could pull the territory into its orbit. Russia’s Arctic military buildup is accelerating. If we hesitate, we lose a rare chance to secure a position that may never come again. Scarcity drives value—Greenland’s strategic worth is unparalleled, and delay risks it slipping from our grasp. Act now, or regret later.

Building Unity and Liking (Cialdini’s Principles)

We are in this together as a nation. Whether you’re a farmer in the Midwest, a tech worker in Silicon Valley, or a soldier on duty, Greenland’s benefits touch us all—through jobs from mining, security from defense, and hope from climate solutions. I stand with you, sharing the same dream of an America that leads, not follows. Let’s unite around this vision, as we’ve done in our greatest moments.

Anticipating Counterarguments (Inoculation Theory)

Some may argue that taking control of Greenland disrespects Danish sovereignty or risks international backlash. I hear you, but let’s address this head-on. Denmark, a NATO ally, struggles to fund Greenland’s development, with the territory costing them billions annually. A U.S. partnership—or outright control—could be framed as mutual benefit, easing their burden while ensuring Western interests prevail over adversarial influence. History shows that bold moves, when justified by security and mutual gain, can win global support—think of the Marshall Plan. We can lead diplomatically, ensuring this transition strengthens, not strains, alliances.

A Call to Commitment (Cialdini’s Consistency Principle)

Finally, let’s start small. Agree with me on this simple truth: America must protect its interests in an uncertain world. If you nod to that, then the next step is clear—Greenland is the cornerstone of that protection. Commit to this first step, and let’s build toward a policy that secures it, whether through negotiation, investment, or direct control. Consistency demands we follow through.

Conclusion

In closing, the United States must have and control Greenland to secure our defense, economy, and global standing. The logic is undeniable, the emotional stakes are profound, and the urgency is real. We’ve led before in times of crisis—now, let’s lead again. I urge you to support this vision, to advocate for policies that bring Greenland under American stewardship, and to ensure our nation remains the beacon of strength it was born to be. Together, we can make this not just a dream, but a destiny fulfilled.

---

Persuasion Techniques Used

• Ethos: Established credibility by referencing expert consensus and aligning with American values of leadership.
• Logos: Provided concrete data on security (Thule Air Base, CSIS reports), economics (rare earths, USGS estimates), and climate (NOAA insights) to appeal to reason.
• Pathos: Evoked fear of future threats and pride in American resilience to connect emotionally.
• Cialdini’s Principles: Used scarcity (closing window of opportunity), unity (shared national interest), liking (relatability across demographics), and commitment (small initial agreement leading to larger action).
• Inoculation Theory: Addressed counterarguments preemptively to strengthen the stance.
• Narrative: Framed Greenland as a “shield” and “cornerstone,” using storytelling for memorability.

This argument targets the central route of the Elaboration Likelihood Model, offering deep reasoning for an engaged audience, while also incorporating peripheral cues (emotional appeals, authority) for broader impact.