American Politics 4.0 - Orangeyou Glad He’s Back?

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Reminder, 95% of what Trump says, the opposite is the usual outcome.

Greatest irony in the history of this site?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Sliver

You don't think a strongly worded lyric will turn the tide?

Maybe not, but if the interpretive dancers and digital artists get involved I'd sleep a lot better at night.

Can imagine how many munitions the US would waste on our Paper Mache Division deployed to the border

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

We’re in NATO. We’re a commonwealth nation - subjects of the King of England. We represent the only chance for Europe to be free of dependence on Russian/American/Middle Eastern/Chinese energy.

I don't think the Commonwealth offers much in this situation. There are no defense or even trade agreements in the organization. Look at some of the members, like South Africa which is a Russian stooge at this point and the most populous member, India, which is downright adversarial to Canada at the moment, or Brunei, which is a terrible dictatorship. Member countries like the UK, Australia, and New Zealand would support Canada at least diplomatically because we are aligned countries in general (western style democracies based wholly or partially on British common law), not because of the Commonwealth.

The Commonwealth is a nice gesture to promote dialogue and cultural exchange, but if people look at it us some kind of bulwark against hostile forces, I think they'll be disappointed.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Nobody is launching nukes, they are a deterrent but nobody seriously thinks the US is launching nukes at everybody. As you pointed out it's the end of humanity. It takes multiple keys and the launch code for the US to launch, do you really believe the people who have families and loved ones who also need to turn those keys are going to? A nuclear exchange started by the US is never going to happen.

I envy your optimism.

You say that the UK, France and other allies would come to our aid in case of invasion by the US. Let's pretend that is real for a second.

If we have the combined might of NATO fighting a conventional war against the forces of the US along the 49th parallel, how bad does it need to get in your eyes before one of the belligerents launch a nuke, compelling the other side to launch a nuke in retaliation? 25 million casualties? 50 million? Or you believe both sides would just continue the conventional fight losing millions indefinitely?

I say again - if there is an invasion, NO ONE is coming to help. It is not worth losing millions of people to defend Canada against an aggressive US.

I sincerely believe there will be no invasion and these are all just insane hypotheticals.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Reminder, 95% of what Trump says, the opposite is the usual outcome.

Not about things like this. This is a critical error people made pre-election and are still making.

This only really applies to when he is replying to a question someone is asking him. If he's replying to something someone else has said, it's 95% (probably closer to 99%) made up or a lie. IMO this is because he is the pinnacle of narcissism; he doesn't give a #### or even a thought to what anyone else is saying or thinking, and will just blab out whatever reply seems most suited to advance the conversation.
But, the other two scenarios he says things in are more likely to be true. If he's at a rally or making a speech and saying something, it's either completely scripted (Project 2025, deportation) or an irrational mind####ing thought that he can't help but let out (see: John Daly Penis, Hannibal Lecter, Fight up'hill me boys!). In either case, these are things the president thinks are true, wants to do, or has been told by someone he is beholden (doesn't actually like or trust people) to that he should do.
Annexing Canada falls into one of these two categories. Either someone he's beholden to is telling him about it constantly and that's why it keeps coming out of his mouth, or it's a totally insane thought like hannibal lector that he just can't help but have parading around in his vacuous mind.

IMO the former is the more concerning and unfortunately the most likely. We have resources and they could need them, especially in a protectionist world where global trade has been muted.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Can imagine how many munitions the US would waste on our Paper Mache Division deployed to the border

A lot, but probably only 0.01% of the total

[The Yen Man]

I mean, sure, the US would win if they did invade us, but at what cost, and for what benefit exactly? They'd pretty much wreck their economy and probably irreversibly mess up their stock market. Their global trust would be worthless.

And after they occupy Canada, then what? They'll need to spend billions and billions each year just to keep Canada in line. Those concentration camps don't pay for themselves.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Sliver

You don't think a strongly worded lyric will turn the tide?

Maybe not, but if the interpretive dancers and digital artists get involved I'd sleep a lot better at night.

Let’s see.

“America… #### You!”
Canada’snotforsale
Justtryand####intakeit!

You wouldn’t even need to change many of the lyrics.

“America… #### you!”
So lick my #### and suck on my balls
“America… #### You!”
Freedom is the only way, yeah!

Trumperists your game is through
Now you have to answer to
“Canada… ####nEh!”

Guns it is.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Can imagine how many munitions the US would waste on our Paper Mache Division deployed to the border

It worked for the Allies when they faked the invasion at Pas de Callais

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

I mean, sure, the US would win if they did invade us, but at what cost, and for what benefit exactly? They'd pretty much wreck their economy and probably irreversibly mess up their stock market. Their global trust would be worthless.

And after they occupy Canada, then what? They'll need to spend billions and billions each year just to keep Canada in line. Those concentration camps don't pay for themselves.

Of all the things this administration has done since Jan 20, how many of them made sense so far?

[Party Elephant]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I don't think the Commonwealth offers much in this situation. There is no defense or even trade agreements in the organization. Look at some of the members, like South Africa which is a Russian stooge at this point and the most populous member, India, which is downright adversarial to Canada at the moment, or Brunei, which is a terrible dictatorship. Member countries like the UK, Australia, and New Zealand would support Canada at least diplomatically, but because we are aligned countries in general (western style democracies based on wholly or partially on British common law), not because of the Commonwealth.

The Commonwealth is a nice gesture to promote dialogue and cultural exchange, but if people look at it us some kind of bulwark against hostile forces, I think they'll be disappointed.

Nope, at least not with their current Heritage Foundation sponsored government.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Sir, if they didn’t gas Afghanistan and they didn’t gas Iraq, why would you think for a moment they would gas us?

And they can’t use biological weapons because Canadians would easily spread the disease south indiscriminately.

And we know how the Americans respond to vaccinations.

In any event. We don’t need extra people - we need money, weapons, and whatever else to conduct this war.

If 4 million people actively resist, the Americans will be driven into the sea.

If 4 million people resist, we already have three guns for each of them in private circulation.

If America did this, it would be the end of their society.

You're 100% right on every point here, although I should note with the first one the answer could be that this is a regime that is unstable. That makes it different from Iraq and Afghanistan. But I do agree, they won't go there.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Cause a psychotic maniac like Trump wasn't in control then lol. I'm glad you have delusions that we'd easily beat them, but our best case is a likely quick surrender and guerilla warfare post-occupation. Worth pointing out, speaking of Afghanistan and Iraq, they both lost the conventional war and easily won the guerilla war.

It’s our only case - I’m not suggesting our army fight them straight across.

Trump still can’t unilaterally murder the entire population of the country, unless he starts a nuclear war.

At which point yes, I do think our nuclear allies would respond appropriately.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

I mean, sure, the US would win if they did invade us, but at what cost, and for what benefit exactly? They'd pretty much wreck their economy and probably irreversibly mess up their stock market. Their global trust would be worthless.

And after they occupy Canada, then what? They'll need to spend billions and billions each year just to keep Canada in line. Those concentration camps don't pay for themselves.

Quebec would try and secede immediately. Maybe some other provinces would follow.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

You're 100% right on every point here, although I should note with the first one the answer could be that this is a regime that is unstable. That makes it different from Iraq and Afghanistan. But I do agree, they won't go there.

You don’t gas someone who can gas you back.

I have to imagine Canada could produce chemical weapons quite rapidly if they had to.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

You don’t gas someone who can gas you back.

I have to imagine Canada could produce chemical weapons quite rapidly if they had to.

You don't, if you're a rational thinker.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

It’s our only case - I’m not suggesting our army fight them straight across.

Trump still can’t unilaterally murder the entire population of the country, unless he starts a nuclear war.

At which point yes, I do think our nuclear allies would respond appropriately.

No, he can definitely wipe us out with just chemical weapons. Lest we forget they don't actually give a #### about the land here, they are after the resources, most of which are up north. Wiping out everything in the major population centers and then picking off the rest won't be hard (especially since the rest is made up of a lot of Maple MAGA), and leaves the resources mostly unaffected. Maybe we'd be able to strike back, but even if we wiped out the entire East Coast there (highly unlikely), that would probably be welcomed by MAGA cause that would be a lot of the actual internal resistance we'd destroy.

God this conversation sucks lol. Lets just hope the ####er dies already.

[activeStick]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

I don't even think a land invasion is realistic, let alone bombing.

It will be something way more sinister. Mock elections and collaborators, with the military invited in to defend or some bull ####, if it occurs.

Yep. It'll be taken from the CIA playbook they've used in countless other countries before to put in place someone they approve of who works for America. Pump American propoganda into the country, fund local groups to protest against their government, hope and wait for that government to take action against them while using American media to frame the government response as heavy-handed and "undemocratic" to build support from American citizens and western allies. Intervene at the right time and pillage anything of value in that soverign country for America and only America. Be celebrated by western allies as heroes who brought freedom to a people that were suffering. Tale as old as time.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

No, he can definitely wipe us out with just chemical weapons. Lest we forget they don't actually give a #### about the land here, they are after the resources, most of which are up north. Wiping out everything in the major population centers and then picking off the rest won't be hard (especially since the rest is made up of a lot of Maple MAGA), and leaves the resources mostly unaffected. Maybe we'd be able to strike back, but even if we wiped out the entire East Coast there (highly unlikely), that would probably be welcomed by MAGA cause that would be a lot of the actual internal resistance we'd destroy.

God this conversation sucks lol. Lets just hope the ####er dies already.

There is no way for Donald Trump to murder the entire population of Canada without dying himself.

I am secure in that, at least.

[Senator Clay Davis]

I'm sure 10 years ago you were secure in the thought a US invasion of Canada could only be the plot of some ####ty B-movie. But here we are.