The United States should annex Canada

Author: RemyBrown

Posts

Total: 85
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,639
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
or his utter lack of concern for global stability.
Lol, china and Russia and North Korea are not gonna launch nukes over US annexation of what would be the equivilent population of California.
For the US to annex Canada would be a signal loud and clear to the rest of the world that the US will no longer stand up for the sovereignty of other nations around the globe, thereby emboldening other countries like China and Russia to take whatever they want.

Everyone knows this, sorry if you don't get it.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 27,421
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
Everyone knows this, sorr
Yeah, pretty sure only Americans think American military protects all democracies and not just the ones USA likes.

And an annexation would be totally democratic if enough Canadians decide it would be nicer to live under liberty and free speech.
So yeah, go get your refund on that "global outrage" soda pop.
RemyBrown
RemyBrown's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 506
3
2
6
RemyBrown's avatar
RemyBrown
3
2
6
-->
@Mharman
Blue America is not libertarian lol.

In America, you have greater rights to speech and arms… I’d argue those are more important for a libertarian country than legalized marijuana.
With those 2 issues vs weed, you probably are correct.

But right to abortion vs right to bear arms?  Abortion is probably more.

Entering without papers vs right to bear arms?  The right to exist is probably more important.

Trump is not a free speech absolutist.
RemyBrown
RemyBrown's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 506
3
2
6
RemyBrown's avatar
RemyBrown
3
2
6
-->
@Double_R
 I said it's easy to solve problems when you're a dictator because you don't have the hurdles to jump through as you do when you are operating in a democratic system of checks and balances.
It should be easy to solve even with congress; they argue 40 hours a week; they should be able to come up with policies.  It should be a fulltime job; 40 hours of arguing a week.  No filibusters.

Difficult to tell, but I think you were expressing this as a point of agreement.
do agree with Trump on annexing Canada, but not on the "2020 stolen election" bullshit.

Annexing Canada has the potential to give America Medicare for all and it helps Canada experience more racial diversity (Canadian cities are very white, American cities are less white).  Integration is easiest achieved through a one state solution for Norhtern America.
Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 6,552
3
6
10
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
6
10
-->
@RemyBrown
Canada has immigration laws and can deport people as well. Baby murder isn’t as important as free speech and arms as well- as a matter of fact, I would argue it’s in  the libertarian interest to protect rights- including for the unborn (in spite of what the libertarian left says) I will also add the US respects private property rights a bit more. And whatever you think of Trump, I can assure you it remains that freedom of speech is most respected in the US.
RemyBrown
RemyBrown's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 506
3
2
6
RemyBrown's avatar
RemyBrown
3
2
6
-->
@Mharman
 Canada has immigration laws and can deport people as well.
I don't agree when Canada does it either (and they are hypocritical on deportations, which is worse than Trump).

Baby murder isn’t as important as free speech and arms as well- as a matter of fact, I would argue it’s in  the libertarian interest to protect rights- including for the unborn (in spite of what the libertarian left says)
Libertarians try incredibly hard to care about consistency.

If you can't force someone to endure 3 days of vasectomy pain to prevent the death of an unborn child, then you can't force someone else to endure 9 months (or even a week) of unwanted pain for the same cause.  Why should 3 days of vasectomy pain be deemed more serious than 9 months of pregnancy pain?
Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 6,552
3
6
10
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
6
10
-->
@RemyBrown
Do you understand what a vasectomy is?
RemyBrown
RemyBrown's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 506
3
2
6
RemyBrown's avatar
RemyBrown
3
2
6
-->
@Mharman
Yes; what's the issue with it?  Surely 3 days of pain is less serious than 9 months?  You can get pre vasectomy sperm stored in a hospital freezer if you ever want kids.

It seems abstract until it's your own bodily autonomy on the line.
Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 6,552
3
6
10
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
6
10
-->
@RemyBrown
The difference is that a vasectomy doesn’t kill an unborn child lol. If you wanna talk bodily autonomy, how about the child’s?

Would you prefer your parents aborted you?
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,639
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
Yeah, pretty sure only Americans think American military protects all democracies and not just the ones USA likes.
As usual, has nothing to do with the points I just made. One would think if you had an actual rebuttal you'd offer it.

And an annexation would be totally democratic if enough Canadians decide it would be nicer to live under liberty and free speech.
An annexation is by definition done by force genius.

Moreover, Canadians have made crystal clear that they have no interest in becoming a US state, you'd know this if you were paying any attention at all so it's yet another example of your childish need to troll.
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,639
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@RemyBrown
It should be easy to solve even with congress; they argue 40 hours a week; they should be able to come up with policies.  It should be a fulltime job; 40 hours of arguing a week.
Doesn't matter how long they argue, if their mind is made up that's it. How many times have you changed someone's mind here? Now imagine if that same person's job depended on them maintaining their position.

Annexing Canada has the potential to give America Medicare for all
That makes absolutely no sense.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 27,421
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
An annexation is by definition done by force genius.
I'll toss that silly argument to chat gpt. 

A long time ago, Texas was its own country. It wasn’t part of the United States yet. The people who lived there were called Texans, and they had their own rules and leaders. But many Texans wanted to join the United States because they thought it would keep them safer and make life better.

The people of Texas had a big vote. When people vote, they make a choice together. The Texans voted on whether they wanted to stay their own country or become part of the United States. Most of the people voted to join the U.S., which meant they wanted Texas to be part of the bigger country.

After the vote, the leaders of Texas asked the U.S. government if they could join. The leaders in the U.S. had to think about it. Some of them said, "Yes, Texas should join!" but others said, "No, it might cause problems." People argued about it because they weren’t sure if it was a good idea.

In the end, the U.S. government agreed. They said, "Yes, Texas can become part of our country." The two countries made a deal. They signed papers to make it official. This is called annexation, which is a big word that means one country becomes part of another.

After Texas joined, it became a state in the United States. The people of Texas were now American citizens. They could vote in U.S. elections and follow the same laws. The U.S. flag added a new star for Texas, because each state gets its own star on the flag.

Even though Texas joined the U.S., some people were still unhappy about it. Mexico, which used to own Texas, didn’t like that Texas became part of the U.S. This made Mexico and the U.S. fight a war later on.

But in the end, Texas stayed part of the United States. The people of Texas got what they voted for—they became part of a bigger country, with more friends and more protection. 🌟

Moreover, Canadians have made crystal clear that they have no interest in becoming a US state..

When it finally gets framed as a choice for liberty and free speech, you will be surprised what people will choose.


Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 27,421
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
stand up for the sovereignty of other nations around the globe..

oh....OK....chat gpt, is that correct?

Here’s a partial list of countries where the U.S. promoted or supported coups, threatening their sovereignty, often to install or protect pro-American regimes during the Cold War and beyond:
  1. Iran (1953) – The CIA-backed coup overthrew Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, who had nationalized Iran's oil industry. The U.S. reinstalled the pro-Western Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.
  2. Guatemala (1954) – The CIA supported the coup against President Jacobo Árbenz, who was enacting land reforms that threatened United Fruit Company interests.
  3. Congo (1960) – The U.S. helped overthrow Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba, who was leaning toward the Soviet Union.
  4. Dominican Republic (1963) – The U.S. backed the coup against Juan Bosch, the country’s first democratically elected president.
  5. Brazil (1964) – The U.S. supported the military coup that overthrew President João Goulart, installing a right-wing dictatorship.
  6. Chile (1973) – The CIA helped overthrow President Salvador Allende, a democratically elected socialist, replacing him with General Augusto Pinochet.
  7. Argentina (1976) – The U.S. supported the military coup that ousted President Isabel Perón, backing the right-wing junta during the Dirty War.
  8. Uruguay (1973) – The U.S. provided logistical support for the military takeover, aiding the junta that overthrew President Juan María Bordaberry.
  9. Indonesia (1965) – The U.S. assisted in the overthrow of President Sukarno, providing financial support and kill lists to the military regime led by Suharto.
  10. Honduras (2009) – The U.S. tacitly supported the coup against President Manuel Zelaya, who was pushed from power by the military.
  11. Haiti (2004) – The U.S. was involved in the removal of President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, allegedly pressuring him to resign and facilitating his exile.
  12. Bolivia (2019) – While not a traditional coup, the U.S. supported the removal of President Evo Morales, who fled the country after allegations of electoral fraud, though his supporters saw it as a coup.
  13. Venezuela (2002) – The U.S. allegedly supported the attempted coup against President Hugo Chávez, though he was quickly restored to power.
  14. Panama (1989) – The U.S. invaded Panama to overthrow Manuel Noriega, effectively staging a coup through military force.
  15. Grenada (1983) – The U.S. invaded Grenada and ousted the Marxist government, installing a pro-American regime.
  16. El Salvador (1980s) – The U.S. supported the military government against leftist rebels, aiding government forces responsible for coups and atrocities.
  17. Nicaragua (1980s) – The U.S. backed the Contras, who attempted to overthrow the Sandinista government, effectively waging a proxy coup.
  18. Libya (2011) – The U.S. led NATO airstrikes to remove Muammar Gaddafi, backing rebels in what was effectively regime change.
  19. Ukraine (2014) – The U.S. supported the Maidan movement, which led to the overthrow of President Viktor Yanukovych, viewed by many as a U.S.-backed coup.
  20. Egypt (2013) – While not officially labeled a coup, the U.S. tacitly supported the military’s removal of President Mohamed Morsi, providing aid and political cover to the new regime.
✅ This partial list shows the U.S. has a long history of intervening in foreign nations, often undermining their sovereignty by backing or orchestrating coups, especially during the Cold War and into the 21st century.



TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 203
1
2
5
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
1
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
Gotta love uncensored AI.
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,639
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
An annexation is by definition done by force genius.
I'll toss that silly argument to chat gpt. 
"AI Overview
Annex territory, in a political context, means to incorporate a territory into the domain of a city, country, or state, usually by force or without permission."

The context we are talking about makes clear which usage of the term applies here, and it's just stupid to hold onto some fantasy notion that Canadians are anything but vehemently against joining the US.


Moreover, Canadians have made crystal clear that they have no interest in becoming a US state..
When it finally gets framed as a choice for liberty and free speech, you will be surprised what people will choose.
Ah yes, that's all Trump needs to do here - frame it differently.

You are so unserious it's almost impressive.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 27,421
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
Gotta love uncensored AI.

yep. It doesn't care about your partisan slants.

It will just tell you the history of the annexation of Texas as if you had the mind of a child.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 27,421
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R

"AI Overview
Annex territory, in a political context, means to incorporate a territory into the domain of a city, country, or state, usually by force or without permission."

The context we are talking about makes clear which usage of the term applies here, and it's just stupid to hold onto some fantasy notion that Canadians are anything but vehemently against joining the US.
I will just toss yet another silly argument over to chat GPT...

Hay chatzie, care to explain?

In U.S. history, most of the land was gained through purchases and agreements. Only sometimes has the U.S. used force to take over new territory. One peaceful example was the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, when the U.S. bought a huge piece of land from France for $15 million, which doubled the country’s size. The U.S. also bought Florida from Spain in 1819 through a treaty called the Adams-Onís Treaty, and in 1867, the U.S. bought Alaska from Russia for $7.2 million. There was also the Gadsden Purchase in 1854, where the U.S. bought a small piece of land from Mexico to complete its southern border.

However, the U.S. didn’t always gain land peacefully. Sometimes, it used force or war. The U.S. fought the Mexican-American War. When the war ended in 1848, the U.S. took not only Texas but also California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Colorado and Wyoming. In Hawaii, the U.S. helped businessmen overthrow Queen Liliʻuokalani in 1893, and later, in 1898, the U.S. officially annexed Hawaii. Even though most native Hawaiians didn’t want it, the U.S. still took over.

The U.S. also used force against Native Americans. The government made treaties with tribes but often broke them and forced Native Americans onto reservations. The U.S. Army fought battles with many tribes, using violence to take their land. After the Spanish-American War in 1898, the U.S. gained Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. Even though this was through a treaty, it came after the U.S. had defeated Spain in the war.

The U.S. sometimes added new land by letting the people who lived there vote to join. One example is Texas. A long time ago, Texas was its own country after it broke away from Mexico in 1836. For almost 10 years, it was independent, but many Texans wanted to join the U.S. In 1845, they had a vote, and most people said yes. So, Texas became the 28th state. This was a peaceful and democratic way for Texas to join.

Another example is Hawaii. Even though the U.S. had taken control of Hawaii in 1898, it didn’t become a state right away. In 1959, the people of Hawaii had a vote, and almost everyone said they wanted to be part of the U.S. So, Hawaii became the 50th state. Around the same time, Alaska also had a vote. The people there chose to join the U.S., and Alaska became the 49th state. These are examples of how some places became part of the U.S. because the people voted for it.

So, while the U.S. mostly bought a lot of its land peacefully, there were also some times when it used war, force, or unfair deals to expand its territory.
RemyBrown
RemyBrown's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 506
3
2
6
RemyBrown's avatar
RemyBrown
3
2
6
-->
@Double_R
Now imagine if that same person's job depended on them maintaining their position.
It only becomes an issue if they break orthodoxy and the public doesn't find out about it (which often happens).

That makes absolutely no sense.
It does.  If the US annexes Canada under the condition of Medicare for all being under the 10th amendment, then states can decide for themselves if they want M4A or not.  1 of 2 things are true:

1. M4A is a net negative.
2. M4A is a net positive.

If the former is the case, then the newly added Canadian states would get rid of the idea voluntarily.  If the ladder is true, then the idea expands to other American states.

You can't lose here; the better idea wins whatever the better idea is.
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,639
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
I will just toss yet another silly argument over to chat GPT...
Because you have no argument of your own. As usual.
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,639
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@RemyBrown
It only becomes an issue if they break orthodoxy and the public doesn't find out about it (which often happens).
So it... Often... Becomes an issue

You can't lose here; the better idea wins whatever the better idea is.
The idea exists regardless. You have yet to explain why we need Canada for this.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 27,421
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
AI is fairly useful as a bullshit sniffer. Simply input the bullshit talking point, and it will correctly identify the bullshit almost all of time. So when you say something as erroneous as "America got most of its land through force" or "America protects the sovereignty of all other nations"

It can easily reprint thousands of pages of recorded history at a snap to debunk all your gaslighting of history.
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,639
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
So when you say something as erroneous as "America got most of its land through force" or "America protects the sovereignty of all other nations"
I didn't argue either of those things.

Are you illiterate?
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,434
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Double_R

Well, he does like foreign sex workers as First Ladies.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 27,421
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@FLRW
lol, porn doesn't motivate me nearly as much as it does you.
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,812
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@FLRW
Well, he does like foreign sex workers as First Ladies.
Melania is not a Canadian. She is a Slovenian. Trump should annex Slovenia.