US Foreign Policy Trump47 | Threatens all hell to break loose in Gaza; won't rule out military force in Panama, Greenland, threatens economic force

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 271
  • Views: 6K
  • Politics 
Not identical of course but kinda has an Iran Hostage feel. Isn’t something that swayed the election but seems like something that could possibly happen right around inauguration to give Trump an early boost.
So in this case, the Israelis under Bibi are in the role of the Iranian mullahs who didn’t want Carter to get any credit and were willing to shove the knife a little deeper in his back by waiting until right after the inauguration to release the hostages? Sadly, that checks out.
 

Every Canadian needs to pay attention to this bit of American history. In one treaty, the U.S. annexed the present-day states of California, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Oklahoma, Kansas and Wyoming. It subsequently illegally invaded Indigenous territory in the west.


Read more: White U.S. citizens once flooded into Indian Territory, prompting calls for mass deportations


Canada could be next — perhaps not immediately as the 51st state, but quite possibly as a U.S. territory that would deny Canadians any voting rights for Congress or the presidency, allow only some autonomy and make questions of citizenship ambiguous. The constitutional architecture exists in the U.S. to make it happen.


Impossible? Unthinkable? Many pundits dismiss Trump’s bellicose rhetoric as hot-headed bargaining. It’s just tough talk, they say. Some have argued his bluster is simply part of his favoured “art of the deal” negotiating tactics.

That’s the wrong reading. How Trump could make good on the threat can be found in the U.S. Constitution. There is both potential and precedent for the U.S. to acquire territory through cession or subjugation.

Invading Canada​

The War Plan Red of 1930 was also drummed up by the U.S. Department of War on how to invade Canada if ever needed.

It included shocking details about kicking off the attack in Halifax with poison gas, quickly invading New Brunswick and then occupying Québec City and Montréal before claiming Niagara Falls.

Historically, America has made many Canadian leaders nervous. Queen Victoria felt that Ottawa, as a capital, would be sheltered from U.S. invasions. John A. Macdonald worried about Union forces attacks on Canada, as U.S. Confederacy spies and raiders were permitted to hole up in Montréal during the civil war.

In the 1911 election, when the Liberal party pushed for free trade with the U.S., they were shown the door by a wave of anti-American sentiment that backed Robert Borden’s Conservatives.

Treaties and congressional green lights​

Hypothetical paranoia aside, the ability of the U.S. to acquire territories is ingrained in the U.S. Constitution. It is straightforward. First, start with Article II, Section 2 of the constitution:


Treaties are the tools the U.S. uses to take “nothing by conquest” after the Senate ratifies those treaties by a two-thirds majority.

In 1848, President Zachary Taylor proposed the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo to Congress to annex Mexican lands. Even though some wanted to take all of Mexico, Congress ratified the treaty.

In 1898, Congress passed House Joint Resolution 259. It ratified President William McKinley’s treaty of the annexation of Hawaii. Due to protest, petition and dissent, it took 60 years for Hawaii to become an official state in 1957.

The American origin story of a country born in revolution only applies to a small piece of the country. The rest of the place came to exist through annexation. The U.S. expanded to 50 states and 14 overseas territories through a mix of cession, occupation and purchase.
This is fear mongering.
 
Anyone else do a double take when you hear Hamas officials are close to agreeing to a hostage deal? Hamas “officials”? Terrorist organizations have officials now I guess.
 
Anyone else do a double take when you hear Hamas officials are close to agreeing to a hostage deal? Hamas “officials”? Terrorist organizations have officials now I guess.
1. Hamas is still the governmental authority in Gaza.
2. Yes, terrorist organizations have "officials." The KKK had a grand wizard, did it not? It still does. If you want to get the KKK's view on something, who do you call? Probably the officials. When the KKK was founded in 1868, its first grand wizard, Forrest, gave an interview to a newspaper on behalf of the KKK.

An official is just a word for the person calling the shots. Any organization more than a few people in size has them.

Y'all have to stop the basic confusion of "what is" and "what ought to be." I used to consider the ability to recognize and respect that distinction to be one of the bare minimum requirements of being considered "educated." I've moved off that stance. Still, do better.
 

I was thinking about this and how this is simply Putin sowing discord in the US. I believe he does that a lot.

In one sense, I feel responsible when I react to these things. That is what Putin wants. He wants us fighting over whether Trump and Putin have some sort of arrangement, whether Trump is compromised, etc.

But ultimately this is all on Trump. By never standing up to Putin, he opens the door for all of this.

If Trump isn't compromised, I simply don't understand why he doesn't tell Putin to f' off when Putin says things like that. After all, it doesn't present Trump in a good light. But, for whatever reason Trump never does that. It might just be that Trump is so enamored with Putin's flattery. The only thing we know for sure is that Putin plays Trump like a fiddle.

(Also note that I am operating under the assumption that Russian state TV does in fact speak for Trump.)
 
I was thinking about this and how this is simply Putin sowing discord in the US. I believe he does that a lot.

In one sense, I feel responsible when I react to these things. That is what Putin wants. He wants us fighting over whether Trump and Putin have some sort of arrangement, whether Trump is compromised, etc.

But ultimately this is all on Trump. By never standing up to Putin, he opens the door for all of this.

If Trump isn't compromised, I simply don't understand why he doesn't tell Putin to f' off when Putin says things like that. After all, it doesn't present Trump in a good light. But, for whatever reason Trump never does that. It might just be that Trump is so enamored with Putin's flattery. The only thing we know for sure is that Putin plays Trump like a fiddle.

(Also note that I am operating under the assumption that Russian state TV does in fact speak for Trump.)
We had an opportunity to ignore Trump. It was by electing Kamala as the next president. Now that the plurality of Americans have decided to make him the most powerful person in the world, we can't ignore him. That's what the callatoroys cant understand. You can apologize for Trump all you want. But the man is the commander in chief of the most powerful army in human history, and he's the putative leader of the free world. If you excuse him by saying he won't do what he's promised to do, or by chalking him up as an "exaggerator," that's not our issue. You idiots put him in this position. Don't blame us when we use his words against you.
 
So, Trump’s “envoy” is in Israel while Trump is likely calling Bibi and pushing ideas that run counter to American policy.
There really isn't a current American policy since there isn't a current American president. I say that because joe has checked out and really hasn't been there for some time. Do you really think israel is going to spend any more time dealing with the biden administration? Would you?
 
We had an opportunity to ignore Trump. It was by electing Kamala as the next president. Now that the plurality of Americans have decided to make him the most powerful person in the world, we can't ignore him. That's what the callatoroys cant understand. You can apologize for Trump all you want. But the man is the commander in chief of the most powerful army in human history, and he's the putative leader of the free world. If you excuse him by saying he won't do what he's promised to do, or by chalking him up as an "exaggerator," that's not our issue. You idiots put him in this position. Don't blame us when we use his words against you.
You act as if you don't have 4 years of history to go by to show how he will use the military. trump hasn't shown any tendency to use the military in an aggressive manner.
 
You act as if you don't have 4 years of history to go by to show how he will use the military. trump hasn't shown any tendency to use the military in an aggressive manner.
If you can't see the difference between what Trump was saying in 2016 and what he's saying today, that's on you. I know conservatives have sworn off the news sources that report actual facts, but it might be worth keeping an eye on them every now and then.
 
Back
Top