Donald Trump plans US - Panama war in 2025

[Jamiet99uk]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98l9wj67jgo

[flash2015]

That wasn't on my Trump presidency bingo card!

However, I suspect this is all just bluster to get a better deal on shipping rates...so he can claim he is fighting inflation on the price of imports he is slapping tariffs on.

[kingofthepirates]

HA! This is absolute gold, but I’d be surprised if he actually did it (invaded Panama) or if much anything of substance came from this ‘threat’.

If he does go through with it though… I’m p sure that’s illegal, so good luck and good riddance to him!

[Jamiet99uk]

HA! This is absolute gold, but I’d be surprised if he actually did it (invaded Panama) or if much anything of substance came from this ‘threat’.

If he does go through with it though… I’m p sure that’s illegal, so good luck and good riddance to him!

Donald Trump does not recognise international law.

[Octavious]

I'm not seeing anything in that link that suggests an invasion. Just Trump making it clear that he's not happy with the current state of affairs as part of a negotiation.

It'll all be forgotten when he buys Greenland

[flash2015]

I am more interested in the Greenland thing.

I can't understand the opposition. Do the Innuit even have a Casino yet??? Don't worry, once the USA takes over Trump can build that!

Think of the Northern Summer Skiing opportunities. Who wants to schlepp all the way to NZ just to ski? Or go the the fake snow standing room only ski "hills" of Australia? And Greenland could offer 24 hour skiing too!!!

California has "Burning Man". Greenland could have "Freezing Man"!!! The opportunities are endless.

And even better if the US can get Greenland, perhaps it could be used to bring Canada on board. We could offer Greenland to the Great State of Canada - who would turn that down?

MGGA!

[Octavious]

The population of Greenland is about 60,000 or so isn't it? Offer every single one of them a million dollars if they agree and then suggest it's put to a vote. The locals have no great affection for Denmark for the most part, and it will be hard for Copenhagen to hold on if the population of their American island overwhelmingly demand to be part of America

[kingofthepirates]

Offer every single one of them a million dollars if they agree

So um how easy is it to move to there?

[Jamiet99uk]

The locals have no great affection for Denmark for the most part.

This is true I believe; the general view of Denmark is of an abusive colonial power which spent much of the 20th Century trying to destroy the native culture.

[Crazy Anglican]

If he does go through with it though… I’m p sure that’s illegal, so good luck and good riddance to him!

Supreme Court Justices say What?

[Octavious]

If he does go through with it though… I’m p sure that’s illegal, so good luck and good riddance to him!

Supreme Court Justices say What?

I very much doubt that Panama is a strong left vs right issue, and the Justices of the Supreme Court have no specific loyalty to Trump regardless of where their own views lie.

An invasion is not going to happen. There will be no American version of the Suez crisis. All there is to see is Trump letting Panama know that they're in his thoughts and that he's not best pleased. This gives them a few weeks to think about all the actions Trump might consider taking when he becomes President, so that when he makes a relatively modest proposal it comes as a relief.

All of this is about China. The Chinese have been investing heavily in Panama and America is getting nervous that squatters are moving in to their central American holiday home. Same with Greenland. America has always wanted Greenland, but have been comfortable enough with the status quo. Now they're sniffing the air and there's a faint whiff of Greenland independence with friendly neighbourhood Chinese support blowing on the wind. That is the disaster the Yanks are terrified of.

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

I very much doubt that Panama is a strong left vs right issue,

Only one party is talking about invading Panama.

...and the Justices of the Supreme Court have no specific loyalty to Trump regardless of where their own views lie.

The US SC seems to have notoriously partisan appointments. Justices don't need ongoing fealty to the President because they were selected as ideologues who are almost certain to represent the appointing administration's worldview.

[CaptainFritz28]

I think it's funny that it seems that some people, and even some people here, really think that Trump even has the ability to invade Panama, or even that that's his intent.

[Jamiet99uk]

I think it's funny that it seems that some people, and even some people here, really think that Trump even has the ability to invade Panama, or even that that's his intent.

The USA has the ability to do it, in terms of its ability to project military power. It's pretty obvious he's not going to actually do it. Like many of Trump's statements, it's an idle threat, just like his claim Mexico was going to pay for the construction of a wall. Not to mention the things that just happened in Sweden.

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

I think it's funny that it seems that some people, and even some people here, really think that Trump even has the ability to invade Panama, or even that that's his intent.

I don't think the US is going to invade anyone, which is why Trump's penchant for threatening invasion strikes me as very odd.

The very charitable view that Trump's threats of invasion are an earnest bargaining tactic don't make sense to me. If we all know the US isn't going to invade Panama or wherever else, then what good is making a totally non-credible threat?

[flash2015]

To be fair though, it isn't like the US hasn't done it before (I am old enough to remember it):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_invasion_of_Panama

Trump does have the advantage of the "chaos" element. You can say he won't do it...but are you sure? There are also plenty of measures short of invasion the US can use to hurt Panama. Trump will get something here. Whether it will be something truly meaningful (e.g. it could be just some marginal fee discount for US flagged ships) is another question.

[Octavious]

I very much doubt that Panama is a strong left vs right issue,

Only one party is talking about invading Panama.

...and the Justices of the Supreme Court have no specific loyalty to Trump regardless of where their own views lie.

The US SC seems to have notoriously partisan appointments. Justices don't need ongoing fealty to the President because they were selected as ideologues who are almost certain to represent the appointing administration's worldview.

None of the parties are, in fact, talking about invading Panama. Trump, speaking to other Republicans, said that prices being charged were ridiculous and if the rip-off continues he will demand the canal back. As anyone who has played Diplomacy and made a case for them owning Belgium knows, this is a very long way from actual war. There will be elements in both parties that are more hawkish than others, but I don't think that they are anywhere close to a majority in either party at the moment. In recent history the Democrats have been somewhat more hawkish than the Republicans but I think their enthusiasm has been tempered by reality.

As far as the Justices go, I don't think that they're especially aligned with whatever passes for Trumpian philosophy. His picks seemed geared towards appealing to certain sections of the Republican base, certainly, and they had far less tolerance for progressive fashions than people the Democrats would have preferred, but they are all qualified for the role and I see no evidence to suggest that they will do anything other than act honourably as they see it.

[Crazy Anglican]

If he does go through with it though… I’m p sure that’s illegal, so good luck and good riddance to him!

Supreme Court Justices say What?

I very much doubt that Panama is a strong left vs right issue, and the Justices of the Supreme Court have no specific loyalty to Trump regardless of where their own views lie.

An invasion is not going to happen. There will be no American version of the Suez crisis. All there is to see is Trump letting Panama know that they're in his thoughts and that he's not best pleased. This gives them a few weeks to think about all the actions Trump might consider taking when he becomes President, so that when he makes a relatively modest proposal it comes as a relief.

All of this is about China. The Chinese have been investing heavily in Panama and America is getting nervous that squatters are moving in to their central American holiday home. Same with Greenland. America has always wanted Greenland, but have been comfortable enough with the status quo. Now they're sniffing the air and there's a faint whiff of Greenland independence with friendly neighbourhood Chinese support blowing on the wind. That is the disaster the Yanks are terrified of.

I also highly doubt that the US is about to embark on a round of expansion, it's been roughly 65+ years since the last round of additions to the states. My response was more of an "illegal or not it would certainly fall under the official acts bar set by the Supreme Court for Presidential Immunity last summer and wouldn't result in anybody losing their office."

[Crazy Anglican]

The very charitable view that Trump's threats of invasion are an earnest bargaining tactic don't make sense to me. If we all know the US isn't going to invade Panama or wherever else, then what good is making a totally non-credible threat?

I'd ask who does Trump seem to personally admire on the world stage? In the wake an actual invasion of Ukraine and a seemingly credible threats against Taiwan, not to mention saber rattling of sorts in the Philippines. I don't think totally non-credible is entirely accurate. Like was mentioned earlier, It isn't like it hasn't happened before, and I'm sure they have not forgotten even if most of us have.

[Crazy Anglican]

The very charitable view that Trump's threats of invasion are an earnest bargaining tactic don't make sense to me. If we all know the US isn't going to invade Panama or wherever else, then what good is making a totally non-credible threat?

I'd ask who does Trump seem to personally admire on the world stage? In the wake an actual invasion of Ukraine and a seemingly credible threats against Taiwan, not to mention saber rattling of sorts in the Philippines. I don't think totally non-credible is entirely accurate. Like flash mentioned earlier, It isn't like it hasn't happened before, and I'm sure they have not forgotten even if most of us have.