|
|
|
- Thread starter Monarch Butterfly
- Start date
afransen
Senior Member
That assumes they leave office. It really looks like they aren't planning to do so. They don't expect to be held responsible for the flagrant lawlessness.
Trump 2028 merch is available on their website 
Richard White
Senior Member
Trump 2028 merch is available on their website
Sigh.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
Who’s they?
afransen
Senior Member
Trump and his administration.
Bojaxs
Senior Member
It's interesting how people talk about Trump wanting to roll back America to the 1940's, 50's. Yet some more astute political experts are suggesting that Trump wants to roll America back even further than that. To some kind of modern day version of the late 1800's, early 1900's. I suppose you could call the "William McKinley" era. Post Civil War - Pre WW1.
During this era America was more isolated from the rest of the world, all imports were tariffed, and was engaging in Imperialism, annexing territories like Hawaii, and eye balling Cuba. America believed that they could remain isolated and strong if they continued with annexing neighbouring countries.
During this era America was more isolated from the rest of the world, all imports were tariffed, and was engaging in Imperialism, annexing territories like Hawaii, and eye balling Cuba. America believed that they could remain isolated and strong if they continued with annexing neighbouring countries.
Last edited:
innsertnamehere
Superstar
To be clear I am not condoning this AT ALL, but if Trump was expansionist and had half a brain, he would be aiming at Cuba, not Greenland or Canada.
The US has long ties to Cuba, a large swing-voting cuban demographic which strongly supports US intervention in the country, and the country is under-resourced with few allies. Trump would have a "good" reason in the eyes of the american people too, to "rescue" the country from communism.
But Trump doesn't have two brain cells to rub together, so instead he takes aim at Canada and... Greenland.
The US has long ties to Cuba, a large swing-voting cuban demographic which strongly supports US intervention in the country, and the country is under-resourced with few allies. Trump would have a "good" reason in the eyes of the american people too, to "rescue" the country from communism.
But Trump doesn't have two brain cells to rub together, so instead he takes aim at Canada and... Greenland.
UtakataNoAnnex
Superstar
^...and Panama.
Either way, I am not sure it's the lack of brain cells, rather about his and his stooges' breathtaking abilities to block the brain cells that says this is all a really bad idea. /bleh
Either way, I am not sure it's the lack of brain cells, rather about his and his stooges' breathtaking abilities to block the brain cells that says this is all a really bad idea. /bleh
He is definitely interested in Panama. He mentioned it when he addressed Congress.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
DSCToronto
Superstar
Greenland and Canada have resources that Trump would like to get his grubby hands on. Cuba has not got much to offer (or to be taken). In any case, if one starts annexing neighbours you may as well be Russia!
Northern Light
Superstar
I think Kirsten did a good job trying to be diplomatic, and inoffensive, as her job dictates, while also giving a mainly American audience the Canadian perspective on recent events.
I think the most striking question though was the one about whether Trump influenced the Canadian elections and why Canadians 'picked' Mr. Carney.
That's not really something an apolitical representative of Canada should comment on...
It did occur to me that while the interviewer was aware her job was apolitical, he probably has the U.S. system of Presidentially appointed ambassadors (often overtly partisan, with changes following a U.S. election) in his head.
In Canada, while those appointments do ultimately come before cabinet, they are more commonly career diplomatic appointments, or at least more qualified, and typically these don't align with Canadian elections, but when someone's term comes up (Ambassador's) or when they resign/retire etc.
evandyk
Senior Member
Before Hillman, the previous ambassador was appointed because he was a Liberal activist (David McNaughton), and the three before that were politicians (Gary Doer, Michael Wilson and Frank McKenna). There have been plenty of career diplomats, but also people like Brian Mulroney's Chief of Staff, and Jean Chretien's uncle. I think prior to 1990 it was almost exclusively career diplomats, and hopefully Kirsten Hillman brings along a return to that.
I do think it's much less nakedly political than the US, where literally a big donation to the winning president can get you an ambassadorship. Herschel Walker is now the ambassador to the Bahamas. Ivanka Trump's father-in-law is ambassador to France this time around. Trump Jr's ex-girlfriend is the ambassador to Greece. Newt Gingrich's ex-wife is now in Switzerland. It goes on and on with less famous people whose only accomplishments are giving money to the party.
evandyk
Senior Member
Apparently the ambassador to Italy owns the Houston Rockets and a big chunk of Wynn casinos. The ambassador to the EU is the former president of Carl's Jr. The wikipedia list of appointments is fascinating.