Hegseth says the Pentagon has contingency plans to invade Greenland if necessary

Leader Live

20 hours ago

Democratic members of the House Armed Services Committee repeatedly got into heated exchanges with Mr Hegseth, with some of the toughest lines of questioning coming from military veterans as many demanded yes or no answers and he tried to avoid direct responses about his actions as Pentagon chief.
In one back-and-forth, Mr Hegseth did provide an eyebrow-raising answer when Representative Adam Smith asked whether the Pentagon has plans to take Greenland or Panama by force if necessary.
'Our job at the Defence Department is to have plans for any contingency,' Mr Hegseth said several times.
It is not unusual for the Pentagon to draw up contingency plans for conflicts that have not arisen, but his handling of the questions prompted a Republican lawmaker to step in a few minutes later.
Representative Mike Turner asked: 'It is not your testimony today that there are plans at the Pentagon for taking by force or invading Greenland, correct?'
As Mr Hegseth started to repeat his answer about contingency plans, Mr Turner added emphatically, 'I sure as hell hope that is not your testimony.'
'We look forward to working with Greenland to ensure that it is secured from any potential threats,' Mr Hegseth responded.
Time and again, officials pressed Mr Hegseth to answer questions he has avoided for months, including during the two previous days of hearings on Capitol Hill. And frustration boiled over.
'You're an embarrassment to this country. You're unfit to lead,' Salud Carbajal snapped, the California Democrat's voice rising. 'You should just get the hell out.'
President Donald Trump has said multiple times that he wants to take control of the strategic, mineral-rich island nation of Greenland, long a US ally.
Those remarks have been met with flat rejections from Greenland's leaders.
'Greenland is not for sale,' Jacob Isbosethsen, Greenland's representative to the US, said on Thursday at a forum in Washington sponsored by the Arctic Institute.
In an effort not to show the Pentagon's hand on its routine effort to have plans for everything, Mr Hegseth danced around the direct question from Mr Smith, leading to the confusion.
'Speaking on behalf of the American people, I don't think the American people voted for President Trump because they were hoping we would invade Greenland,' Mr Smith said.
Mr Hegseth's use of two Signal chats to discuss plans for US strikes on Houthi rebels in Yemen with other US leaders as well as members of his family prompted dizzying exchanges with representatives.
He was pressed multiple times over whether or not he shared classified information and if he should face accountability if he did.
Mr Hegseth argued that the classification markings of any information about those military operations could not be discussed.
That became a quick trap, as Mr Hegseth has asserted that nothing he posted — on strike times and munitions dropped in March — was classified. His questioner, Seth Moulton, a Massachusetts Democrat and Marine veteran, jumped on the disparity.
'You can very well disclose whether or not it was classified,' Mr Moulton said.
'What's not classified is that it was an incredible, successful mission,' Mr Hegseth responded.
A Pentagon watchdog report on his Signal use is expected soon.
Mr Moulton then asked Mr Hegseth whether he would hold himself accountable if the inspector general finds that he placed classified information on Signal, a commercially available app.
Mr Hegseth would not directly say, only noting that he serves 'at the pleasure of the president'.