Name: Davos: GOP senator describes the mood during Trump’s speech
Uploaded: 2026-01-22T17:10:03.000Z
Duration: 9 min 14 s
Description: VoiceTubeの動画で発音を聞きながら英語表現を覚えよう！学べる英語：

We spoke with Republican Senator Thom Tillis from Davos earlier today.

This was after President Trump's speech, but before this claim of a framework of a Greenland deal.

And joining me now from Davos is Republican Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina.

I want to get to your reaction to the speech in a second.

But first, since you were in the room to hear President Trump's speech, what was the reaction in the room to what the President had to say?

Well, there was a lot of silence, of course.

I was sitting with the US Delegation and the people that traveled with the President, but

I saw a lot of quiet, hands down, during the speech.

Well, you know, I think it was an opportunity missed.

This is the first time I've ever been to Davos.

But I'm concerned with many of our allies, our partners, militarily, economically, starting to think that they have to diversify away and de risk from the United States of America.

Look, I get the President's goal to get the NATO members up to their commitments, and

He's done an extraordinary job, better than any President since the NATO alliance was forged.

But I'm beginning to sense that, that they're looking at worst case scenarios for the current US Posture.

And that could lead to a disadvantage to the United States.

And more importantly, the democratic world is at its best.

When we're working together, we're trading fairly.

I think that the President's right to hold some of the countries accountable, but

when you cast them all in the same light, I think it's a mistake.

I also think that we have to continue to think the NATO partners that honored their Article 5 commitment went to Afghanistan with us and lost lives in in defense of our great country.

The Article 5 commitment and the fact that the only time it's ever been initiated is in defense of the United States, I think the American people need to understand.

Yeah, I mean, that's something that's interesting.

President Trump successfully pushed a lot of these countries to uphold their commitment to spend a certain amount of their GDP on defense spending.

But he also, in recent days, he reposted something that said that NATO was the enemy within.

And then you heard the President say a day ago that he doesn't think NATO members would honor the Article 5 commitment.

When, as you note, the only time that's been invoked was other countries coming to our defense after 9, 11.

And in fact, I believe Denmark, the country at issue here that owns Greenland, I think they had the highest or among the highest per capita loss of life in the war in Afghanistan on our behalf.

In fact, they had almost exactly the same per capita loss as the United States.

That's why I became emotional when I went to the memorial in Copenhagen.

I was wondering what the families, the loved ones of those soldiers were thinking when we're showing this sort of disrespect to a nation that that literally, on a per capita basis, gave as many lives in some of the most contested areas of Afghanistan as you can find.

This is just not the way to keep the free world together.

The only person or persons who are happy with the notion of causing this problem, this tumult, this uncertainty in NATO, is Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping.

They've got to be cheering from the bleachers.

President Trump said today that he, quote, won't use force to take over Greenland.

That appears to be his clearest statement yet, ruling out the use of the US Military.

Do you think that assuaged any of our European allies?

Well, first, I think it was a false concession.

I mean, with all due respect to the president, I don't believe that the Congress would sit still if he were to take this by force.

I think there would probably be sufficient votes to pass a war powers resolution that would be veto proof.

So let's just be honest with our friends and our allies and let's be respectful to them.

Jake, we could have whatever we want in terms of presence in Greenland today without having to spend a dollar.

And to my fiscal conservative colleagues out there, how about this?

Not spending billions of dollars to take territory that we've already been given unfettered access to and even have an agreement dating back to 1951 that Denmark and Greenland have said that they would expand and make more accommodating.

Greenland is a country or is a territory that needs massive investment in infrastructure and massive investment just to support the basis.

And by the way, a couple of years ago, they offered to sell one of their military bases in the most attractive part of Greenland, where the ports do not freeze in the winter for a dollar.

So to my fiscal conservative colleagues, let's project power in the Arctic, let's get a multinational NATO force there, and

let's do it on a far more economically sustainable basis than this administration is contemplating.

I want to play something else that President Trump said today on Greenland about what the US did after World War II.

After the war, we gave Greenland back to Denmark.

I go back to those souls listed on that memorial wall and wonder what the mothers, the fathers, the brothers, sisters and spouses are thinking today.

That's why they served along American servicemen and almost certainly saved the lives of American servicemen and gave their own lives.

This is not how you maintain the most important, profound and successful military alliance in the history of this planet.

It's disrespectful, it's unproductive, and it's unsustainable.

Several European leaders have expressed bewilderment, at the very least, at the President's threats to impose these huge tariffs on any NATO allies who oppose his attempt to take Greenland.

I want you to take a listen to what the Belgian Prime Minister said about how Europe can now go forward.

Europe is at a crossroads where it has to decide.

Until now, we tried to appease the new President in the White House.

We were very lenient also with the tariffs.

But now so many red lines are being crossed that you have the choice between your self respect.

Being a miserable slave is something else.

How worried are you that the US Is at risk of permanently damaging relationships with some of our country's oldest and closest allies?

Well, I think that we can repair the relationships.

And I hope that the President will get the advice that will people with stars on their shoulders know how important the alliance is and know how important it is to our own sophistication, our capabilities.

We are far less exquisite in our ability to execute when we're not testing ourselves among our allies.

However, it is a little bit rich that we're talking about the home and of NATO and the battle, the famous Battle of the Bulge, not meeting their 2% requirement.

These countries that fall short, have fallen short for years are a part of the reason why we are here today.

And so while I've tried to say that I disagree with the President's posture right now, they own some responsibility for us being here because they combine for a $2 trillion shortfall in the first 20 years of this century.

We would have an industrial base, a capability, and

maybe not even an incursion into Ukraine if we had a NATO that had spent that $2 trillion.

Imagine if they were achieving the goals they're prepared to do now.

Get the legitimate argument off the table.

That has infuriated this president, and rightfully so.

The president also touted today what he calls the booming U.S. economy.

He's saying that incomes are rising, inflation has been defeated.

Well, you know, I think we have a little bit of a disconnect.

I don't think it's productive to say that we don't have an affordability crisis.

It's coming from many people who have never wanted for anything in their lives.

字幕リスト動画再生

Davos: GOP senator describes the mood during Trump’s speech

massive

recognize

commitment

profound