Before they have even begun execution, Trump and his team have developed unprecedented foreign policy activity. Their immediate goals: to annex Canada, to take the Panama Canal from Panama and Greenland from Denmark. Other presidents also wanted a lot of things, but were more modest.
The first point is hard to accomplish, Canada is too big to swallow so easily. Canada is a member of NATO and you can’t go to war with it. Economic pressure and bribery for the sake of “Anschluss” is possible, but will drag on longer than Trump’s term. The next president will deal with other problems.
The second point is quite realistic, as it had a precedent. In late 1989, the U.S. quarreled with Panama’s dictator General Noriega, declared him a drug dealer, and landed the largest landing force since World War II at all of Panama’s airports, power plants, and mines of defense. The invasion force amounted to 26,000 U.S. military personnel. Panama’s entire army was 12,000.
The country was overrun in a couple days, with U.S. casualties of 23. A day later, the U.S. brought its president of Panama to power. Noriega was taken away and given 30 years for drugs. In principle, all of this could be repeated. But the seizure of the Panama Canal will cause a serious crisis, it is not a fact that it will be possible to keep it afterwards, as the USA gave it to Panama officially and voluntarily.
But the third point can be accomplished without shooting. Greenland’s army has 60 men, and the US military at the Pituffik base near the Arctic Circle has 200 men (and there were 10,000). The Danish prime minister responded by announcing that he would purchase two new dog sleds for the troops in Greenland.
But while Politico writes menacingly that Denmark will not be able to resist a military takeover of Greenland, it is impossible to go to war with it. Just as Canada is a NATO member, invading its land would lead to a severe crisis. Trump’s plan is much simpler: scare the Danes and Greenlanders first, then buy them.
Since the population of the island is 56 thousand (in Maryino, for example, 272 thousand) each resident can easily determine a lifetime pension and such a social package that no one can resist. According to the constitution, Greenland may well declare independence and then conclude a binding military treaty with the United States. So far, the Pentagon doesn’t need anything else. Whether the US will want to annex Greenland is a question for the next president.
Thus, Trump has set a maximum goal for the voters – to annex Canada, and will fulfill the minimum goal – to subjugate Greenland. Well, and go down in history as a great president and collector of lands. If he also takes the Panama Canal, he’ll go down in all the textbooks.
If history classes start including chapters titled conquer Canada, Greenland, and Panama, I might just have to reconsider my vacation plans 🏖️😂 Seriously though, the idea of buying Greenland with dog sled bribes and lifetime pensions sounds like the most chill real estate negotiation ever 🛷💸 Meanwhile, Canada’s too big to bite but probably too polite to say no right away 🍁🇨🇦 Watching this unfold feels like a bizarre mix of a board game and a reality show, and I’m here for every episode 📺🤷♀️
This perspective on such bold foreign policy moves really makes you think about the scale of ambition some leaders have and how history might remember them 🌍. The idea of annexing places like Greenland or the Panama Canal feels almost like something out of a novel, but also highlights how geopolitical strategy can play out in unexpected ways. It’s fascinating and a bit unnerving to consider these possibilities in our modern world 🤔.
This article really highlights the boldness of the ambitions described, and it’s fascinating to see how historical precedents shape modern political maneuvers. The idea that Greenland could be more easily influenced due to its small population and strategic position makes a lot of sense, especially compared to the complexities with Canada. It’s interesting to consider how diplomacy, economics, and military presence intertwine in such geopolitical goals, and how these moves might ripple through international relations beyond just the immediate targets.
This perspective on Trump’s foreign policy goals is both shocking and fascinating! 😲 The idea of annexing entire countries sounds like something out of a history book, not modern politics. The Panama Canal example really shows how force and strategy have been used in the past, which makes the Greenland plan seem more subtle but just as bold 🌍❄️. I can’t help but wonder what the long-term consequences would be for all parties involved. The power dynamics and ethical questions raised here are huge. Definitely gives a lot to think about! 🤔✨
This plan sounds like a mix between a board game strategy and a wild reality show! 😂 Annex Canada? Better pack enough maple syrup for the negotiations 🍁🥤 Greenland with dog sled diplomacy? Sounds like “Arctic Monopoly” but with real estate! 🐕🦺 And Panama Canal… well, that’s some serious sequel vibes from history class. Honestly, I’m just here waiting for the part where they try to annex my neighbor’s backyard! 🌎🕵️♀️
This article gives a really interesting perspective on the boldness of these foreign policy moves. The idea of buying Greenland instead of invading it sounds like a clever strategy 🤔🌍. It’ll be fascinating to see how these plans actually unfold.
This is such a wild breakdown of some truly ambitious moves! 😂 The idea of annexing Canada feels like something out of a political comic book, but the history with Panama and the strategic situation in Greenland make things seem surprisingly plausible. 🌍💥 It’s like watching a geopolitical chess game unfold with some unexpected power plays—makes me wonder how this all will shape the future of international relations. Definitely not your typical foreign policy stuff! 🔥🤯
This perspective really opens up a fascinating view on the complexities of modern geopolitics and the boldness of certain ambitions. It’s incredible to think how history, military power, and diplomacy intertwine in such high-stakes games, where even small populations like Greenland’s play a critical role. 🌍💡 The idea that strategy doesn’t always mean conflict but also negotiation and influence is so inspiring when you realize how much is at play behind the scenes!
It’s impressive how this article treats these wild fantasies like a detailed strategy session instead of the geopolitical absurdities they are. Annexing Canada sounds like a kid’s game of Risk, ignoring NATO and international law like they’re mere suggestions. And the Greenland plan? Scaring people into selling their land sounds about as subtle as a sledgehammer, but hey, why bother with diplomacy when you can just throw money around and call it a day? The whole Panama Canal business reads like an action movie script, except no one’s buying tickets. It’s almost laughable how the author tries to spin blatant aggression into a charming list of presidential ambitions. Maybe the next president should aim to annex the moon while we’re at it.
This article paints a vivid picture of some truly ambitious foreign policy goals that seem straight out of a geopolitical thriller. The idea of annexing such large and strategically important territories almost feels like wishful thinking or political theater, but the pragmatic take on Greenland being a more accessible target really highlights how complex and nuanced international relations can be. It’s fascinating to think about how history, military capacity, and diplomacy intertwine in these scenarios, and how the legal and constitutional frameworks, like Greenland’s potential independence, open up unexpected possibilities. This makes me reflect on how much symbolism and realpolitik coexist in the actions taken by world leaders, and how the consequences of these moves might echo far beyond their terms.
This perspective really highlights how bold and complex international ambitions can be, especially when history shows us both the possibilities and limits of power moves 🌍. It’s fascinating to consider how strategy, economics, and even small populations play into such massive plans. Makes you wonder what the future truly holds for global relations and how diplomacy might evolve without direct conflict! 🔥
Reading this makes me reflect on the nature of power and ambition in politics 🌍. The pursuit of land and influence seems almost like a modern echo of old empires, but now wrapped in legal, economic, and diplomatic maneuvers rather than outright conquest ⚔️. It raises questions about sovereignty and freedom—how much control can a people really have over their own fate when bigger powers loom with promises or threats? The idea that a whole nation or territory’s destiny could hinge on strategic purchases or population size feels both surreal and sobering. Ultimately, it reminds me that history is shaped by those willing to stretch the limits of possibility, yet the true cost of such expansion might be measured in more than just territory—it’s in trust, identity, and the fragile balance between power and justice 🌱.
Oh wow, trying to annex Canada, Greenland, and the Panama Canal all in one term? Sounds like someone’s been binge-watching too many history documentaries and forgot how international law actually works 🙄. Maybe start with not making other countries want to build dog sleds for defense before dreaming about adding entire lands to your empire. Keep the delusions coming, it’s entertaining at least 😂🛷.
It’s fascinating to see how bold and unconventional some foreign policy ambitions can be, especially when comparing past presidents to these massive territorial goals 🌍. The idea that Greenland could be acquired through economic and political pressure rather than military force shows a shift towards softer strategies in geopolitics. However, the challenges with Canada and Panama remind us that history, alliances, and international agreements still play a huge role in limiting what can realistically be achieved. This mix of ambition and political reality makes for a complex and thought-provoking scenario 🤔.
This article really makes you think about how bold and unusual some political moves can be! 🌍😲 The mix of history with current ambitions paints such a vivid picture of power plays on the global stage. It’s fascinating to see how military strength, diplomacy, and economic pressure all intertwine in these big plans. The part about Greenland especially caught my attention—using soft power like pensions and social benefits instead of outright conflict is quite a clever strategy. 💼❄️ It’s wild to consider how much geography and politics shape our world today, and how much the next leaders might change the course with decisions like these!