If the US invaded and took over Canada, who would stop them?

if the US invaded and took over Canada, who would stop them?

Other urls found in this thread:

rbth.com/news/2016/09/06/russia-and-bolivia-sign-agreement-on-military-cooperation_627455
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

...

The day of the rake is near.

How do you know we have not infiltrated you already?

:^)

Nobody really, but it'd be too costly and we'd lose whatever international standing we had. We'll just wait until you guys ditch the monarchy for the ultimately bloodless Anschluss.

Mexico

>international standing
>becoming the largest country on planet earth
really?

this desu, Canada is like the only country being nice to us lately (excluding shitposters)

NATO obviously. Do you really think the US alone could stand up to the combined might of 27 other first world count-

Thank god all that weaponry is nuke-proof

>be british officer
>burn white house
>get shot

holy shit, why hasn't the US taken over all these countries?

France and the UK have enough nukes to create a ton of craters in the US

>be brit
>attempt to fly to US to burn down white house again
>can't because Trump has banned incoming flights from Muslim countries

They're all full of foreigners.
Pfft. We can deactivate the UKs nukes anytime we want.

They have

Can you do it with the French?
They have several territories which are very close to continental US.
And they could send the foreign legion to New York for the lols.

You're in there too you know?

>We can deactivate the UKs nukes anytime we want.

That's not how it works....

The US hasn't been interested in conquering other countries since.....well, since it became capable of conquering other countries. It's very weird. The rule seems to be that once the US is able to conquer a country, it no longer wants to conquer that country.

i am absolutely aware

You dont because you cant. You dont truly dominate the world because nuclear weapons exist

No but they only have 300 nukes.

I think you guys learnt from Liberia and Cuba and decided to do it differently, Haiti for example.

is US the most hipster country in the world?

Enough to destroy 300 cities.

Best examples of this are Mexico and Cuba. Our government officials never shut up about conquering these three places during the 19th century. But in 1848, after defeating Mexico and occupying the country, the President decided to not only just take the northern empty bits, but also pay the Mexicans millions of dollars for it. In 1899, with Cuba finally under our control, Congress said "on second thought, we do't actually want it".

You could also throw Canada in there, but in that case the reason for wanting annexation was fear that Britain would use it as a base to attack the US, so obviously that stopped being an issue around the 1890s, when the US-British "friendship" really got going.

>Americans limp home with their tail between their legs, completely btfo by half naked Asian peasants
>America winning a war against a first world modern army
Loled to be honest.

severely underrated post

It honestly isn't, you have to figure the vast majority of those will likely be shot down.

*conquering these two places

I'm talking about why the US doesn't just run around annexing non-nuclear states, and why it didn't do it much before nukes were invented either.

It's more than enough to deter us. Nobody in their right mind would give up an American city just so we can annex some country we don't care about.

Not really. We just really hate foreigners.

If you had met you people you'd understand why.

But you cant annex non nuclear states because the other nuclear states would not allow it, its as simple as that.

Of course not but in this scenario we presumably care about France for some reason.

Maybe we're at war with the caliphate, who knows?

Sure we could. Russia annexs the shit out of stuff all the time.

No one gives a fuck what we do in this hemisphere.

Military doesn't mean shit when you don't use it efficiently. I would say 3/4 of your costs are food because you're fat cunts.

Nobody desu

>But you cant annex non nuclear states because the other nuclear states would not allow it

Right, just like how the world didn't let China annex Tibet, or the USSR annex the Baltic States, or India annex Hyderabad, or Russia to annex bits of Ukraine...ultimately, it becomes a question of "will you give up your entire population to protect some country thousands of miles away whose existence has no impact on your country's well-being?". The answer is almost always no. If the US decided to annex Jamaica tomorrow, there would be a big fuss, other countries would sanction us, we'd lose a ton of political influence, etc., but Theresa "I want to see your porn habits" May wouldn't launch your missiles.

this so much
this is why russia have the power Sup Forums usually deny. nukes make every other factor absurd, since even if the russian where as poor as africans, they would still have the power to destroy th world. and that why usa is not the total ruler of the world, since they are not the only who owns nukes.
in a total display of power, it wouldnt matter who spend more money in the military , usa would be erased from existence anyway

...

>tfw the silly yanks will never ever be as powerful as the British Empire

This. No one can do shit about superpowers invading countries.

If the US decided to invade Chile and rename it "New Texas", not a single nuclear missile would be launched by anyone. Nobody in Britain, France, Russia, India, China, or Israel is going to sacrifice their entire country to save Chile. The power you mention goes both ways. It prevents you from totally dominating nuclear powers, but it allows you to do as you please against non-nuclear powers as long as you have the conventional military power to back it up.

Your logic is on the assumption that MAD isn't a thing.

Sorry buddy, there's at least 5 countries more powerful than GB

not true. your country is in other position, completly diferent. russia or china are "below" the US in every sense, making those countries want more power and land. usa by the other hand canot anex anything ´cause it has too much to loose if it declares a major event as a war or a break of realtionships between countries
also youre pussies

They can complain at the UN which we all know is very effective.

Other countries would be very happy to sponsor insurgency in New Texas though

And you are not one of them. So sit your maple syrup drinking arse down you leaf spastic

Of course, we would never want to go around annexing other countries these days. We're too invested in the neoliberal order that pays lip service to ideas like territorial integrity. But that's not my point, it's a hypothetical scenario.

Meanwhile, in reality, the US could annex the Dominican Republic tomorrow with less than zero consequences.

This is one long run on sentence.
>Complaining to the UN solving a problem
Unlikely.

India annexed Goa too, and China Macau.

True. But still, no nukes, no civilian deaths in our own country.

If the US annexed the Dominican Republic tomorrow there would be massive consequences. It would basically destroy the legitimacy that the international order we built (UN, World Bank, IMF, WTO) is based on. We would lose any remaining political influence or credibility. NATO would probably be dissolved, most of our allies would abandon us. We'd probably face economic sanctions, too.

>Great Britain is more powerful than Canada
Sure.

What this user said is absolutely right. Other countries can afford to run around annexing places willy-nilly because they're "below" us. What does Russia care if the neoliberal order gets angry at them? They're barely a part of it. We have too much to lose to do anything like that.

>If the US annexed the Dominican Republic tomorrow there would be massive consequences
I'll take that bet.

this may be true, because Chile is "allied" to the US. yet, that idea is ignoring the fact that, latam for example, is filled whit russians and chinese influencies and interest, and they may not go full war, but history has show thats not necesary (see vietnam, corea, afganistan, cuba, etc etc)
rbth.com/news/2016/09/06/russia-and-bolivia-sign-agreement-on-military-cooperation_627455

Do you really think the world would just shrug and ignore it?

Of course. But I'm just talking about possible nuclear attacks.

...

The neoliberal order is and shall be precisely what we dictate.

If the US decides it wants to annex some pissant island tomorrow the neoliberal order will adapt because at the end of the day all those people truly care about is money.

...

>Do you really think the world would just shrug and ignore it?
I guarantee it.

Why would anyone die on the vine for the Dominican Republic? It's of no economic or strategic value whatsoever.

>The neoliberal order is and shall be precisely what we dictate.

No it isn't. This isn't 1945 anymore, the US is still the world's sole superpower but the rest of the world isn't as weak as it was when our government created this order in the first place.

>tomorrow the neoliberal order will adapt because at the end of the day all those people truly care about is money.

Yes, it will adapt by rejecting us as that order's leader. Our current allies would stop following our lead except for those who are really desperately dependent on us (which isn't really that many of them). We would definitely face economic sanctions from the likes of the EU, China, and Russia.

>Why would anyone die on the vine for the Dominican Republic?

I'm not talking about dying. I don't think anyone would so much as fire a shot. But there would be serious political and economic consequences.

>But there would be serious political and economic consequences
You seriously overestimate the elite's supposed attachment to western values.

All they care about is money. And as long as the US Navy remains the only navy capable of policing the sea lanes and the billions that float on them then the US military will be allowed to do whatever the fuck it wants.

The Dominicans would probably fire a shot.
And there's a bunch of them in Jew York no?

Themselves.

>New Texas
I'd enjoy that.
Hey buddy you seen the great Wall of New Texas. Hell yeah, everything is bigger in Texas. Though I think the great Wall of Trump is still bigger.

>And there's a bunch of them in Jew York no?

Those are Americanized Dominicans. You have no idea how tame American immigrant communities are. One day it's all "muh pride, muh heritage", but then the war starts and they forget all that. You might see some protests, but that's it. Same thing happened in WWI and WWII, the German-Americans made a big deal out of it but they shut up once the shooting started.

We would use any peaceful/diplomatic means at our disposal and while we certainly would not be able to stop you, in a scenario in which you're crazy enough to attack your best ally out of the blue we would certainly militarize our border and look into nuclear detente through alliance with Russia and China at first, but developing our own mid term.

In this scenario even Europe would be forced to boyct you and look for resolution. You can certainly destroy the whole world but even you can't fight us all.

>best ally
I don't see Australia on that map.