Feb 09, 2017, 13:04 pm
(Feb 09, 2017, 09:53 am)joew771 Wrote: First of all I have to say that I think you are totally insane or at least severly intellectually handicapped.You have much to learn, padawan. Insults don't work against the wise.
This only proves you have no real arguments or facts to back them up.
Quote:The U.S. could most certainly conquer Canada or Mexico if we wanted to, quite easily. I'm sure France and a few others would bitch about it, but they would shut up before too long. And saying Trump would lose something because of that is sort of silly, since it would obviously be a U.S. victory. And most of America would be probably be happy to not have to listen to the bitching of those two countries. Especially since Canada would be a nothing useless country without the U.S. in the first place. I find it laughable that Canada even tries to have it's own opinion, since they rely 100% on the U.S. to do anything at all.Obviously you have never enlisted in the army, as your ignorance shows no bounds.
I already said the governments could be defeated and the inevitable insurgencies couldn't.
Apparently you didn't get the memo that we have more rifle-toting hunters and vets than
the U.S. has active troops, that many of those troops have Canadian/Mexican connections,
and we have always outnumbered you one to ten since we burned the white house down.
Also, don't forget we have winter fighting experience and Mexico is comfortable in deserts.
Your opinion of Canada/NATO proves you have no facts or knowledge relevant to the point.
NATO, for example, cannot stand idly by if anyone attacks Canada; so Trump would have
to deal with the British air force, navy [and nukes] and other EU forces on the east coast
while also taking hits by Australian/NZ air forces and navies on the west coast.
Add Mexico to the mix and Trump would have four fronts, badly outnumbered forces and
no friends anywhere. That means dwindling oil reserves, no overseas trade and no backup.
In oil alone the U.S. has only a few months of strategic reserves and not enough production
to fight a continental siege. Rationing would have you starving in the cold in one season.
Russia and China would join in too, for the chance of stopping Trump.
In such a pressure-cooker impeachment is inevitable, if not outright assassination.
That would stop Trump for sure.
Quote:And of course Trump or any president has to rely on congress and the courts. That is the basis of our government. To say that his executive branch is taking over america is a foolish statement, and unfounded by any sort of reality. We in this country have 3 branches, the executive, the judicial and the legislative. If any one of them starts acting like total dickholes, the other 2 will stop them, that's the nature of our constituition.Have you forgotten that the worst of the far-right have gotten control of the executive
and the legislative branches, have started creating a conservative majority in the SCOTUS
and Trump is already threatening to retaliate against judges who rule against his desires?
Can you name a president who actually threatened judges? Third-world dictators, maybe?
Quote:That's why in the past week that the judicial (the court) has stopped the executive (President Trump) from enacting his executive order.Threats against the courts have begun while Congress and Senate are proving their loyalty to Trump.
If we lived in some sort of dictatorship that wouldn't have happened, but it did. The Courts said 'Hey executive branch' you did something you weren't supposed to do and stopped them.
And now the courts and possibly congress and the senate (the legislative branch) will sort it all out.
One court stood up to Trump, he tweets utter contempt and now one appeals court considers his
appeal while nobody is nailing him for contempt. The intimidation has begun and is already working.
If this insane behavior by the far-right continues there will be war; but it will be a civil war to stop Trump.