You Won't Have Me To Kick Around

But Klein merely shrugged his shoulders, adding he doesn’t expect the race to become a platform for sandbagging him. “I didn’t kick around Don Getty and Don Getty didn’t kick around Peter Lougheed,” he said, adding he won’t overtly support any candidate nor did he know who he’d vote for.

Still lying after all these years..... "But Getty ran a deficit," said Ralph Klein

Actually he didn't

Other accomplishments of the Getty Government include a strong record of fiscal management, self-government for Metis Settlements, private telelphone lines for rural Albertans, the election of Canada's only elected Senator, and the creation of Family Day.

It was, in fact, Klein's predecessor, Don Getty, who framed and launched Alberta's fiscal revolution. In the aftermath of the 1980s energy-price recession, Getty slashed public spending. In an April 2006 Edmonton Journal interview, Getty said, "(Klein) continued what we were doing. The debt and deficit was solved by God. Or Mother Nature, maybe. It was the price of oil, not any special creation."

The reality is that during the Getty era the price of oil had increased, steadily.

Getty inherited a deficit of $761 million in 1985-6,

and oversaw its rise to $3.4 billion in 1992-3.

Klein took over in 1993, and was running a surplus two years later, leading to Alberta's current status of having no net debt. Some people will point to oil prices collapsing in 1986 as the reason why Alberta started running deficits; they are wrong. Let's compare the price of oil during the Getty and Klein administrations:

Year	Getty	Year	Klein
1986	$14.64	1993	$16.74
1987	$17.50	1994	$15.66
1988	$14.87	1995	$16.75
1989	$18.33	1996	$20.46
1990	$23.19	1997	$18.97
1991	$20.19	1998	$11.91
1992	$19.25	1999	$16.55

During Deficit Don Getty's administration, the price of crude oil averaged $18.28. During Klein's first seven years, the time period where Klein moved Alberta from a debtor to a net creditor, the price of crude oil averaged $16.55. It is clear that the price of oil is not why Alberta runs surpluses.

The reality was that Getty was a lame duck Premier. The deficits were the costs of buying votes, building hospitals, seniors homes etc. that had been the Tories success model under Lougheed.

That and a few spectacular failures in diversification and the slogan of the Ralph team became; Getting Government out of the business of business. But it was all temporary.

The deficit plagued all of Canada, in fact it was a global phenomena. By 1995 it had hit home with the Federal Liberal government, and they began a slash and burn program of cutting funding to the provinces. Worsening deficits in Ontario but not Alberta.

Here the Ralph Revolution was about privatization, cutting public services, and creating a low tax regime. All the solutions of the neo-con Republican agenda from south of the Border. That is why the province ended up with a surplus. The oil industry had little to do with it, since the Tories had implemented a royalty holiday in 1985 in response to the NEP. Which had resulted in the initial deficit crisis.

Klein's government introduced legislation that required the government to balance its budget by 1996-97. To accomplish this, the Tories implemented severe expenditure cuts, government downsizing, and the privatization of some services. A series of severe expenditure cuts was met with little resistance from a population intent upon seeing its financial house put in order. At the same time, the government expanded government-run gambling, which proved to be a windfall. The cost cutting and the revenue generation succeeded, and thereafter the Tories recorded a series of budgetary surpluses. Their success had a wide influence on other provincial governments, which began to duplicate Alberta's cost-saving measures.

Ralph Klein's revolution has merely gone full circle, argues his old nemesis, former Liberal leader Nancy MacBeth. "He's had three back-to-back budgets that grew by close to 40% and now we're short of money," she shrugged in an interview. "The problem is that he can't blame the last ten years on (former premier) Don Getty. He's got his own record to deal with."

Ralph ran his campaign and subsequent elections always refering to the failure of the Getty Government as if it wasn't a Tory Government. He ran against Getty more than he ran against the opposition. The Ralph Revolution was about implementing a Republican program in Alberta abetted by the likes of the Fraser Institute and the National Citizens Coalition. It was never about the deficit or the debt. That was an excuse, just as was Ralph's constant blaming of Getty for his problems.

In Alberta, the decade began with the surprise resignation of Premier Don Getty in 1992. Getty was succeeded by former Calgary mayor and provincial environment minister Ralph Klein, whom the Alberta Progressive Conservative Party chose as leader in December 1992. In the provincial election that took place the next year, the Progressive Conservatives managed to remain in power by distancing themselves from the shortcomings of the Getty regime. The stage was set for what was to become known as the Klein Revolution (Lisac 1995).

When Ralph Klein took office from Don Getty in December 1992, Alberta had accumulated debt of nearly $6 billion, and the provincial Liberals under Laurence Decore were poised to form the next government. They were running against the Tories chiefly on the grounds of fiscal probity and smaller government. Against the odds, Klein was able to distance himself from the previous Conservative administration and to win the 1993 election using many of the policies advocated by Decore.

The new Conservative leader Ralph Klein campaigns on his charisma. (TV; runs 3:31)

"Go Ralph Go!" shouts the crowd of Ralph Klein supporters. During the 1993 election campaign, the new leader of the Alberta Conservatives is playing up his populist charm, making the most of photo-ops, and calling his party "Ralph's team" in an attempt to distance himself from former Conservative premier Don Getty.

The Calgary Sun - Alberta Tories on brink

Back in 1992, with Laurence Decore’s Liberals almost topping the polls and Premier Don Getty’s regime in chaos, Moore and a small group of other “true” Conservatives went to then-environment minister Ralph Klein and promised to deliver the support of at least 35 MLAs to Klein in a leadership bid.

Actually, Moore and his group put 37 MLAs behind Klein. Then came a razor-edge fight between Klein and Nancy Betkowski, who later showed her true colours by becoming leader of the provincial Liberals.

Moore, who was called on the carpet and chastised often by Getty for condemning that premier’s free-spending ways that eventually made Alberta into a debtor province for the first time since the Great Depression, had given Klein, and his eminence grise Rod Love a list of five commitments in return for the MLA support. They were:

• Cut the cabinet roughly in half to 15 ministers.
• Chop the civil service by at least 25%.
• Pass legislation to prevent ever running a deficit.
• Prevent the government from getting involved in money-losing private sector business enterprises.
• Cabinet ministers who did not operate within their budgets must be fired outright.
• Klein followed through on all those commitments, but only initially.

I will leave the last word to the editor of a rural weekly, the folks that are supposed to be the backbone of Ralphs world.

The lack of a plan has been evident for years
Rocky Mountain Outlook, Canada - 14 Sep 2006

By Carol Picard - Editor
Sep 14 2006

The recent admission by outgoing Premier Ralph Klein that the government had and has no plan for managing the precipitous growth of the province elicited gasps of amazement throughout the land. Such has been the sense of betrayal that even columnists at Alberta’s notoriously Conservative daily newspapers have now begun voicing serious criticism of the government — something virtually unheard of throughout the dozen-plus years of “Ralph’s World”.

Well, they’re a decade late and a dollar shy. The truth of the matter is, there never has been a plan — just a goal. And most Alberta voters — newspaper columnists included — have been caught up in the cult of Personality Politics.

Way back when, when Klein took over from Don Getty, he was hailed as a saviour of sorts, promising to deliver the province from a sea of red ink created by his predecessors. He and his ministers and MLAs proceeded to reduce the deficit and eliminate the debt in a slash-and-burn approach that voters elsewhere in the country couldn’t stomach when their own leaders attempted the same. Klein’s macro-economic analogy to the household finances appealed to the lowest common denominator, and was folksy enough to get heads nodding, enough to ensure him widespread support despite the pain.

There was nothing orderly about it, and no forethought at all was evident. To reduce education costs (seen as red ink on a profit-loss statement that had nothing to do with future planning or a healthy and civilized society) he eliminated kindergarten, assuring all that the government had “studies” showing that kindergarten was a useless frill, a theory that flew in the face of scientifically-based educational practice. He squeezed education dollars so hard students commonly attended classes of 30 to 40 students, even at the elementary level. No evidence it hurts them, the government cried, despite empirical evidence that said otherwise.

Capacity at universities was slashed — particularly in nursing and education — in an effort to save a buck, despite the looming reality of an aging baby boomer generation needing additional health care. Today we face shortages in such professions.

He blew up hospitals and closed beds, and today, in the face of huge growth, the medical system is limping. Even at the time, as patients lay on gurneys in hospital corridors for hours, as wait times in emergency wards increased into the double-digits, anyone who dared go public with their criticism was dubbed the “Victim of the Week” by our premier.

His arrogance towards those who disagreed with him was breathtaking, and examples abound, but his descent from King Ralph to today’s scapegoat should not take anyone by surprise. Today, the Emperor truly has no clothes.

And today, some of his henchmen are running willy-nilly around the province, trying to win support for their own bid to be premier. If not actively distancing themselves from Ralph, they are remarkably silent about their participation in the “no-plan” approach to government.

But Albertans as a pack have remarkably short memories and huge stomachs for betrayal. One of them will prevail and, as promised, become our next premier. Lucky us.

Also See:

Alberta

One Party State

Klein

Democratic Deficit

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Alberta, Dinning, Klein, PC, Calgary, PartyofCalgary, politics, leadership, Liberals, Conservatives, corporations, OnePartyState,Alberta, Lougheed, Getty, Oil, Planning, History, Politics, Economics, TarSands

Don Getty's Legacy

Today is Family Day in Alberta. A province wide holiday brought in by Premier Don Getty. It is his legacy. What is Chretien's? Or Ralph Klien's? They were after all Don's contemporaries and nemesis. And yet what did they do for the citizens, all the citizens. Nothing, nada, zip.

On the radio I heard the announcer prove his ignorance by thanking Ralph for todays day off. But such was not the case, Ralph had his chance to declare a holiday on Sept. 1 as the anniversary of Alberta's province hood, but failed to.

Family day was opposed by business interests which complained that would cost them money. When in reality it didn't. Another shopping day. What they lost in paying work place wages they made up in consumer spending. their wage slaves became their consumers with a commodity fetish.

But that same complaint did stop Ralph from declaring Sept. 1 a holiday. But then the fat boy who was King never played football. Peter Lougheed, and Don Getty, two Premiers did. As did our current Lieutant Governor; Normie Kwong. All three played for the Edmonton Eskimos.

Ralph listened to the business naysayers who run this province and capitulated.

His legacy is what? Defeating the deficit dragon.

Hmmm not so.

That was actually begun by Getty, Ralph inherited his program. Which was why in true Stalinist fashion he had to remake Don into the enemy, the bad guy, the Trotsky, who betrayed Alberta by running it into debt and deficit by trying to diversify the economy. A program begun by Lougheed. But a dream that failed and Getty inherited. But such was Lougheeds stature and reputation, Ralph and his neo-con advisor's could not touch him so they made Getty their scape goat.

Other accomplishments of the Getty Government ; a strong record of fiscal management, self-government for Metis Settlements, private telelphone lines for rural Albertans, the election of Canada's only elected Senator, and the creation of Family Day.

And Ralph inherited Senate Elections from Getty! A key plank of the Reform Party and the old Social Credit rump within the Alberta P C's.

Getty fumbled politically at the end of his Premiership but to be honest Ralph made him his political football, his scapegoat, his Trotsky, as he moved to rule the one party state with a new agenda, to create a Republican movement in Canada. Which was just another example of Ralph's ability at political plagiarism.

A political movement that was in direct opposition to Lougheeds Paternalistic State Capitalism. And one that failed.

See:

Don Getty

Ralph Klein

Alberta

Social Credit

Manning

Lougheed



Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Peter Lougheed, Don Getty, Realph Klein, Alberta, Premier, PC, Conservatives, Tories, politics, family day, holidays, Canada,

Brand X

Rick Bell hits the nail on the head about our Brand X government and the party in charge.

a good assumption is many Albertans will simply cling to the Tory brand unless the actual Xs on the big day show something different. It's the brand. It has nothing to do with political philosophy. We have seen billions in boondoggles, an attitude of denial causing a building backlog you feel everyday you get out of bed. We've seen cutting and spending and behaviour that would be a firing offence elsewhere. We've smelled the stench of scandal and been served up arrogance as aggravating as anything Ottawa dishes out.

All we can hope for is that the stench from this dying corpse of a political regime disgusts the huge undecided vote in Alberta enough that it decides to NOT vote Tory.

The key to election-night victory could be the support of the large segment of undecided voters, said Lois Harder, who teaches political science at the University of Alberta. "The issue in a province with a long political dynasty and a healthy economy is whether people are going to be motivated to vote."

Thanks to Ed calling a winter election, lets hope it remains so damned cold that rural Tories decide to stay warm at home in front of their pot belly stoves.

That and let's hope the oil boys decide that the WildRoseAlliance is the place to park their votes splitting the right.

The Tory leader found a more welcoming crowd during coffee shop meet-and-greets in Wetaskiwin and Calmar. But when his bus pulled into Drayton Valley for a chat to about 100 townsfolk at the 55+ Recreation Centre, he faced some tough questions from oil and gas workers upset with his royalty plan.

Ken Cameron, a 52-year-old co-owner of an oil and gas services company, told Stelmach that industry workers have been crippled by the soaring Canadian dollar and Ottawa's decision to tax income trusts. But "the final nail in the coffin" has been Stelmach's new royalty framework.

"I think the premier and (Energy Minister) Mel Knight are totally out of touch with conventional oil and gas," said Cameron.

Stelmach has vowed to review his royalty plan to ensure there's no "unintended consequences" for smaller oil and gas companies.

The review had better produce some major changes or Stelmach's lost another vote, this one from Dave Humphreys, a 42-year-old vice-president of an oil and gas company who also pressed the Tory leader on the issue.

"I'm very worried about the economic impact on the community," Dave Humphreys, vice-president of an oil and gas firm, told Stelmach. "It's going to have a terrible rippling effect."

The rough receptions in Red Deer and Drayton Valley only add to what's already been a rocky start to Stelmach's first election campaign as premier, suggested Peter McCormick, political scientist at the University of Lethbridge.

"This is the part of the campaign that should be on auto pilot," McCormick said.

"This was well set up to be a triumphant campaign, but it just isn't working."

If the Tories remain in power, after Stelmach's vote buying campaign let us hope it is with a decimated majority, with a balance of power in the Leg made up of the opposition parties. Now that would be usual for any other province, but highly unusual for Alberta.

Then the Tories would have to act like a government rather than as a feudal dynasty including having to have debates in the legislature and actually bringing budgets and bills to be voted on rather than passed 'in council' as they have done for the past twenty years.

Considering that this is the Party that had popularity ratings of 80-90% in past elections this poll does not bode well, despite the spin put on it by Dave Rutherford's right wing media mouthpiece;

CALGARY/AM770CHQR - The first poll of the provincial election campaign finds the conservatives are off to a good start and the opposition are yet to find traction.
Environics did a telephone survey February 1-4.
The Progressive Conservatives have the support of 52 per cent of decided voters across the province.
The Alberta Liberals come in at 25 per cent, the NDP ten per cent, the Green Party 7 per cent and the Wildrose Alliance 6 per cent.
19 per cent of respondants are undecided or chose not to answer the question.
Older and more affluent voters tend to back the tories while the liberals are more popular with younger voters and students.
The tories also have 48 per cent support in Calgary while the liberals are at 29 per cent.
It's not much different in Edmonton but in the rest of the province the tories jump to 57 per cent and the liberals drop to 19 per cent.

And Ed Stelmach's own poll numbers are even less than any other Tory leader, less than even the much maligned Don Getty.

That's what happens when a central campaign starts to fly off the rails. Ed's might be heading for a dry gulch even deeper than the one former Premier Don Getty's campaign crashed into in 1989. Like Stelmach, Getty made a string of money promises which he could not explain. They were deeply flawed as policy and made voters worry about debt.

Also, like Stelmach, Getty had no discernible vision for the province beyond providing something expensive to every group that might be upset.

It's all eerily familiar to veterans of that bizarre 1989 campaign.

Don Getty lost his own Edmonton Whitemud riding. Later he limped to a byelection victory in Stettler, and governed listlessly until his party ran him out of the leadership in 1992.

His only saving grace is that he is not alone in being a charismatically challenged leader.

A January opinion poll showed 28.5 per cent of Albertans think Stelmach would make the best premier, well in front of nearest rival, Liberal Leader Kevin Taft.

For some critics, the weakness in the polls is enough to compare Stelmach to Harry Strom, who was the leader of the Social Credit government when its 36-year dynasty was snuffed out by Peter Lougheed's Progressive Conservatives in 1971.

McCormick said there are some comparisons to be made -- Strom was a decent man in charge of a low-key government that was more progressive than it's remembered today.

"He just couldn't project it," McCormick said. "Where Stelmach is really lucky is, although he reminds us of Harry Strom, Kevin Taft doesn't remind us at all of Peter Lougheed."

tags
Alberta, Premier, Ed Stelmach,
election,PC, politics, Conservatives,media, politics, Alberta election,
Kevin Taft,
Alberta, Alberta Liberals,Alberta Election,

European court upholds Italy’s right to seize prized Greek bronze from Getty Museum, rejects appeal

Reporter Sookee Chung takes a photo of a sculpture titled “Statue of a Victorious Youth, 300-100 B.C.” at the J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles. A European court upheld Italy’s right to seize a prized Greek statue from the J. Paul Getty Museum in California, rejecting the museum’s appeal on Thursday and ruling Italy was right to try to reclaim an important part of its cultural heritage. 

(AP Photo/Nick Ut, File)

PUBLISHED: May 2, 2024 
By NICOLE WINFIELD

ROME — A European court on Thursday upheld Italy’s right to seize a prized Greek statue from the J. Paul Getty Museum in California, ruling that Italy was justified in trying to reclaim an important part of its cultural heritage and rejecting the museum’s appeal.

The European Court of Human Rights, or ECHR, determined that Italy’s decades-long efforts to recover the “Victorious Youth” statue from the Malibu-based Getty were not disproportionate.

“Victorious Youth,” a life-sized bronze dating from 300 B.C. to 100 B.C., is one of the highlights of the Getty’s collection. Though the artist is unknown, some scholars believe it was made by Lysippos, Alexander the Great’s personal sculptor.

The bronze, which was pulled from the sea in 1964 by Italian fishermen and then exported out of Italy illegally, was purchased by the Getty in 1977 for $4 million and has been on display there ever since.

The Getty had appealed to the European court after Italy’s high Court of Cassation in 2018 upheld a lower court’s confiscation order. The Getty had argued that its rights to the statue, under a European human rights protocol on protection of property, had been violated by Italy’s campaign to get it back.

The court ruled Thursday that no such violation had occurred.

“This is not just a victory for the Italian government. It’s a victory for culture,” said Maurizio Fiorilli, who as an Italian government attorney had spearheaded Italy’s efforts to recover its looted antiquities and, in particular, the Getty bronze.

The Getty has long defended its right to the statue, saying Italy had no legal claim to it.

Among other things, the Getty had argued that the statue is of Greek origin, was found in international waters and was never part of Italy’s cultural heritage. It cited a 1968 Court of Cassation ruling that found no evidence that the statue belonged to Italy.

Italy argued the statue was indeed part of its own cultural heritage, that it was brought to shore by Italians aboard an Italian-flagged ship and was exported illegally, without any customs declarations or payments.

After years of further legal wrangling, an Italian court in Pesaro in 2010 ordered the statue seized and returned, at the height of Italy’s campaign to recover antiquities looted from its territory and sold to museums and private collectors around the globe.

Thursday’s ruling by the Strasbourg, France-based ECHR was a chamber judgment. Both sides now have three months to ask that the case be heard by the court’s Grand Chamber for a final decision. But Thursday’s ruling was unanimous, with no dissenting judges, and the Grand Chamber can refuse to hear the case.

There was no immediate comment from the Getty, and its lawyers referred comment to the museum.

Italian Culture Minister Gennaro Sangiuliano praised Thursday’s decision as an “unequivocal ruling” that recognized the rights of the Italian state and its ownership of the statue.

“Following today’s ruling … the Italian government will restart contacts with U.S. authorities for assistance in the implementation of the confiscation order,” he said.

In a statement, he doubled down on Italy’s campaign to bring its looted treasures home, and noted that recently Italy has ceased cooperation with foreign museums that don’t recognize Italian legal confiscation orders.

Recently, Italy banned any loans to the Minneapolis Institute of Art following a dispute over an ancient marble statue believed to have been looted from Italy almost a half-century ago.

The Getty had appealed to the ECHR by arguing, among other things, that Italy’s 2010 confiscation order constituted a violation of its right to enjoy its possessions and that it would be deprived of that right if U.S. authorities carried out the seizure.

The ECHR however strongly reaffirmed Italy’s right to pursue the protection of its cultural heritage, especially from unlawful exportation.

“The court further held that owing, in particular, to the Getty Trust’s negligence or bad faith in purchasing the statue despite being aware of the claims of the Italian state and their efforts to recover it, the confiscation order had been proportionate to the aim of ensuring the return of an object that was part of Italy’s cultural heritage,” said the summary of the ruling.

It wasn’t immediately clear what would happen next, though Fiorilli said the Getty had exhausted legal remedies and it’s now for U.S. the courts to enforce the Italian confiscation order.

“It’s not about guaranteeing the right to property, it’s about guaranteeing the internationally recognized value of every nation’s right to protect its cultural patrimony,” Fiorilli told The Associated Press over the telephone.

The statue, nicknamed the “Getty Bronze,” is a signature piece for the museum. Standing about 5 feet (1.52 meters) tall, the statue of the young athlete raising his right hand to an olive wreath crown around his head is one of the few life-sized Greek bronzes to have survived.

The bronze is believed to have sunk with the ship that was carrying it to Italy after the Romans conquered Greece. After being found in the nets of Italian fishermen trawling in international waters in 1964, it was allegedly buried in an Italian cabbage patch and hidden in a priest’s bathtub before it was taken out of the country.

Italy has successfully won back thousands of artifacts from museums, collections and private owners around the world that it says were looted or stolen from the country illegally, and recently opened a museum to house them until they can be returned to the regions from where they were looted.

The most important work to date that Italy has successfully brought back is the Euphronios Krater, one of the finest ancient Greek vases in existence. The Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, which purchased it for $1 million in 1972 from an art dealer later accused of acquiring looted artifacts, returned it to Italy in 2008.

In 2010, the same year that Italy ordered the “Victorious Youth” statue confiscated from the Getty, a criminal trial ended in Rome against the Getty’s former curator of antiquities, Marion True. After years of trial, the Rome court ruled that the statute of limitations had expired on charges that True received stolen artifacts. She has denied wrongdoing.

In 2007, the Getty, without admitting any wrongdoing, agreed to return 40 ancient treasures in exchange for the long-term loans of other artifacts. Similar deals have been reached with other museums.

Under the 2007 deal, the two sides agreed to postpone further discussion of “Victorious Youth” until the court case was decided.

Trump says he ‘doesn’t rule out’ using military force to control Greenland

Edward Helmore
Sun, May 4, 2025

THE GUARDIAN

Donald Trump would not rule out using military force to gain control of Greenland, the world’s largest island and an autonomous territory within Denmark, a fellow Nato member with the US.

Since taking office, the US president has repeatedly expressed the idea of US expansion into Greenland, triggering widespread condemnation and unease both on the island itself and in the global diplomatic community. Greenland is seen as strategically important both for defense and as a future source of mineral wealth.

In an interview on NBC’s Meet The Press on Sunday, Trump was asked whether he would rule out using force against the territory.

Related: Danish PM tells US ‘you cannot annex another country’ on visit to Greenland

“I don’t rule it out. I don’t say I’m going to do it, but I don’t rule out anything. No, not there. We need Greenland very badly. Greenland is a very small amount of people, which we’ll take care of, and we’ll cherish them, and all of that. But we need that for international security,” Trump said.

The exchange came as part of wide-ranging interview following Trump’s first 100-days in office last week and he was also asked about the idea of using military force against Canada – an idea once unthinkable but now a subject of speculation amid Trump’s repeated assertion he would like to make Canada the US’s 51st state.

“It’s highly unlikely. I don’t see it with Canada. I just don’t see it, I have to be honest with you,” Trump said.

Trump said he had spoke with Canada’s new prime minister, Mark Carney, and confirmed that the pair had not spoken about making his country part of the US.

But he said they could discuss the topic when Carney visits Washington DC “this week or next week”. Carney, along with around 90% of Canadians, oppose the idea of folding Canada into the US. But Trump said he was open to a discussion.

“I’ll always talk about that. You know why? We subsidize Canada to the tune of $200bn a year,” Trump said. “We don’t need their cars. In fact, we don’t want their cars. We don’t need their energy. We don’t even want their energy. We have more than they do. We don’t want their lumber. We have great lumber. All I have to do is free it up from the environmental lunatics.”

Related: Triumph for Carney: what happened in Canada’s election, and what will it mean?

Trump said that if “Canada was part of the US it wouldn’t cost us. It would be great … it would be a cherished state. And, if you look at our map, if you look at the geography – I’m a real estate guy at heart. When I look down at that without that artificial line that was drawn with a ruler many years ago – was just an artificial line, goes straight across. You don’t even realize.”

“What a beautiful country it would be,” he added.

A poll published last month found that 68% of Americans believe Trump is serious about the US trying to take over Greenland, and 53% think Trump is serious when he talks about the US trying to take control of Canada.

But the survey, commissioned by ABC News found that respondents didn’t think either annexation would be a good idea. About 86% said they opposed the US trying to take control of Canada, and 76% opposed trying to take control of Greenland.


Trump renews threat of military force to annex Greenland

Jessie Yeung and Piper Hudspeth Blackburn, CNN
Sun, May 4, 2025 

President Donald Trump speaks to NBC News’ Kristen Welker in an interview that aired on May 4, 2025. - NBC


President Donald Trump has renewed his threat of using military force to annex Greenland, saying in an NBC News interview he wouldn’t rule it out to make the self-governing Danish territory a part of the United States.

It’s the latest in Trump’s many comments about seizing control of the resource-rich island, which he insists the US needs for national security purposes.

“I don’t rule it out,” he told NBC News’ Kristen Welker in an interview that aired on Sunday. “I don’t say I’m going to do it, but I don’t rule out anything.”

“We need Greenland very badly,” Trump said. “Greenland is a very small amount of people, which we’ll take care of, and we’ll cherish them, and all of that. But we need that for international security.”

He added that he doubted it would happen – but that the possibility is “certainly” there.

Trump has repeatedly expressed interest in buying the island, or the US taking it by force or economic coercion, even as NATO ally Denmark and Greenland have firmly rejected the idea.

There are a few factors driving that interest; Greenland occupies a unique geopolitical position, sitting between the US and Europe, which could help repel any potential attack from Russia, experts have said. It also lies along a key shipping lane, and is part of the Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom gap, a strategic maritime region.

But experts also suspect Trump is eyeing other aspects of Greenland such as its trove of natural resources, which may become more accessible as climate change melts the territory’s ice. These include oil and gas, and the rare earth metals in high demand for electric cars, wind turbines and military equipment.

Since Trump began voicing plans for his presidency in December, his desire to annex Greenland has raised questions about the island’s future security as the US, Russia and China vie for influence in the Arctic.

But Greenland has pushed back strongly.

“President Trump says that the United States ‘will get Greenland.’ Let me be clear: The United States will not get it. We do not belong to anyone else. We decide our own future,” the island’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen said in March after Trump again suggested the use of military force.

Greenland’s not the only sovereign territory Trump has his sights on; the president has repeatedly threatened to annex Canada and make it the US’ “51st state,” souring relations between the two longtime allies.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney at a news conference about US tariffs in Ottawa on April 3, 2025. - Dave Chan/AFP/Getty Images

Last week, Canada’s Liberal Party swept to victory in federal elections, with Prime Minister Mark Carney riding on a wave of anti-Trump sentiment and using his victory speech to declare Canada would “never” yield to the United States.



White House Releases Yet Another AI-Generated Image Of Trump — This Time As A Jacked Sith Lord
Deadline


During the NBC interview on Sunday, Trump said it was “highly unlikely” he’d use military force to annex Canada.

“I don’t see it with Canada. I just don’t see it, I have to be honest with you,” he said.

He added that he’d talked on the phone with Carney after his election win, calling the Canadian leader a “very nice man.” Trump had congratulated Carney, but they did not discuss the threat of annexation of Canada, he said.

Carney is set to visit Trump in Washington on Tuesday. When asked whether the topic would come up during that visit, Trump responded: “I’ll always talk about that.”

If Canada was a state, “it would be great,” Trump added. “It would be a cherished state.”