paxamericana

I can’t understand your Canadian language over my twelve carrier battle group.

The same hammer blow to Canada if you anti American extremist decide to make a martyr of yourselves. There is no 72 Tim Horton awaiting you in heaven.

Of course we are. What did you think America first meant!? The Monroe Doctrine never went away. It’s part of our strategic thinking. Your country is too large for you to defend, you all know that, that’s why you don’t even try, you don’t have a military, it’s the American that protected your land. That’s why we consider Canada our’s. Culturally, there isn’t a difference between our two population so Trump is offering you anti-American Canuck a political vote. To us, you’re all a petulant little brother that doesn’t know when to give up.

Is this the libertarian version of event? The do nothing party because “muh roads”? Last I checked, the only Canadian who could do math ,Chrystia Freeland resigned. She saw the same math problem I described above. Canada is aging into obsolescence. The rest of these Anti-American Canucks are just delusional. So hate America all you want but there is no Canada without some form of American support from now and until the future. Trump is offering you, the crazies, a vote. I suggest take the man on the offer. The rest of us American are not that politely inclined.

Did you missed the War on Terror? Do you think terrorism would scare us? If anything that would hasten public support against your insurgency. It may be violent but short lived. So go ahead, blow up a base of your choice, the hammer will just come down harder. America is in a period of rest and refit from fighting terrorists for the last 20 years. Anything you're planning has already been met with and handled with by our millitary. We wrote the book on counter insurgency. That was done half a world away. Doing it at our door step 9/11 style for a second time... well good luck to the fool who think they can try. You don't undestand, Canadian don't have any option in the matter. Canada is our's. Your sons and daughter don't want to live and work in Canada, they come to America. You're all just old and obsolete, national dissolution is coming, even without American involvement, Trudeu knows that. He fled because he knows the truth.

You're all missing the point. Your demographic is not sustainable and you no longer have a working age population to sustain your welfare state. If anything, Trump is a moderate. The monroe doctrine never went away. There are plenty of American who see Canda as right fully ours (America's) . Your population is that of one of our state and your trade is more with American than between yourselves . It would be child's play to take over Canada; economically, strategically and millitarily. ( We already acomplished 2 out of the 3. ). It would begin with Alberta and Saskatchewan. Cut canda in two and the rest is just divide and conquer. There is no international rescue. America out guns the entire World. Help will not come to your aid, we're coming for you. The only reason why we have not invaded Canada is because for the past two century there was little vallue in the norther climate. But global warming is changing the calculus. Best believe there is already a cost benefit analysis being done on Canada and it's not to your benefit.

Well if defense of the artic ever became an issue, I'm sure Canada could wring out some concession from the American. Probably less tarrif on your milk in exchange of US millitary access to some of your northern ports.

Well ever since Uncle sam defeated the soviet Canada became irrelevant. There's a potential for round two. I'll post about it in another post. Long story short it has to do with the chinese ambition in the artic.

I don't disagree with the premise of your statements. HOWEVER, be that as it may, Americans again aren't willing to shall we say shoulder the burden of maintaining the alliance to the degree that it has since the cold war. Especially now that nato members are wealthy themselves. And that a major security threat significant in magnitude to the soviets is absent. The long term isolationist consequence will be America getting drag into another world war with the potential esscalation to nukes. (Or nuclear proliferation and one or a few going off more likely) Now there has been a push by the Globalist wing of the pentagon to point that attention to starting with Obama and his piviot to asia. Specifically China, and establish a pseudo Asiatic version of nato in ASEAN countries like Japan taiwan south korea phillipines and vietnam. I think this in the long term is unfounded due to China's collasping demographic and terrible geography. China can de-industrialize in a matter of months wiping out half of the population. They can't even produce enough food to maintain their population wihtout fertilizer input from abroad. India also suffer from terrible geogrpahy, lacking navigable rivers and is mountanous making it difficult for infrastucture development. Populous but always poor. Yes churchill put bluntly "There is only one thing worse than fighting with allies, and that is fighting without them"

Mmmhmmm Russia cares about the nutritious well being of subsaharan africa that much huh? And they decided to stop threatening the west with nukes out of the kindness of their hearts or because they're scared of the big bad europeans and canadian millitary? I guess the decreased in population from most of the modern world doesn't count or something. The universial trend is once you industrialized adults have less kids. Meaning if you moved from the farm where children was free labor to the cities, they become expensive habits and adults aren't stupid. So we have less of them. This is a universial trend with only one Exception and that's Israel. They see population growth as a religious duty coming out of world war 2. America and by exstension, Americans, are not putting up with the free loaders anymore. Its become a political force on its own with both parties. The international community should wake up and realize that America doesn't need them and is already repositioning their trade/industrial policies to reflect that. https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/30/politics/europe-us-relationship-china-intl/index.html

I'll simply say this, the population demographics of the world (with a few notable exception, America being one) does not support a growth base economic model simply because the population is shrinking. There is no economic incentive to protect the "trade" route shall we say. The US isn't stupid, they know this will lead to major instability and possibly a war. That is why they aren't stopping investment into their millitary. They're preparing for a world that's going to break down interms of trade as well as physical security I would say. Geographically, America is a continental sized island and well insulated from the coming break down of world order. We can source most and with in easy reach all of what we need to produce goods for ourselves. While still boasting a young enough population to support it in the first place.

So I believe you're taking into account export which is incorrect. The goods that america NEED shall we say, is import. Export are of either finished industrial product/machinery or raw material the offshore manufacturer need to sell back to the US. In a isolationist america this is unnecesarry as supply chain can aquire the basic material locally and manufacture locally. So there is a big push by both the Trump and Biden administration to build out America's energy sector both oil and green tech. This makes america the cheapest in term of unsubsidized electricity. This inturn will produce cheap input cost for manufacturing. As manufacturer are moving assembly plants closer to the US. While you could argue that mexico can't replace china completely, there is also a southeast asia divestment out of china and into ASEAN countries. Mexico is dependent upon us trade and so is canada FYI as a percentage of their GDP. Again you should look at import specifically. This point is moot however as the market is wholeheartedly in US. I will say that you could view mexico and canada and all of south america as an extension of the United state visa vi the monroe donctrine. Again courtesy of the United States Navy.

But represent them he did. Trump is a manifestation of this post cold war era America. We're tired of holding up the roof while no longer recieving any security benefits. At the expense of American labor I might add. The liberal view of Trump is superfical in my observation. They sort of missed the tree for the forest. And if you think this is a unique problem for half of america you've no idea what Clinton,Bush,Obama did. They all in their own way disengaged from the rest of the world. For the above stated reason ofcourse.

We don't trade with much of the world actually. And most of that internaitonal trade is done locally with Mexico and Canada accounting for a mere maybe 8% GDP? Out of that 8, 2-3% is with China. https://www.nber.org/digest/apr18/how-large-are-us-economys-gains-trade Take a deep dive into the type of infrastructure America is building. See if any of that still requires china. I'll give you the short version nope. Its not out of national security standpoint either, its simply economics, due to china againg population their labor cost has risen greatly since the early 2000s. While quality of labor still remains poor. It makes more sense to invest into supply chain that are closer to home. Mexican labor is now cheaper than china and higher skilled FYI.

I think a missing component in this discussion is geography. American security gaurantee is what allowed for countries to circumvent their basic geographical limitation, countries that lacked raw resources to grow and sell product had unhindered access guaranteed by the American. Without the guarantor, basic geographical limit will force countries to secure their own trade route and compete over natural resources as was the reason for both world war.