Trump 2nd term prediction thread

Yes i can point you to american citizens easily being worse off if the USA goes to war with China.

Supply chain collapse, high chance of conscription, materially worse life conditions, huge sums of money necessary to fight that war , either rationing of most staples or insane inflation (or both) and so on.

While taking the Panama canal wouldn't have those outcomes. You just take it, Panama sucks it up, ships trading with the USA have preferential treatment, american citizens are better off.

OR even better, you credibly threaten that and you get your preferential treatment from a Panama that has to bend the knee otherwise you simply take what you want, and no fires are shot and your citizens gain.

How, again, is that bad for americans?

nice goal shifting here mate.

The problem isn't is it bad for american citizens.
Man you are incredible.

Karen likes posting pictures too.

What could possibly go wrong if American attacks a sovereign nation to take back something we legally gave them? Really?

Lucy is just carrying on in the proud tradition of Ronny Reagan, George H.W. and the CIA; these guys have never once seen a Central/South American nation they don't desperately wish to plunder.

Pointing out problems with the capitalist, imperialist, genocide-funding party known as the Democratic Party is HARDLY some kind of reactionary or counter-revolutionary thought. On the contrary...

Once in while maybe.
When it's the only response and way of communication then your motives are very questionnable.

eh? i asked you why it is bad for americans if the military take the panama canal, you answered "how would you answer if the military take X", i answered for a case where it would be bad for americans.

Man the role of elected politicians is literally strictly only to do whatever they can within the constitution to improve the lives of citizens, there is no other moral constrain or consideration allowed.

It should actually be treasonous to even consider something else

Whole conversation was pointing out Trump expansionnist dreams compared to rest of the world.
I'm done with you, you are unsufferable.

It's really amazing that an incompetent conman can say something outrageously stupid and the entire maga verse starts cheering and dancing in support.

Yes and i asked you why you think taking the panama canal was a bad idea *for american citizens*, and you didn't answer

How comes you didn't ask if taking greenland or canada was a bad idea?
I can't help you if you don't see why randomly invading coutries is a bad idea.

Now it seems like your 5 year old logic is trying to tell us that USA can invade almost any country they want (and some without resistance according to you), no **** sherlock, of course they can take down lot of countries, absolutely no one id arguing against that.

That you don't see why it's bad is absolutely unreal.

Afaik he didn't say to "take canada", he just trolled canada to have a good laugh.

Greenland is on the map and should be an interesting conversation, ofc a lot will depend on details. But buying off the very small population to vote for annexation shouldn't be hard, and certainly much cheaper than using the militaries. It's an allied country though , so it shouldn't be taken by force.

My logic is that the USA should be much more transparently imperialistic because *it can* , in a surgical way that benefits american citizens (and hopefully allied countries as well), because history didn't end and it's time the american empire comes back in full force and take the reins of the world again.

Destroy the "arc of history", go back to a non-hypocritical "might is right" equilibrium, profit.

Put that trillion per year in defense spending to work for the benefit of americans (and allies) , make the west great again

Is this really so hard for you to grasp? Taking territory by force tends to turn countries into pariah states and compromises their ability to exert regional or global influence through more traditional means.

You save money with current arrangements, you don't want to pay pensions and healthcare of an annexed italy believe me.

But i mean if that's your preference please come and take us , i would love to have the federal constitution instead of our garbage marxist one

Only because we pushed for that idea , we (the west) decide what makes a country a pariah, we make the rules.

Traditional means are force, that's what worked for all of history.

Then in the last very few decades an effeminated attempt to "end history" was tried, with disastrous results. Weakening of western influence, a Russia that felt empowered to just take what it wants, a China that still uses old methods because they work.

There is no inherent arc of history, we can easily go back to when it was normal for the USA to just take puerto rico because it was there.

did the USA become a pariah state because they took puerto rico? no.

Even better, take out Italy, turn iit into a garbage dumpster and let the natives (luciom and his friends ) take care of the garbage.
Luciom and his friends shouldn't be allowed on the motherland though, as they are too poor for american taste.
Billionaires cannot allow poor people like Luciom to live in the same place, that would be distatefull.

I think Luciom should totally fight for this future.

It's interesting how your evil leftist soul comes out when you try to "counter" actual opinions you dislike. It's akin to when the "people who cared about public health" threw parties every time a prominent antivaxer died of covid.

Revealed preferences i guess.

Topic is use your power to your own benefit, your counter "tongue in cheek" example is random destruction of some place out of spite. That's your soul deep inside, i get it. Must be truly deep of hatred with humanity to be as leftist as you.

Rococo talks like a normal person, with the normal technocratic counter of "well going back to imperialism could have pushbacks in the international communities", and i can discuss with him that there can't be any significant pushback if the USA are the emperial power because you can't push back the USA militaries basically and you are better off allying with them whatever they want to do (if they let you).

You do what? i say "take the panamal canal, it's a profitable form of imperialism to do so", and i went through why it's profitable, and you go "let's take italy and dump garbage there" as if that was profitable to do (hint: it isn't), and also "luciom shouldn't be allowed in the mainland anyway" because "i am poor" (??) when the whole of italy has a slightly higher per capita gdp than puerto rico, with the north much higher of course (and i am from the north).

You aren't even capable of rational thinking, it's all just toxic poison to you even having to debate with someone who is *actually* rightwing but with an IQ higher than 100.

You can only take yourself to lol at playbig conspiracies or some IQ 70 MAGA claim, you cannot comprehend or accept there are smart educated people who have values that are utterly different from yours, and... they just won the elections in the USA.

I don't know if your reference to the end of history is a reference to Francis Fukuyama, but if so, I would say that you have drawn the wrong conclusions. Also, Fukuyama was far from the first person to speculate that human civilization had reached the end of history, at least in terms of a system of organization and governance.

This isn't a particularly good example. First, the U.S. took control of Puerto Rico 125 years ago. What made a country a pariah state 125 years ago is different than what makes a country a pariah state now. Second, the U.S. took control of PR by virtue of the Treaty of Paris, which ended the Spanish-American war. The Spanish-American War did not start because the U.S. invaded Puerto Rico.

I'm not sure why the bolded is technocratic.

I am referencing the leftist bad reading of Fukuyama yes, which basically operated within the assumption that history in the sense of major wars among important countries and territorial shifts and so on where permanently in the past and the way to keep them there was on being super-nice guys worldwide and it would all work out for the best.

That isn't what he said, he isn't regarded as a leftist, and I don't think that's what leftists thought he said. But OK.