In a move that has left geopolitical analysts and late-night comedians equally bewildered, President-elect Donald Trump has hinted at the possibility of using military force to acquire Greenland and the Panama Canal. Yes, you read that correctly. The man who once tried to buy Greenland is now considering a more… assertive approach.

During a recent press conference at Mar-a-Lago, Trump declared that U.S. control over these territories is vital for national security and economic stability. He criticized the current administration for what he perceives as a lack of strategic vision, stating, ‘We need to protect our interests. Greenland and the Panama Canal are key to that.’

Let’s start with Greenland. This isn’t the first time Trump has set his sights on the world’s largest island. Back in 2019, he floated the idea of purchasing it from Denmark, only to be met with bewilderment and a firm ‘No, thanks.’ Fast forward to 2025, and it seems he’s still enamored with the icy territory. Trump argues that Greenland’s strategic position in the Arctic makes it a valuable asset, especially with increasing Russian and Chinese interests in the region.

However, Denmark and Greenland have been quick to dismiss these renewed ambitions. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen reiterated her previous stance, calling the idea ‘absurd,’ while Greenland’s government emphasized their autonomy and lack of interest in becoming part of the United States.

Now, onto the Panama Canal. Trump has expressed dissatisfaction with Panama’s management of the canal, accusing them of overcharging American vessels and allowing Chinese influence to seep in. He reminisced about the days when the U.S. controlled the canal, suggesting that it was a mistake to hand it over to Panama in 1999. In his view, reclaiming the canal is essential to ensure free and fair trade routes.

Panama’s leadership, unsurprisingly, isn’t thrilled with these assertions. President Laurentino Cortizo responded firmly, stating, ‘The Panama Canal is Panamanian, and it will remain so. We are open to dialogue but will not tolerate threats to our sovereignty.’

Critics argue that Trump’s proposals are not only impractical but also reminiscent of an outdated imperialist mindset. The international community has largely moved past the era of territorial acquisitions through force, favoring diplomatic and cooperative approaches instead. Moreover, such actions could strain relationships with key allies and destabilize global trade.

Supporters, however, see this as Trump being Trump—unafraid to challenge the status quo and prioritize American interests. They argue that his willingness to consider bold moves demonstrates a commitment to national security and economic prosperity.

It’s worth noting that while Trump’s statements are provocative, the actual implementation of such plans would face significant legal, ethical, and logistical hurdles. The U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power to declare war, and any military action without congressional approval would be unconstitutional. Additionally, international law frowns upon the acquisition of territory by force.

In the end, whether this is a genuine policy proposal or another instance of Trump’s characteristic bravado remains to be seen. One thing is certain: his comments have reignited debates about American foreign policy and the nation’s role on the global stage.

As we await further developments, perhaps it’s time to dust off those Risk and Monopoly boards. After all, world domination seems to be back in vogue.