You're viewing a single thread.
-
It will be a shit show until Canada and the rest of the western world work out agreements independent of the US.
-
Isolating a fascist power with the strongest military in the world doesn't work. Eventually they work up the balls to use it.
Every nation should be prepared for what happens when the purge of the US military and government is complete and only loyalists hold power.
-
Given that there are no ideal moves in any direction, I feel that standing up to the bully is the only option on the table. They failed to do that in 1939.
-
It is still the right thing to do. As you say, we just all need to be prepared for it.
-
And another thing. Its America's job to police this mess, they installed him either directly or indirectly. The rest of the world didn't ask or vote for this dangerous toddler.
-
There are plenty of the dead who weren't responsible for what killed them.
-
I'm not sure what to make of that in context. Do you mean that we should just suck it up?
-
Suck up the reality that counting on Americans to handle Trump isn't a plan, it's a hope.
-
Don't fret... I have absolutely no expectations that Americans can pull out of this power dive. I just hope that most of the damage will be self inflicted.
-
-
-
-
-
What happens if a NATO country Attack another NATO country?
-
No joke, I can see UK and France offering nuclear retaliation response promise to Canada, outside of NATO. I think trump really is dumb enough to start real war with for example Canada. NATO is dead, rest of the west needs to make similar protection agreements without USA, besides NATO , for when shit really hits the fan (I think it will, it's a matter of when, not if).
-
Well, article 5 doesn't apply then. Other agreements may still apply.
-
Of course it applies! Where are you getting that it doesn't from?
-
From article 5 from the NATO treaty actually. It states that it applies to attacks from external actors, i.e. non-members.
Edit: the article or nato treaty doesn't state it that explicitly actually. But a quick google show that it's at least the consensus interpretation
-
it states that it applies to attacks from external actors, i.e. non-members
Which America would be if they leave NATO...
-
It has been hotly debated, mostly in regards to Greece and Türkiye, who have been at each other's throats for decades. In that case, the aggressor likely wouldn't be obvious and both are likely to claim article 5. Their relations to other NATO members are also a lot more ambiguous, some favoring one, some the other.
In the case of a rogue USA attacking Canada, or Denmark, I believe the case would be a lot clearer.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Over here in the EU we still need gas and oil. I'd much rather import it from Canada than from Qatar or some other middle eastern dictatorship.
-
As a Canadian I agree but that is difficult. Canada is so integrated with the US that they basically refine all of our crude. Canadian crude is unlike crude from anywhere else and has to be refined a certain way. So we have to build refineries or you do, that can handle our capacity. That takes time and certainly won't be instantaneous. It's not like we can just divert.
-
Yeah plus the transport would be much more expensive. But I guess building your own refineries will give much more flexibility for the future...
-
-
-
We're already doing that. EVERYBODY is doing that. every western nation is doing their best to cut America out of their trading deals. Donnie has seriously fucked America over.
-
that's sure to bring down the price of eggs, right? right?
-
-
They should call it "The Free World Agreement".
-