The archbishop of the U.S. military services says US troops could refuse Greenland orders

[aussie_aussie_oi_oi]

Speaking to the BBC on Jan. 18. Archbishop Timothy Broglio of the Archdiocese for the Military Services said he “cannot see any circumstances” in which an American military operation to take control of Greenland or another ally’s territory could fulfill the criteria for a just war.
The archbishop also said administration rhetoric on Greenland “tarnishes the image of the United States.”
Broglio previous served in the Holy See’s Secretariat of State as a Vatican diplomat, including as Apostolic Nuncio to the Dominican Republic and Apostolic Delegate to Puerto Rico.
The archbishop was also previously elected as president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops; his term as head of the USCCB ended in November of last year.
Asked whether he is concerned about Catholics serving in the military who might be asked to participate in a military operation to take control of Greenland, Broglio responded, “I am obviously worried, because they could be put in a situation where they’re being ordered to do something which is morally questionable.” “And it would be very difficult for a soldier or a Marine or a sailor by himself to disobey an order such as that,” he continued. “But strictly speaking, he or she, within the realm of their own conscience, it would be morally acceptable to disobey that order. But that’s perhaps putting that individual in an untenable situation, and that’s my concern.”
Asked if he was “laying out red lines” for the Trump administration, the archbishop said he does not know whether “the powers that be” are open to listening to admonitions from Catholic leaders, but said he believes it is his duty to speak up. Broglio’s comments come amid rising international tensions, as U.S. President Donald Trump continues to repeat demands for “complete and total control of Greenland.”
https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/brogli ... -greenland

[Student]

not a good idea

[Jack3]

Feser:

https://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2026/0 ... s.html?m=1

https://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2025/1 ... e.html?m=1

https://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2025/1 ... t.html?m=1

[Highlander]

not a good idea

What, specifically, is not a good idea?

I often wonder now much coming from various sources, including ecclesiastical, is a form of virtue signaling. Pronouncements of this sort have no practical impact, since there won't be a military action against Greenland. Trump, today, stated that there would not be.

[anawim]

since there won't be a military action against Greenland. Trump, today, stated that there would not be.

Exactly! I've been following Trump for over 40 years. He makes bold statements in order to get people's attention, and then states what he really wants and needs.
He's playing chess, while everyone else is playing checkers, and most don't even seem to know that they are being played.

[Doom]

I have no idea where this "Trump is going to invade Greenland" idea came from; Trump has not only never suggested it, but has repeatedly said the exact opposite, that he wants to acquire it by negotiation.

And by the way, the news today is that a tentative agreement has been reached.

[Highlander]

It seems that Trump announced a framework for resolution of the Greenland issue. It also seems that nobody else is aware of a framework for resolution. Trump is never boring.

[Jack3]

I have no idea where this "Trump is going to invade Greenland" idea came from;
Trump has ... repeatedly said the exact opposite, that he wants to acquire it by negotiation.

From Trump, you can get yes, and no, and a secret third thing.

You'll also find him whining like a petulant child for the Nobel Peace Prize, and saying he's gonna focus less on peace because he didn't get it.

[anawim]

Attempts at acquiring Greenland has a history:

1867 – Andrew Johnson: explored buying Greenland & Iceland (right after Alaska).
WWII – FDR: U.S. took over Greenland’s defense while Denmark was occupied.
1946 – Truman: offered $100M in gold to buy it.
Cold War – Eisenhower → Kennedy: nonstop negotiations for bases, radar, missiles.
Post–Cold War – Clinton/Bush/Obama: expanded Arctic security & missile defense.
2019 – Trump: said publicly what presidents discussed privately for 150+ years.

The U.S. didn’t “suddenly” want Greenland.
It’s been defending it, negotiating it, and embedding there since the 1800s.
Greenland = Arctic power, shipping lanes, missiles, minerals.
Trump didn’t invent it.
He said the quiet part out loud.

[Highlander]

There are a number of entities, large and small, the nestle under the wings of the big powers, bask in their protection, and then do as they please. Canada, for example, through the 1960's or so was a minor player in its own prosperity. Now, not so much.

I found it telling that Denmark sent 17 (?) soldiers to Greenland to defend against the US. Previously, they had none to defend against Russia or China. Symbolic as it is, it reveals that Denmark is more comfortable with threats from an enemy than offers from an ally.

[Jack3]

There are a number of entities, large and small, the nestle under the wings of the big powers, bask in their protection, and then do as they please. Canada, for example, through the 1960's or so was a minor player in its own prosperity. Now, not so much.

I found it telling that Denmark sent 17 (?) soldiers to Greenland to defend against the US. Previously, they had none to defend against Russia or China. Symbolic as it is, it reveals that Denmark is more comfortable with threats from an enemy than offers from an ally.

I can understand how Greenland would find it hard to perceive Trump's moves as "an offer from an ally", the polar opposite of a threat.