Silicon Forest

Why Does Greenland “Really” Matter?

Why Does Greenland “Really” Matter?

—

by

Aaron Day
in

The X post shares a 15-minute video by Susan Kokinda of Promethean Action, framing President Trump’s renewed push for Greenland as a revival of the 1920s U.S. War Plan Red—a declassified contingency for conflict with Britain—aimed at dismantling lingering European imperial control through NATO and Denmark.

Kokinda argues Greenland’s strategic Arctic position enables U.S. sovereignty against British-influenced alliances, while tying Trump’s domestic policies—like banning institutional homebuyers and capping defense contractor salaries—to breaking related financial cartels.

Posted amid Trump’s January 17, 2026, tariff threats on NATO allies opposing U.S. Greenland claims, the video has fueled over 16,000 likes and MAGA enthusiasm, contrasting with European protests and Danish classifications of the U.S. as a security risk.

Greenland Benefits

SuperGrok Explains War Plan Red details

War Plan Red was one of several color-coded contingency plans developed by the United States War Department during the interwar period between World War I and World War II, specifically outlining a hypothetical strategy for war against the British Empire. These plans were created as training exercises to prepare for various global threats, with “Red” designating Britain and its territories: Canada as “Crimson,” India as “Ruby,” Australia as “Scarlet,” New Zealand as “Garnet,” and the Irish Free State as “Emerald.”

The plan was drafted in response to post-World War I tensions, including economic rivalries, Britain’s war debt to the U.S., and failed naval disarmament talks like the 1927 Geneva Naval Conference.

It was formally approved in May 1930 by U.S. Secretary of War Patrick J. Hurley and updated through the 1930s, though it was never intended for immediate use and reflected worst-case scenario planning rather than active hostility.

Historical Context

The roots of War Plan Red trace back to the uneasy U.S.-British relations after World War I. The U.S. viewed Britain’s global empire and naval dominance as potential threats, especially amid economic expansion that could challenge British interests.

Planners anticipated that a war might arise from commercial competition threatening Britain’s standard of living or from disputes over naval arms limitations.

It was part of a broader “Rainbow” series of plans, where colors represented different adversaries: Orange for Japan, Black for Germany, Green for Mexico, and so on.

The plan assumed Britain might use Canada as a staging ground for an invasion of the U.S., prompting a preemptive strategy focused on North America.

Key Details of the Plan

War Plan Red emphasized defense of the U.S. (“Blue”) homeland while launching offensive operations to neutralize British influence in the Western Hemisphere. It avoided a direct naval confrontation with Britain’s superior fleet, instead prioritizing a land-based invasion of Canada to cut off British supply lines and prevent reinforcements.

The strategy was designed for a prolonged conflict, involving rapid mobilization of U.S. forces.

  • Initial Objectives: The plan called for immediate seizure of key Canadian ports and infrastructure. A top priority was capturing Halifax, Nova Scotia, via a naval blockade and amphibious assault to deny Britain a vital Atlantic base. This would be supported by air strikes and chemical weapons if necessary, with reconnaissance flights (including secret missions by aviator Charles Lindbergh) identifying vulnerabilities like Hudson Bay.
  • Land Invasions: Multi-pronged ground attacks would target Canada’s industrial and transportation hubs. Troops would advance from:
    • Detroit and Albany to capture Toronto and Montreal.
    • Bellingham, Washington, to take Vancouver.
    • Buffalo and Vermont to seize Niagara Falls and disrupt power grids.
    • Boston to support the Halifax operation. Additional assaults on Quebec City, Winnipeg, and railroads aimed to strangle Canada’s manufacturing and munitions capacity. historyextra.com +1 The plan estimated Britain could mobilize up to 12.5 million troops in Canada within 40 days, so U.S. forces needed overwhelming speed and coordination between army, navy, and air units. themorningnews.org
  • Naval and Air Components: The U.S. Navy would focus on blockading Canadian ports and protecting American coasts, while avoiding open-sea battles with the Royal Navy. Air power, including potential strikes on the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River, was emphasized for quick dominance. Maine would serve as a forward base for operations against Quebec and the Maritimes.
  • Resource and Manpower Considerations: The plan assumed U.S. superiority in manpower and industry, advocating for “overrunning” Canada to exploit its resources while crippling Britain’s economy. It included provisions for building additional warships post-outbreak and prepositioning supplies.

In 1935, the plan was updated with $57 million in congressional funding, including construction of three military airfields disguised as civilian airports near the U.S.-Canada border. This led to the largest U.S. war games in history at Fort Drum, New York, involving 36,000 troops.

However, a leaked brochure exposed the airfields’ true purpose, making front-page news in The New York Times.

Canadian and British Counterparts

Canada developed its own preemptive plan, Defense Scheme No. 1, in 1921, which involved surprise invasions of U.S. cities like Albany, Detroit, and Seattle to buy time for British reinforcements.

Britain, aware of potential tensions, had vague plans but focused on naval superiority rather than North American land wars.

These mutual suspicions highlighted the era’s paranoia, but improving U.S.-British relations by the late 1930s rendered the plans obsolete.War Plan Red was declassified in 1974 and is now viewed as a historical curiosity, illustrating how even allies prepared for improbable conflicts. It was never close to execution, as World War II shifted alliances toward cooperation against common enemies.

Comments

Leave a Reply