Population of Greenland as an American possession?

Assuming the US purchased or took over Greenland following WW2 what kind of population would it have today? At the moment aprox 56,000 people live there.

As well what status would the territory actually have? Overseas territory like PR and the pacific terrorizes? State?
 

Devvy

Donor
Now, Iceland on the other hand...

Never going to happen. For starters, despite the fact the Danes provided defence and foreign affairs for Iceland under the terms of the 1918 Act of Union, Iceland from 1918 was also a sovereign nation in personal union with Denmark. Iceland had been under Danish (and Denmark-Norway) rule for ages and just managed to get self government, I can't see them wanting to sacrifice that to join the US. Even the whole joining NATO thing was controversial despite not even having to really commit to it due to no forces.
 
Never going to happen. For starters, despite the fact the Danes provided defence and foreign affairs for Iceland under the terms of the 1918 Act of Union, Iceland from 1918 was also a sovereign nation in personal union with Denmark. Iceland had been under Danish (and Denmark-Norway) rule for ages and just managed to get self government, I can't see them wanting to sacrifice that to join the US. Even the whole joining NATO thing was controversial despite not even having to really commit to it due to no forces.

Fair point, which is why anytime you see the US owning Iceland, its usually a sign things went terribly wrong elsewhere, ala a Nazi Victory TL, where Iceland is occupied to act as America's unsinkable aircraft carrier.

Circumstances aside, its a much more viable as a state than Greenland. Hell, in a scenario where the US has both, Greenland may be part of an Icelandic state.
 
It would remain a territory or, more likely, be turned into a commonwealth or some sort. It doesn't have the minimum population of 60,000 that Congress decided was the bare minimum in 1830 when letting in Michigan. Like many islands, both of the US and Europeans, if held to the modern day they would require a certain level of subsidies, as the island doesn't have the highest carrying capacity, and things such as sheep herding aren't economically or environmentally sustainable.
 
Fair point, which is why anytime you see the US owning Iceland, its usually a sign things went terribly wrong elsewhere, ala a Nazi Victory TL, where Iceland is occupied to act as America's unsinkable aircraft carrier.

Circumstances aside, its a much more viable as a state than Greenland. Hell, in a scenario where the US has both, Greenland may be part of an Icelandic state.
And now I am thinking of a state made up of Greenland, Iceland, and the former Dominion/Crown Colony of Newfoundland.
 
It would remain a territory or, more likely, be turned into a commonwealth or some sort. It doesn't have the minimum population of 60,000 that Congress decided was the bare minimum in 1830 when letting in Michigan. Like many islands, both of the US and Europeans, if held to the modern day they would require a certain level of subsidies, as the island doesn't have the highest carrying capacity, and things such as sheep herding aren't economically or environmentally sustainable.

You don't think the population would get over 60,000 if it came under American possession? The increase from military personnel and their families not to mention those looking to move over there for the natural resources sector should easily push it over 60,000. How much over that is the question?
 
It would remain a territory or, more likely, be turned into a commonwealth or some sort. It doesn't have the minimum population of 60,000 that Congress decided was the bare minimum in 1830 when letting in Michigan. Like many islands, both of the US and Europeans, if held to the modern day they would require a certain level of subsidies, as the island doesn't have the highest carrying capacity, and things such as sheep herding aren't economically or environmentally sustainable.
Nevada didn't get to 60,000 consistently for decades after it became a state. I don't doubt that Greenland could be made a territory with 50,000, which it reached in the '70s. The question is, would Congress do that? Would Greenland? Paging @Gentleman Biaggi.
 
Nevada didn't get to 60,000 consistently for decades after it became a state. I don't doubt that Greenland could be made a territory with 50,000, which it reached in the '70s. The question is, would Congress do that? Would Greenland? Paging @Gentleman Biaggi.
Yeahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh no
1. If it were to become a state it would probably have to have a population higher than Wyoming (which Greenland never did), even if it somehow did, it takes a lot more for something to become a state than that, and it would take several generations to get the Danish and Greenlandic languages down in the state so it wouldn’t be too culturally different.
2. Greenland is a territory with no real way to up its population without a major change. Sure, if Greenland’s hydrocarbons we’re put to good use by the US there COULD be an influx of jobs from the US. But who would want to stay there long term because of the weather?
3. As I mentioned before, Greenland is quite culturally different from the states, and if annexed would likley be a way to exploit hydrocarbons and become 2nd in the total size race (unless the POC stays in power and holds on to Taiwan and Mongolia)
 
I can imagine more military bases during the Cold War pushing the population to 100,000 then dropping to current levels after that ends
 
Hydrocarbon extraction, mining, and fishing would all be industries that we could expect so see grow with an American Greenland.

The US would likely have a larger military presence as well, which would mean more military families, more services oriented around serving the needs of those families, etc.\

Higher population likely means more shipping and logistics, so port maintenance would another industry.
 
I can imagine more military bases during the Cold War pushing the population to 100,000 then dropping to current levels after that ends

Would a military population count towards the population needed for statehood? Military personnel and their dependents are transient, and those living on Greenland would almost all have their official residences elsewhere. Civil servants assigned to Greenland bases may decide to become Greenlanders.
 
Would a military population count towards the population needed for statehood? Military personnel and their dependents are transient, and those living on Greenland would almost all have their official residences elsewhere. Civil servants assigned to Greenland bases may decide to become Greenlanders.
Sadly no I don' think so
 
I really think the most logical way for a Greenland state would be in union with another region, being it Newfoundland and Iceland. Of these two, Newfoundland is possibly the easier one of the two to have happen.

In that case, it would likely have a few counties around Nuuk and similar where there are large populations, while the rest of the region is subdivided into larger counties, federal regions, military bases, reservations, and wildlife reserves. The population might get as high as 100k... Maybe... with military families living in the southern side or just back in Newfoundland. mind, the entire island would be autonomous in relation to Newfoundland as well, considering it's a separate region so far from the rest.

Not really much more to it. It'd make relations with Canada more interesting for sure(the Arctic treaties!), but it really only could come into existence much as part of another state.
 
Top