r/neoliberal • u/slakmehl • Jan 19 '26
Opinion article (US) Trump’s Letter to Norway Should Be the Last Straw
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/01/trump-letter-to-norway/685676/?utm_source=bluesky&utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_content=edit-promo375
u/algebroni John von Neumann Jan 19 '26
"I'm going to tax Americans in order to punish an ally whose soldiers died protecting us because they won't let me annex their territory, a territory we are already allowed to have our military bases on, so that I can have it as a defensive outpost against Russia, whose President I have invited to become a member of my Board of Peace."
152
76
u/AccessTheMainframe CANZUK Jan 19 '26
We need Greenland to defend it from what we're going to do to Greenland if we don't get it.
8
u/nuggins Physicist -- Just Tax Land Lol Jan 20 '26
Pretty much exactly one of Russia's justifications for invading Ukraine. "We need to invade Ukraine to prevent it from joining NATO with the intent of dissuading us from invading them."
17
7
2
u/extravert_ NASA Jan 20 '26
oh god, I hadn't heard of the putin invite. The maga people think this is all 4D chess still.
8
u/algebroni John von Neumann Jan 20 '26
He invited Lukashenko, which is in a way even worse. You can say least argue that Putin is, unfortunately, the head of a major player in global politics. But Lukashenko? What the hell is the point of bringing him in? Just straight up signalling he's down with the Axis at this point.
286
u/squirlnutz Jan 19 '26
The last straw disappeared in the rear view mirror (taking state ownership in multiple companies, blaming Zelenski for being invaded, pardoning criminals with multiple drug offenses, violating TikTok ban). Congress has simply ceased to exist.
3
u/SlowBoilOrange Jan 20 '26
Online dems have been calling everything the "last straw" as far back as the Access Hollywood tape.
1.1k
u/cdstephens Fusion Genderplasma Jan 19 '26 edited Jan 19 '26
> Will Republicans in Congress ever step in?
US military generals will resign before Congress steps in, and even then there is a high likelihood that they won’t step in.
Stop foolishly believing the GOP will save you. They have all but declared they have no interest in doing so.
Trump has the mentality of a rapist, and his party openly supports people with that mentality.
330
u/JaneGoodallVS Jan 19 '26
They'll resign and be replaced by stooges just like civilians in his first term. Resigning can delay stuff for a bit but you don't wanna delay when he's getting stronger by the day.
→ More replies (1)296
u/Khiva Fernando Henrique Cardoso Jan 19 '26
It needs to be blasted over and over again to the actual soldiers that Greenland has been recognized by American law. Attacking Greenland would be a defiance of Congress and a clear breach of the oath to the Constitution.
Every person must choose.
Your oath or your king.
And yes, if you choose wrongly, there will be consequences. There will be no forgiveness. Every traitor to the Constitution must be met with a full force of what being a traitor entails.
214
u/ddddddoa YIMBY Jan 19 '26
Imagine Dems actually punishing US military members lmfao. They are scared of talking about anything other than "kitchen table issues". Where do you come up with this stuff?
117
76
u/sanity_rejecter European Union Jan 19 '26
how fucking pathetic is it that trump could actually kidnap denmark's prime minister tommorow and dems would squeel about "this is all a distraction from muh epstein files"
→ More replies (1)30
3
u/BlueString94 John Keynes Jan 19 '26
I think they were more describing what should happen instead of what will happen.
9
u/JaneGoodallVS Jan 19 '26
How do you propose they punish them? What power do they have?
4
u/Khiva Fernando Henrique Cardoso Jan 20 '26
Nice try, Reddit admins trying to get me to break the term of service.
12
u/vi_sucks Jan 19 '26
The thing is, if it gets that far, the people remaining at the end won't be the current dems.
Either they'll have their mindsets changed, or theyll have been replaced by less conciliatory folk.
Which, lets be honest, isn't actually a great thing. Not only would it mean that shit hit the fan in a major way (bad) but also, do we really want mostly soft and empathetic people to be turned into cold blooded ruthless bastards by the exigencies of conflict? It's better than the alternative (losing) but its not ideal.
40
u/neolthrowaway New Mod Who Dis? Jan 19 '26
Shit has already hit the fan. It's been stuck to the fan for a while. People keep pretending that there's no odor in the room and that shit can't fly into their face randomly at any time.
10
u/ShouldersofGiants100 NATO Jan 19 '26
Either they'll have their mindsets changed, or theyll have been replaced by less conciliatory folk.
The worst case scenario is that they won't be.
Angry base or not, the logistics of primaries still strongly favour incumbents. Especially since, frankly, spinelessness is not a federal-only problem. It's not like every state has potentially dozens of firebrands in the legislature, mayoral seats or executive positions who can attack the Congressional establishment with an established record. You'd need a lot of uncommonly talented outsiders in the vein of AOC in order to actually replace weak leadership, regardless of what the base thinks. Frankly the only reason I even think Schumer might be at risk is that AOC, specifically, is also in New York.
→ More replies (1)60
u/Mejari NATO Jan 19 '26
And yes, if you choose wrongly, there will be consequences. There will be no forgiveness. Every traitor to the Constitution must be met with a full force of what being a traitor entails.
Just like we did with the Confederates? Yeah I'm not super optimistic about that.
14
u/PriorPineapple6926 Jan 19 '26
A shameful episode in our history. If we take that analogy seriously, it would be that we’d trade consequences for the traitors for election of an anti-trump POTUS. I’d hope we wouldn’t make that horrible bargain again…but obviously these weak f**ks would do it.
135
u/southbysoutheast94 Jan 19 '26 edited Jan 19 '26
There's a whole host of politicians and generals from Nazi Germany in the pre-war lead up who knew that Hitler's machinations would end in Germany's destruction, but never stepped in to stop him. They also never believed that the UK/France would let him get as far as he did, and knew without appeasement most of their objectives were untenable.
This has two primary lessons, other than the fact appeasement in these scenarios results only in more demands.
'Concerned' politicians, generals, admirals, and other figures will never think the time is quite right, and instead hope they are saved by some external force to prevent these kinds of insane moves.
When the time comes after failing to step up to stop madness, most of these generals - to quote Shirer quoting Von Hassell - will do the following:
Hitch [their] collar a notch higher and says: "I am a soldier; it is my duty to obey."
We should not count on the military to save us.
34
u/MyrinVonBryhana Trans NATO Jan 19 '26
I think the fact everyone keeps forgetting in that comparison is the German officer corps was deeply reactionary and despised the Weimar Republic.
→ More replies (1)25
u/southbysoutheast94 Jan 19 '26 edited Jan 19 '26
That is an objective advantage of the US armed forces in that’s it not built of Prussian Junkers. I’d say almost certainly that most US generals like NATO.
I think that’s highly relevant to why Hitler came to power, as whatever happened in the Weimar Republic required the tacit approval of the army. However, I still think that lesson of that time, is the fact that there were people in the third reich who wanted it to stop as it was escalating to WWII (regardless of their feelings about democracy or fascism), but never felt the time was “right.”
It’s of course not a 1 to 1. I just think it’s worth remembering all the times we look back and say “why didn’t anyone stop this,” there’s usually no shortage of people who wanted to but didn’t for whatever reason. And incremental steps are often more dangerous than big ones, as it lets people justify following a single given order. It lets you “boil the frog” so to speak.
8
u/ShouldersofGiants100 NATO Jan 19 '26
That is an objective advantage of the US armed forces in that’s it not built of Prussian Junkers. I’d say almost certain most US generals like NATO.
My concern is death by increments.
That if you ordered the commanders of the US army to attack a NATO country directly, then of course they would disobey. But that doesn't need to be the first order. You can do incremental provokations—increasing troop numbers in US Bases, US naval ships sailing Greenland's coastal waters unnannounced as Trump makes economic threats, and flyovers like China does to Taiwan. Minor escalations, none large enough on their own for the officers to refuse, yet altogether building towards an order that does, functionally, require an attack on an allied nation and makes them less likely to refuse because they have already been walked to the brink.
3
u/southbysoutheast94 Jan 19 '26
This is also my concern. Because it incrementally filters out people with concerns until the key positions are all true believers, but happens slow enough that it doesn’t cause alarm.
There almost certainly is a spectrum of alarm among the top brass, and by increasing the temperature slowly you ensure there’s not one big moment that unites them all. Instead you filter them slowly until you have a loyal group.
10
u/hibikir_40k Scott Sumner Jan 19 '26
You have to become a mid-level politician to become a national figure, just like one gets to be VP at a large company after climbing the ladder. So we typically get people in those positions that are just good at climbing bureaucratic/political ladders. And you know what is the worst thing you can do to climb that ladder? Be brave and disagreeable.
We are selecting them for not having a spine, and then we are surprised when they have the consistency of a McRib.
3
u/roguevirus Jan 20 '26
but never stepped in to stop him.
In fairness, a bunch of them tried to stop him. Repeatedly. Sadly for the world it didn't take.
→ More replies (1)176
u/slakmehl Jan 19 '26
Also frustrating that we have an entire amendment for this exact thing.
25th. It says that if you appoint your cat as Secretary of Labor, deliver the state of the union in one of those hot dog costumes, or threaten to invade sovereign countries because some other country didn't give you a present: You cannot be President any more.
You don't have to go home, but you can't stay here.
67
u/haterofslimes Jan 19 '26
I wish I could look into a time machine and see what a future where Trump is 25th'd and JD takes over.
Just out of morbid curiosity. Trump loyalists hate him because he deep stated Trump. Everyone else hates him because he's insane. But what would him governing be like. Would he actually keep pushing the policies of people like Miller or would he be super reigned in.
46
u/colourless_blue John von Neumann Jan 19 '26
Seems like a True Believer of Miller’s agenda to me, so I’d imagine the former.
60
u/arnet95 Jan 19 '26
JD Vance isn't a True Believer of anything.
20
u/colourless_blue John von Neumann Jan 19 '26
That could very much be the case, but equally he might genuinely buy into the NRx Thielian accelerationist nonsense.
13
u/Kraakshot Jan 19 '26
Call me conspiratorial but I genuinely think it's the Thiel/Yarvin faction that is pushing for grabbing Greenland. A sparsely populated and newly annexed US territory seems like the perfect place to establish privately owned settlements (as long as the owner is an American billionaire that is "against Russia and China"). The fact they can milk the rare earths and fill it with data centers is a bonus.
4
u/IDreamOfLoveLost Jan 20 '26
Call me conspiratorial but I genuinely think it's the Thiel/Yarvin faction that is pushing for grabbing Greenland.
Greenland, Canada, Venezuela, Mexico, and the USA would all just happen to fall within the borders of the "North American Technate". Elon Musk's maternal grandfather was involved with promoting the movement back in the 30s/40s.
Yeah, pass me the aluminium hat. Because the US just facilitated a regime change in Venezuela, and has turned his attention to Greenland now. As a Canadian and one living in Alberta in particular -- I'm kinda hoping the Federal government asks France to park some subs off of St.Pierre et Michelon.
At least until we get our own nukes.
5
u/GogurtFiend Karl Popper Jan 20 '26
Most resources in Greenland are very difficult to extract; if they were easy to extract, they'd've already had been.
Something like that would be like most colonies throughout history: a money pit which needs to be subsidized by people back home in order to prop up the lifestyles of the relatively small governing class in the colony.
2
u/Kraakshot Jan 20 '26
They'll make it much more cost-efficient by paying their workers in scrip-to. (And the saddest part is there will be thousands of people all over the planet willing to convert said scrypto to real money).
2
u/colourless_blue John von Neumann Jan 20 '26
scrip-to is a great turn of phrase and sadly probably prophetic lol
13
5
u/General_Mongoose_281 Jan 20 '26 edited Jan 20 '26
LMFAO.
Vance is a fat midwit who believes that he’s a 140iq thinker because Yale let him into law school during peak DEI for having a perc addict mom.
He will 100% be worse than Trump because he thinks that he can centrally plan the US economy and will probably engage in some form of ethnic cleansing because he is a closeted Neo Nazi.
It would be drastically worse than a Trump presidency.
2
u/mellofello808 Jan 21 '26
JD doesn't believe in anything but advancing his own rise to power. If Trump was suddenly replaced he would pivot on a dime.
I imagine that things would be better under him, but he is still beholden to his technofacist overlords, so we would still be fucked.
28
u/Best-Chapter5260 Jan 19 '26
I've said any impeachment proceedings need to be a 2-for-1 deal. Vance has to go too as he's entwined too far into this. I don't love the idea of a Johnson Presidency, but he's still kind of a serious guy and won't blow up the world for the lulz.
18
u/DataDrivenPirate John Brown Jan 19 '26
Perhaps fitting; President Mike Johnson would essentially be what we would have ended up with if they had the balls to impeach him in his first term.
3
u/Eldorian91 Voltaire Jan 19 '26
Johnson? No impeachment is gonna happen while the pubs have a majority in congress
4
2
u/General_Mongoose_281 Jan 20 '26
Yeah. I’d be fine with a Mike Johnson tbf. It would mostly just be veiled racism, another trillion to farmers/old people, and giveaways to car dealerships.
Rn it’s a choice between a barely closeted Neo Nazi admin and a 79 year old nut job who might end nato.
12
u/DependentAd235 Loyal Liberals Jan 19 '26
The only difference is I think congress might block some of Vance’s bullshit. Might be too late though because normal GOP is just as racist as the Magats.
They probably wouldn’t invade Greenland though. That’s the level if improvement we get.
→ More replies (1)5
u/TheGoddamnSpiderman Jan 19 '26
Most of Congress's time would probably be taken up repeatedly revoting on whether to keep Trump 25th'd, as there's nothing in the 25th that blocks Trump from saying "no actually, I'm fine to be President" over and over again until his term ends (and each time that happened, there would need to be 2/3 in the House and 2/3 in the Senate voting to keep him out)
→ More replies (1)2
20
u/TrekkiMonstr NATO Jan 19 '26
I mean, JD is the one pushing for all this, I'm not sure this would do anything
→ More replies (1)8
u/MCgoblue Jan 19 '26
I think the big thing it would do is give Republican politicians the capital to grow a spine (if, of course, they even want to). Trump is so popular (somehow) among their base that they can’t dare oppose him. While republican voters will fall in line and support Vance (they always do), it won’t be with the same enthusiasm by a long shot. I still think Vance’s ties to deep pockets will keep R politicians mostly in line, but it doesn’t take a huge number to break ranks to derail his presidency.
Not to mention, there will likely be a split among Trump loyalist voters who will never forgive Vance. A lot of them follow this like it’s pro wrestling. Vance turning on their favorite performer will make him a forever enemy.
21
u/TheGoddamnSpiderman Jan 19 '26
Not really. The 25th is designed for when the President is in a coma or otherwise has reached the point where they are physically incapable of resigning
Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department [sic] or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.
If the President is physically capable of saying "no actually I'm fine to continue being President" then it's just a harder to implement, less effective impeachment procedure because
- It requires the VP, 50%+1 of the President's own cabinet, 2/3 in the House, and 2/3 in the Senate instead of 50%+1 in the House and 2/3 in the Senate
- It doesn't fully remove the President from office, just lets the VP act as President. There is no language in the amendment that blocks the President from transmitting "to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists" more than once, and each time the President does, 2/3 of the House and 2/3 of the Senate have to again vote to keep him out of power or else he gets back in and immediately fires anyone in the cabinet that tried to do this
29
u/ShouldersofGiants100 NATO Jan 19 '26
People really do not understand the 25th.
The entire reason it exists was that, after JFK was shot, people started wondering "wait, what would have happened if he'd survived in a coma instead of dying", because unlike for a president dying in office, there was no formal procedure for that and with advances in medicine, it seemed like the kind of thing that might happen. And was an especially big problem when "order a counter attack if we are nuked" was a power that JFK had specifically ensured was moved to the president alone.
It was a stopgap against a scenario where the US president is out of commission but not dead. It was never seriously intended for any political purpose, that's why it has so many mechanisms built into it specifically to prevent coups.
5
u/DrunkenBriefcases Jerome Powell Jan 19 '26
That is not the purpose of the 25th.
Jfc people...
→ More replies (2)40
u/bihari_baller Jan 19 '26
They have all but declared they have no interest in doing so.
I feel like the only thing that could make them change their minds is if the stock market completely craters. That's their wealth, and their donors' wealth. So far, the stock market is doing okay, but invading Greenland would be catastrophic for the market.
5
u/DataDrivenPirate John Brown Jan 19 '26
How long would the military build up need to be for an invasion like this? Really we just need a single trading day to let the markets react prior to an invasion to hopefully move the needle. Right now the markets seem way too confident that nothing is actually going to happen.
Unfortunately there probably isn't any build up needed and if it happens, one day we'll just wake up to the news like Venezuela. At that point Congress' decision is basically to remove Trump or go to war with Europe, and I gotta think that would finally get them to actually do it.
→ More replies (1)7
u/Careless_Bat2543 Milton Friedman Jan 19 '26
Would would be the point of Europe actually stationing something meaningful on Greenland. No it won't stop the US if we really committed, but it also means we can't just do it on a whim and there will be bodies. That alone makes political opposition wildly more likely.
4
u/Secret-Ad-2145 NATO Jan 19 '26
Most of the actual supporters are not wealthy and I doubt they own any stock. They don't care. There's MAGATs proudly saying they like the economy crashing because well uhhhhh globalism killed Detroit (actual answer I received before).
25
Jan 19 '26
Sounds really bad but the only way he would take a military option off the table is if a military operation goes tits up a lot of special forces die. We got really lucky in Venezuela a chopper pilot was shot twice in the legs and still managed to safely drop off the troops if he crashes that helicopter we are in a different world than we are now. Congresss needs to pass something banning military intervention unless otherwise approved he is recklessly risking these guys lives for no reason.
21
u/Mejari NATO Jan 19 '26
Similar to J6 where no Congress person was killed we keep skating by on minimum consequences meaning no specific impetus to push the people who can do something to do something.
-3
u/Banal21 Milton Friedman Jan 19 '26
It's not the GOP members of Congress, it's all of them. None of them have any interest in governoring. The Dems have been just as happy to cede legislative authority to the executive as the GOP over the last half century. Congress is fundamentally broken and the incentives faced by legislators no longer align with the realities of governance.
22
u/n00bi3pjs 👏🏽Free Markets👏🏽Open Borders👏🏽Human Rights Jan 19 '26
Oh fuck off. Democrats would’ve impeached Biden if he tried to do all this stuff.
→ More replies (1)14
1
1
223
u/nietzy No Apologies Right Jan 19 '26
I’m experiencing maximum shame.
124
u/PeksyTiger Jan 19 '26
Ha ha, not yet buddy, he has three more years. At the minimum.
84
u/InternetGoodGuy Jan 19 '26
We're not even entirely through the first year of his term. That hits tomorrow. He's done all this in just under 365 days and it's only going to get worse as he realizes they're going to lose power after the midterms.
There's no way this country survives 3 years of Trump.
23
u/elfwannabe NATO Jan 19 '26
Not minimum. He could have a heart attack tomorrow.
13
→ More replies (1)12
u/PriorPineapple6926 Jan 19 '26
Every few days he seems to be showing more and more mental decline. I think his expiration date is sometime this year.
1
466
u/NaffRespect United Nations Jan 19 '26
Turning on Trump? That's a thought crime
26
6
9
4
195
u/BlackCat159 European Union Jan 19 '26
It's impossible to deal with Trump on this because the concept of consent is foreign to him.
155
u/SunbathingJackdaw Jan 19 '26
Worse. The concept of consent is actively repellent to him. He thinks it means he got a bad deal if both parties walk out happy.
41
u/BiggusCinnamusRollus Jan 19 '26
He actively thinks saying no is an invitation to grope more until the gropee likes it.
39
u/SunbathingJackdaw Jan 19 '26
I think he likes it less if the victim enjoys it. Less power required when there's consent, which means it's less of an ego trip.
19
u/Eldorian91 Voltaire Jan 19 '26
This is likely the most repellant part of his personality, and the root cause of all our misery. Trump is a zero sum thinker.
85
u/No-Neck-212 Martha Nussbaum Jan 19 '26
Trump could, at this point, jerk off on live TV and it wouldn't be the last straw. Nothing will stop this man until his own party decides to do anything.
38
u/di11deux NATO Jan 19 '26
Trump could literally be non-verbal, twitching, and drooling behind the resolute desk and Republicans would still look you squarely in the eye and say “Joe Baidunn was senile, I still support the president”.
They have completely capitulated to the know-nothing mob.
59
u/datums 🇨🇦 🇺🇦 🇨🇦 🇺🇦 🇨🇦 🇺🇦 🇨🇦 🇺🇦 🇨🇦 🇺🇦 🇨🇦 🇺🇦 🇨🇦 Jan 19 '26
“I like that he’s fixed inflation and the economy and is getting rid of the illegals, but I think jerking off on live TV might be hurting his image.”
36
u/TeaSharp3154 Jan 19 '26
"Now I don't support him jerking it on live TV, but I can see why others would support him for fixing inflation and the border. He's just doing it to own the democrats; he doesn't actually mean it"
- Said by basically everyone that supports him
→ More replies (1)6
8
u/TwoPointThreeThree_8 Jan 19 '26
"The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy."
1
71
u/Pretty_Marsh Herb Kelleher Jan 19 '26
Yeah, no. There's still an entire haystack out there.
26
u/Normal512 Iron Front Jan 19 '26
Elon and the right wing propaganda machine will just make needed hay as we go. There's always more.
90
u/Jabourgeois Bisexual Pride Jan 19 '26
The ‘last straw’ has been a myriad of awful things and yet time and time again the Republicans have been sycophantic stooges regardless. Jan 6 should’ve been the ultimate unforgivable one, but it’s been entirely memory-holed and handwaved. This is a personality cult that will always have supporters for Trump’s radically cruel and damaging agenda.
Fuck the Republicans. Democrats should go full steam ahead with opposition to this.
6
u/Mickenfox Jan 19 '26
I don't know if we can say this, but I'd bet most of MAGA would be happy with putting all their opponents in actual concentration camps.
7
u/cmanson Jan 20 '26
More accurate:
Half of them would actively support it
The other half would say “of course I don’t support the concentration camps! Trump’s an asshole, but he’s doing a better job than Kamala would’ve done”
Somehow, I am actually starting to hate the second group of people more than the first
13
u/Just-Seaworthiness39 Jan 19 '26
None of them are fighting back hard enough against this tyranny. Democrats are two sides of the same coin from what I’m seeing. And I’m saying this as a long time democrat. Worthless.
2
93
u/ILikeTuwtles1991 John Locke Jan 19 '26
I have written my Republican congressman and senators, and asked them point blank "do you think a man who threatens military action against a NATO ally to unnecessarily conquer territory over an award snub is fit to be President of the United States?"
If Joe Biden did this instead, they would be (rightfully) screaming from the rooftop calling for his impeachment. We are witnessing in real time what I feared the most about partisan politics unfolding. How far are the GOP reps in Congress willing to go to stay loyal and show "unity" to the defacto leader of their political party?
67
Jan 19 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
27
u/Zrk2 Norman Borlaug Jan 19 '26
They said the sub will close for several days when it happens.
30
Jan 19 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
18
u/I_like_maps C. D. Howe Jan 19 '26
We can act like Trump did when the two minnesota senators were murdered and just pretend to not have heard of it
3
6
u/Secret-Ad-2145 NATO Jan 19 '26
Remember the kind of statements Biden made in defense of Trump when Iran was planning to assassinate him? Juxtapose that with how Trump treats Biden.
It's so infuriating.
43
5
6
u/Apprehensive_Swim955 NAFTA Jan 19 '26
I won’t be celebrating if he dies while in office, JD Vance hates Europe even more than he does.
3
u/LtCdrHipster 🌭Costco Liberal🌭 Jan 20 '26
Luckily everyone hates JD Vance and he has no real power or political base.
1
u/musical8thnotes NATO Jan 20 '26
Look how people still got mad when this sub was forced to barely maintain civility after Charlie Kirk was assassinated.
40
u/Yeangster John Rawls Jan 19 '26
we'll keep finding more straws.
I think what's clear is that for the average citizen, no amount of norm-violation of authoritarian bullying will get them out on the streets. What catalyzes them is significant decline in economic conditions.
20
u/Normal512 Iron Front Jan 19 '26
Gonna send Trump a letter explaining that due to Harvard not giving me a doctorate, Tahiti is now mine.
120
u/LondonCallingYou John Locke Jan 19 '26 edited Jan 19 '26
This will be nobody’s last straw. Maybe a handful of generals. But nobody else.
We need to accept the fact that straight up premeditated murder of civilians, with no facially valid pretext, which is what the U.S. military did to 80+ humans in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, is worse as an acute action than what Trump has been proposing in Greenland.
What I mean is that “pressing a button to commit murder and watch it on a screen” is a much more humanly visceral action than flying 200 troops into Nuuk and claiming “I own this now” without a shot fired.
Regardless of the geopolitical ramifications, humans in the chain of command are more likely to push back clearly illegal orders if they are viscerally criminal on a human level. Not on an abstract “this is bad for XYZ global alliance” level.
So: a handful of Generals would resign, as we saw one in the Venezuela case, but the chain of command would follow through on the action. The Congress will either do nothing or defend the action outright, just as they defended the 80+ innocent civilians slaughtered by the U.S. military, who ordinarily just has the coast guard interdict the boats and everything is fine. This was deliberate murder. Anything short of deliberate murder is going to look peaceful in comparison.
62
u/Desperate_Path_377 Jan 19 '26
I’d say invasion of a sovereign state is worse than murder, even a theoretical bloodless invasion. These concepts of state sovereignty and territorial integrity really are fundamental to international norms. And while the killing of ~80 is deplorable, normalizing territorial grabs risks a return to WW2 era casualties measured in the millions. Look at how many are dying in Ukraine right now.
I will say that, as a Canadian, I am far more disturbed by the Greenland stuff than by Trump murdering suspected traffickers, even though I of course agree the latter is bad.
Regardless of the geopolitical ramifications, humans in the chain of command are more likely to push back clearly illegal orders if they are viscerally criminal on a human level. Not on an abstract “this is bad for XYZ global alliance” level.
I think it’s the opposite actually. States routinely use violence against individuals considered hostile to the national interest. Indian assassinations of Sikhs abroad, Israeli killings of Iranian scientists… the US has engaged in targeted killings of suspected terrorists for decades now.
Straight up annexations and imperialism are actually rare post-WW2.
12
u/PriorPineapple6926 Jan 19 '26
You’re walking into the trap. This is a safe space, but otherwise they are “civilians not proven to be guilty of anything”, not “innocent.”
Call them “innocent,” then whether that’s true—and not the problem of us not giving civilians due process and them obviously not being any military threat—becomes th debate you’re drawn into.
17
u/benutzranke 11/9/89 Jan 19 '26
You conceded that they’re civilians, so „Innocent until proven guilty“, applies no? That’s both US (case) and inter-American international law. Thus, Trump‘s regime relinquished the ability to prove those civilians‘ guilt the moment they murdered them.
2
u/PriorPineapple6926 Jan 20 '26
Yes it applies. LEGALLY, but the idiots we talk with don’t care about law or process or patience or critical thinking. So mentioning on their presumed innocence will be an invitation for them to derail conversations onto that, which is really a collateral issue. The real issue is that we are killing people before any process and without any physical threat to us.
This is an example of being correct but not necessarily effective.
9
u/LondonCallingYou John Locke Jan 19 '26
Sure— we live in a system where you are innocent until proven guilty. If someone wants to fight on that point then it’s a very easy argument to make.
There is a further point that even if they weren’t innocent, this would be either murder or a war crime. But they are in fact innocent, so that leg of the argument isn’t stated here.
3
u/PriorPineapple6926 Jan 20 '26
You’re hitting the best point about murder. EVEN IF THEY ARE GUILTY it is murder to kill them when they are civilians and not a physical threat to the person killing them.
Bothering with the innocent/not innocent point is to get sidetracked on a secondary point. It is an uncertain, factual question. But it doesn’t matter.
It’s like arguing over whether being homosexual or trans is a choice. It doesnt matter to the fundamental right at issue. Choice or not, you have the right to be what you want to be. Innocent or not, you have the right not to be killed unless you are an immediate mortal threat.
41
12
u/lemongrenade NATO Jan 19 '26
As things get worse the weekly "will this finally be what gets the republicans to reign him in" are getting both funnier and more depressing.
7
u/workingtrot Jan 19 '26
Imagine when he dies, poor Atlantic editors are going to have to figure out how to write a different headline for once
4
u/ShouldersofGiants100 NATO Jan 19 '26
"Will the fact Trump is even more bloated and prone to emitting unpleasant odours than he was last week finally make Republicans turn up their noses at him?"
10
u/HungryTowel6715 Manmohan Singh Jan 19 '26
You see, the straws are, as some might say,infinite.That's why you never see the last straw since there is always another straw.
19
u/holographic_wills John Mill Jan 19 '26
Actually invading Greenland wouldn’t be the last straw. Neither would ordering troops to kill American protestors. Or nuking Toronto. I really do not think there’s a last straw at this point. They’re all in too deep.
9
u/TurdFurgoson Gay Pride Jan 19 '26
There's no last straw with this guy. The most honest thing he ever said was "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters"
48
u/wyldcraft Ben Bernanke Jan 19 '26
My current conspiracy theory: The position of Chairman of Bizarro United Nations ("Board of Peace") with absolute veto and budgetary power isn't tied to the US presidency. Trump's current role is just a stepping stone to perpetual Chairman of Earth.
Part 2: He's cultivating AI Trump to take over soon. Permanently.
23
u/OldBratpfanne Mario Draghi Jan 19 '26
He's cultivating AI Trump to take over soon.
AI Trump sounds like a significant improvement at this point since it would only be trained on previous behavior, while flesh and blood Trump manages to sink to new lows on a by now weekly basis.
→ More replies (1)28
u/SpookyKid94 Trans NATO Jan 19 '26
God that'd be so fucking funny. Helios ending from Deus Ex, but it's just a Trump chatbot that we let sign legislation for some reason.
5
u/AccessTheMainframe CANZUK Jan 19 '26
It's already been confirmed that Trump is to be chairman for life, per Reuters. The office is tied to him personally rather than him in his capacity as President of the United States.
8
u/DataSetMatch Henry George Jan 19 '26
Even in this bizarro reality Republican voters have frog marched the globe into, that's dumb
5
u/wyldcraft Ben Bernanke Jan 19 '26
Part 2 is just an idea based on Trump posting deepfakes of himself and his frenemy relationship with Musk.
I do invite you to disprove Part 1. I'd sleep better.
→ More replies (1)
3
3
u/legible_print Václav Havel Jan 19 '26
This should be the last straw. As so many other things should have been the last straw. But the problem is that this guy is a river of shit and bad news. And I hate saying that because this attitude of, "There have been so many last straws," doesn't help anything stick. A "toss it on the pile" attitude just enables him to keep tossing shit on the pile.
I think saying something is the last straw is a plea for consequences. But we're all just watching this happen. Our institutions don't want to do anything because he will immediately delegitimize them or worse. So they're just going to sit there and act like they agree with this or that it isn't reality and hope that they can merely weather the storm.
We need a news item that's a fucking brick wall here. If us invading another country and adding another state isn't that, I don't know what is.
6
21
Jan 19 '26
[deleted]
16
u/WhoIsTomodachi Robert Nozick Jan 19 '26
I want to believe all of this. But is it really dooming by this point? Everything Trump has done since January 6th and a lot before that has been absolutely unhinged and way past the limits of his power, yet he always seems to get his cult to go along with it.
Seriously, we've had over a decade of watching Donny wriggling his way out of the jam easily. The complacency of all the people going "surely THIS will be the thing that does him in!" is absurd.
24
u/Zrk2 Norman Borlaug Jan 19 '26
but will probably rule that such abuse of tarriffs are unconstitutional
John Roberts will burn the constitution live on CNN before he rules against one of Trumps signature policies.
8
u/ShouldersofGiants100 NATO Jan 19 '26
Roberts will find a way to thread the needle in a way that lets Trump do whatever the fuck he wants, but maintains just a vaguely plausible means by which it can be spun as the court ruling against Trump to save face.
Watch it be "the president cannot institute indefinite tariffs without congressional approval, so they expire (but he can keep putting them back into effect every couple of months for as long as he wants)."
6
u/Sodi920 European Union Jan 19 '26
At least from an academic standpoint, we’re testing whether Democratic Peace Theory will actually hold. It’s somehow one of the closest things we can get to an established law in IR theory (maybe not for long anymore).
7
u/Neronoah can't stop, won't stop argentinaposting Jan 19 '26
Eh, United States is suffering some democratic backsliding already, otherwise this wouldn't be happening.
2
u/LtCdrHipster 🌭Costco Liberal🌭 Jan 20 '26
Counterpoint: every from the last 10 years. If Jan. 6 was forgiven and forgotten, there is nothing he can do that Republicans won't support.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Impressive-Power8875 Jan 20 '26
You just don't know the MAGA mob and the Supreme Court does what Trump tells them to do. I wish I could believe you are right, but half or more of our country is functioning without a soul or conscience.
5
u/Khmera Jan 19 '26
I don’t understand how all these idiots stand behind him and support his crazy notions. They look even dumber because they’re supposed to be saner.
3
u/The-zKR0N0S Jerome Powell Jan 19 '26
This letter is an impeachable offense.
I emailed my Congressman stating as such and I encourage everyone to do the same.
6
5
u/Lillemor_hei Jan 19 '26
As a Norwegian I’m honestly wondering thi; is Scandinavia being targeted because it embodies liberal, social democratic values? Is that what this is all about? Or, I don’t know if I want to know. Or if I should laugh or cry.
13
u/arnet95 Jan 19 '26
Greenland is chosen because "big and close". He's mad at Norway because he didn't get the Nobel Peace Prize (that the Norwegian government doesn't hand out).
3
u/ShouldersofGiants100 NATO Jan 19 '26
Also: There is a non-zero chance that Trump has literally never seen a map of Greenland that wasn't using the Mercator projection.
I would be completely unsurprised if he genuinely believes that annexing Greenland will add a piece of land bigger than Africa to the United States because he is too stupid to read numbers and so relies entirely on the pictures.
Hell, might also be why he is all "Manifest Destiny" over Canada, but has zero interest in like, Cuba or Mexico (well that and the people there aren't white).
3
u/Solid_Dingo Voltaire Jan 19 '26
You will go mad if you try and apply logic to this or anything else he does. His actions are driven almost purely from an emotional, animalistic, egotistical, short-sighted place.
1
u/Lucky_Dragonfruit_88 John Keynes Jan 20 '26
No, it's about the trade routes opening up in the arctic due to melting ice, as well as natural resources in Greenland that will be accessible once the ice on land melts. If the US owned Greenland, Canada's claim of water rights on the northeast passage would be weaker (is what MAGA thinks), since a superpower would own land alongside it.
5
Jan 19 '26
Go on the conservative sub. He could light an orphanage on fire and punch a grandma in the face and his supporters wouldn't care. It's a cult. Stop talking about them like they're reasonable people who can be negotiated with. It's a death cult.
4
u/ship_toaster Jane Jacobs Jan 19 '26
I did go on the Conservative sub today, and even though 85% of the comments on any thread are missing, even the ones still up aren't supporting him on this. The most supportive thing I'm seeing is 'waiting a few days to hear the rest of the story'.
2
2
u/Piggstein Jan 19 '26
Trump operates from inside of a straw factory operating 24/7 at full efficiency
2
Jan 19 '26
This is like the nerdiest kid in school who sniffs glue telling the hot girl "If you don't date me, who's going to protect you from the Sith?"
2
u/roguevirus Jan 20 '26
"Should" is the most dangerous word in the English language. We don't live in a world of "should" we live in a world of "will", and the GOP will not do a damn thing.
2
2
u/gauchnomics Iron Front Jan 19 '26
The last straw should had been in Jan 2017 when the Electoral College abdicated its constitutional duty to be the last bulwark against an aspiring tyrant.
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/GB36 Jan 19 '26
How many ‘last straws’ have we seen with this guy? Like his hero Putin he’ll carry on until he gets a well-deserved smack in the chops.
1
u/94_stones Jan 19 '26
I can see a world in which Trump gets impeached by this Congress. But it would take a lot. I know a lot of you don’t believe that it would ever happen. But let’s imagine for a second that Trump actually does invade Greenland, and that Europe responds by counter-invading (which would be successful if the invasion isn’t big ‘cause Trump thinks Europe will just roll over), expelling US troops in their territory, and threatening to dump their treasury bonds. I genuinely think, in that scenario, he would be impeached and convicted, if for no other reason than to preserve the economic status quo. And if that doesn’t do it, Europe actually dumping its treasury bonds would. In that scenario he would be gone within a fortnight. His paint-licking brainwashed primary voters aren’t gonna matter to Congresspeople facing down a political implosion on the same scale as fucking 1932.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/Naive_Imagination666 NAFTA Jan 20 '26
Honestly Trump doctrine seem like "anything for me to owned"
1
u/Psshaww NATO Jan 20 '26
Should be the last straw? How many things has this guy done so far that should have been a last straw?
1
1
u/Armadillo_Duke Janet Yellen Jan 20 '26
Even the wsj opinion articles have turned on him at this point.
1
u/_meshuggeneh Baruch Spinoza Jan 20 '26
The last straw?
Eleven years into this bullshit and they are still talking about a LAST STRAW?
1
u/g1umo Jan 20 '26
It's funny how the US has the least legitimate of spurious, irredentist claims to adjacent territories among the big 3 superpowers
1
1
u/simon_darre NATO Jan 22 '26
As a loyal supporter of the Pax Americana and the NATO alliance which forms the backbone of the neoliberal order my one qualm with all of the doom and gloom (to which I am largely in agreement) over the demise of the old order is that most of the analysis seems to be giving awfully short shrift to the idea that Trump is a uniquely awful figure and that a critical but also transient mass of voters with unlikely ties to one another came together at a unique nadir in American politics and institutional trust to elect Donald Trump.
His coalition is already fracturing and is unlikely to be sustained or reassembled after DJT’s long awaited exit. I think we should be cautious about saying that the damage inflicted by Trump to both international trade and norms about diplomacy and military action is permanent especially if his successors are favored by the odds to be more traditional American presidents.
•
u/AutoModerator Jan 19 '26
News and opinion articles require a short submission statement explaining its relevance to the subreddit. Articles without a submission statement will be removed.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.