His intention? It will be the “Riviera of the Middle East.”
One obstacle: no neighboring country wants to take all of those Palestinians.
If only there was an immense amount of land with nobody living there.
Now I’m starting to see how his plan is coming together!
Tourist areas do really well with people launching rockets into them.
Netanyahu said Trump is “think outside the box.” I say he’s thinking outside the brain. Using the words ‘brain’ and ‘thinking’ very loosely of course.
The last 50 years of doing nothing really yielded results. How dare they consider something new!
This something new would make “Veetnaaam” (LBJ’s pronunciation) and Iraq 2 look like brilliant moves by comparison. What the fuck do we want with Gaza anyway? Bibi’s shit eating grin betrayed how happy he would be to dump it on someone else.
You Trumpers are just imbecilic sheep who will go along with whatever goofiness Leader’s addled brain can concoct.
I agree completely with your whole post, Bill DeeCee, and particularly your last sentence. That is what makes the Trumps so dangerous, unfortunately. IMO, anyway.
I wouldn’t consider US troops occupying the Middle East a new idea.
When we acquire Greenland or Canada maybe but I doubt that LeOrange would want all those Palestinians to become American Citizens
You’re never acquiring Canada. This is the ranting of an idiot.
I’d like to see the USA become the 11th province.
Kidding aside, if Canada were the 51st state, it would get something like 60 electoral votes and 50+ members in the House of Representatives. I’m not sure Trump has thought through what that would mean for the conservative movement.
Canada would get two electoral votes. That’s in the Constitution! And maybe two or three Representatives. They’d ignore that part of the Constitution. You have to get over the idea that rules mean anything to the Trumpistas. Trump didn’t become….well, Trump, by obeying the rules. Except when the rules are in his favor. Then he forces other people to obey them.
Expect to see a lot a Democratic districts re-apportioned out existence now that they control the census records.
I think you’re thinking of Senators. Canada would get only two of those if it became a single state
In electoral votes and Representatives it would get about the same as California.
Practically speaking, Canada almost certainly would not join as a single U.S. state. It simply is too large and diverse, with 10 existing provinces each with their own laws. (In Canada, provincial law covers a lot more jurisdictionally than state law in the U.S.) Ontario on its own would be the 5th most populous U.S. state and the 2nd largest geographically, after Alaska, putting aside the question of Quebec, and would absolutely demand to be its own U.S. state. Practically speaking, we would be talking about the creation of 4-6 new states in the U.S., which would cause a lot of political complications at the U.S. Senate level and beyond. And speaking of Quebec, I don’t think that it would ever voluntarily join the United States under any conditions. So, unless its joining was militarily enforced, it would not just be a matter of amalgamating Canada under the U.S., but also, at the same time, negotiating the separation of Quebec from the soon-to-disappear Canada or from the newly-constituted amalgamated U.S. The legal and practical headaches involved in that would be huge (Canada almost had to face that before – and may yet face it again – and let me tell you it would be technically complicated and generate huge political controversy).
And these are just a few of the many, many issues that would have to be resolved….
Yes, Scoop, I was thinking of senators. I am never so dumb as when I am trying to be smart.
It is clear that his goal with his statement was to overthrow Trudeau and elect Pierre Poilievre. He is also using tariffs as a basis for negotiations.
It is a bit surprising to me how quickly he gets to the point. The next step will be to weaken the DXY and reduce the price of crude oil. It will be an interesting battle with the FED, interest rate cuts would be essential. However, this will require a balance between tax cuts and tariff increases, because if the inflation situation is not managed well, there will be a huge conflict between the FED and the government. These are interesting times.
I agree that the democratic representation of Canadians in the United States – assuming that such representation would be granted – would upend U.S. politics. Canada obviously has a much smaller population than the United States, but it is not tiny. As a 51st state it would be the most populous state (it surpassed California a couple of years ago) and would fairly be awarded electoral college and House of Representative representation to match. If democratic representation were, however, not granted, there is no chance of acceptance by Canada (not that there would be much of a chance even with representation), and we instead would be talking about the forced creation of a permanent massive vassal by the U.S., which would cause its own considerable problems for your country, politically and administratively, not to mention for Canada. Does the U.S. really want 40 million virulently pissed off people to join the country?
Even assuming there was an actual popular movement in both countries to try to form a union in some form – which there is not, on either side of the border – the number of issues and complications to resolve to achieve that union, beyond those I mentioned above, is enormous (I am a retired constitutional lawyer and I could write an initial list, but it would be pages even in short summary format) and would take much time and effort to sort out. That is not to say it could not potentially be done, but it would take serious proposals, negotiations, and sustained technical, legal and administrative work that would have to be a considerable focus of both countries for some time. I just don’t see the appetite for that in Canada or the United States.
So let’s just stay neighbours. I don’t think either of us actually wants to move in together.
Would Canada really be admitted as one giant state? I’d always though it would be broken into a handful of states — maybe even each province becoming its own state.
Either way, it would be cool.
Who knows? That’s just the way Trump has been positioning it. Of course, this is just mental masturbation. The whole magilla just ain’t happening. Trump can bullshit about it, but even if Canada agreed (they won’t), the sensible conservatives in the USA will realize that they can’t afford to lose all those electoral votes.
In the real world, the Republicans would never agree to ten new states simply because it would permanently reduce their chance of controlling the Senate. If it were admitted as ten states, it would have twenty senators and about 50 Representatives (about 70 electoral votes). If Canada were admitted as a single state, it would have two senators and about 50 Representatives (so about 52 electoral votes).
Canadians would be considered one tenth of a person for determining their representation in Congress. That’s in the Constitution too, if you use some Wite-Out and a Sharpie.
At first I thought that Trump was just trolling, but now I think that he is half-trolling and half-serious. But, even still, it is almost certainly not happening, for reasons discussed.
You’re assuming that Trump aims to have elections or fair elections in the future. Highly doubtful.
I agree.
If your anticipation of the potential end of democracy in the United States is correct, then the U.S., and the rest of the world actually, faces much bigger problems than the Gaza and Canada issues discussed in this thread. I assume that any such move would eventually lead to open conflict within the United States, including potential secession efforts by some red states. Let’s really hope that things are not headed in that direction.
Trump’s line of thinking would be Puerto Rico North. We’d be a territory not a state.
Which would make each of the territories a territory of a territory. Is there even a word for such a thing?
PR has 78 administrative municipalities instead of counties. I imagine every current provincial and territory line would be erased in favour of a similar scheme.
Divide and conquer.
No problem. They’ll never survive the winter.
This is part of Trump’s “stop all the wars” initiative. So, like the (first) coup, it is half-assed unplanned wishful thinking. That’s the light at the end of the tunnel – he’s a moron who can’t do stuff. We’re fine until Elon gets him a Diet Coke and a cheeseburger, sets him down in front of Fox.
I don’t know whether he cleared this plan with President Musk. He may be in for a stern warning.
An immense amount of land with no one living there? Mars
POTUS Elmo would never, ever let a bunch of refugees anywhere near his precious Mars.
Instead of moving the Arabs how about they move the Jews there? If the 1st idea is an option worth considering , so is the second.
Pretty sure neither one is a winning idea.
But …
It’s interesting to speculate what the world would be like if the Jewish WW2 refugees had been granted not Israel or Greenland, but part of the United States to create a new, safe homeland. Let’s say they had been granted (for example) South Dakota.
1) The Middle East would have been far more stable over the past 75 years
2) South Dakota would now be America’s richest, best-educated state, sort of Utah to the nth degree.
Iran and Saudi would still hate each other for being the wrong kind of Muslim.
They’d probably fight a lot more than they do now.
Oh, the magnificence of ‘misdirection’.
Don’t be fooled people, this horseshit is exactly what they want you to focus on – you saturate the media with wild nonsense and do the actual evil stuff quietly in the background. Apparently, even after a decade of Trump, we all still fall for the same old tricks…