Trump trolls the terminally thick

Walt said:
trump already said that getting the two was a "necessity", which in international jargon means he will go to war if he does not get them. That is what has the world so worried.
Click to expand...

There is ZERO % chance he'd undertake military action to get Greenland. That was probably said just for "funzies". And we do NOT want to do a military invasion of Panama to get the Canal. The ONLY way Congress would approve anything even REMOTELY like that would be if they completely lost their fucking minds to a person and decided that spending BILLIONS OF DOLLARS on an unnecessary war that would just be appalling to watch and not really "solve" any problem was the thing that REALLY NEEDED TO BE DONE.

Walt said:
When he was just offering to buy Greenland, everyone was just laughing at him.
Click to expand...

Because it's funny. Greenland is its own place as is Denmark. One doesn't just go and "buy" another country against its will. And if Trump actually spends PUBLIC MONEY on a military invasion of Greenland I'm pretty sure the history books will be writing themselves for the MOST BIZARRE AND STUPIDLY FUNNY THING a US president had ever done.

Walt said:
Now he is threatening to go to war for it, and people are worried.
Click to expand...

That's the thing. Trump PROMISED to get us out of all these wars and save money for us and make us all so winning that we would vomit if we won any more and the FIRST THINGS HE'S TALKING ABOUT ARE WASTING BILLIONS IN UNNECESSARY WARS LIKE WITH FUCKING GREEEEEENLAAAND??????????
 
Diogenes said:
If Mexico is a US state, there won't be a border, Salty. There will be a state line.
Click to expand...
There will be a state border, and it will be a totally open border.

You want to literally remove the Mexican/American border as a barrier, and just allow anyone to cross over.
 
Walt said:
Greenland, Canada, Panama, AND Mexico will refuse to join the USA. The next question is what will trump do about that.
Click to expand...

Trump is gonna do NOTHING about it. HE may be delusional enough to think attacking or even PROPOSING the joining of these places but there's like NO ONE ELSE in the West Wing who would be behind that. It's an ABSURDIST notion. INSANE. LITERALLY INSANE if he seriously does anything meaningful for these goals.

Trump is just trolling people. He's blathering to keep his name in the news. It's pathetic and sad. And we're giving him attention.
 
Diogenes said:
Who knows? Louisiana, Texas, and Alaska (among others) opted to join the Union, didn't they?
Click to expand...
Louisiana and Alaska were bought. Texas decided to join, though it was mostly made up of Americans at the time, so that was easy. And with Texas, there was a huge payment of cash. Getting complete foreigners to decide to join the USA will require a lot of money, and even then will be rejected by most.
 
Walt said:
Louisiana and Alaska were bought. Texas decided to join, though it was mostly made up of Americans at the time, so that was easy. And with Texas, there was a huge payment of cash. Getting complete foreigners to decide to join the USA will require a lot of money, and even then will be rejected by most.
Click to expand...


Who knows what the future holds, Salty Walty?

You do know that many current US states were initially territories that petitioned Congress for the privilege of becoming a state, don't you?
 
Walt said:
Louisiana and Alaska were bought.
Click to expand...

The Louisiana Purchase, which took place in 1803, involved the acquisition of approximately 828,000 square miles of territory from France by the United States. Here's a breakdown of how this transition affected the people living in that territory:
  1. Native American Tribes: The territory was home to numerous Native American tribes, including the Osage, Caddo, Quapaw, and others. These tribes did not agree to become part of the United States through any formal process or treaty directly related to the Louisiana Purchase itself. Instead, their lands were part of the transaction between France and the U.S., often leading to subsequent treaties, displacement, and conflicts as U.S. expansion continued.
  2. French and Spanish Settlers:
    • French Settlers: Many French settlers in the region, particularly in areas like New Orleans, had to adapt to American governance. The transition was not always smooth, with cultural and legal differences causing friction. However, many French inhabitants eventually integrated into American society, though some initially resisted American rule or left for other French territories.
    • Spanish Settlers: The area had also been under Spanish control before reverting to France shortly before the sale. Spanish settlers, like their French counterparts, found themselves under new American administration. Their agreement was more about adapting to new governance rather than a formal consent process.
  3. Legal and Political Transition: Post-purchase, the U.S. government established new territories and eventually states from the Louisiana Purchase land. The process involved setting up territorial governments, which sometimes included local elections where residents could participate, but this was more of an administrative incorporation rather than a consultation on becoming American.
  4. Cultural Impact: Over time, the cultural legacy of the area has been a blend of French, Spanish, Native American, and American influences, showing that while the inhabitants did not formally "agree" in a democratic sense, they adapted to and influenced the new American context.
In summary, the people living in the Louisiana Purchase territory didn't have a say in a modern democratic sense regarding becoming American citizens. The change in sovereignty was imposed by the transaction between France and the U.S., followed by gradual integration into the United States through governance, law, and cultural adaptation. The Native American perspective, in particular, is one of significant loss and conflict due to this expansion.

When the United States purchased Alaska from Russia in 1867, known as the Alaska Purchase or Seward's Folly, the indigenous peoples living there were not formally consulted or involved in the negotiations. Here's a breakdown of the situation:

  • Negotiations and Agreement: The transaction was between the governments of the United States and Russia. The Treaty of Cession was signed on March 30, 1867, by U.S. Secretary of State William H. Seward and Russian Minister Eduard de Stoeckl.
  • Indigenous Peoples: At the time of the purchase, Alaska was inhabited by various indigenous groups including the Inuit, Yupik, Tlingit, Haida, Tsimshian, and Aleut peoples, among others. These groups had their own governance structures but were not part of the diplomatic discussions or decisions regarding the sale.
  • Legal and Political Status: The indigenous populations were not considered part of the political entities negotiating the sale. They were subjects of Russian colonial rule, which was then transferred to U.S. sovereignty with little regard for their rights or opinions.
  • Aftermath: The transfer of Alaska to U.S. control had significant impacts on the indigenous populations, including changes in land use, governance, and cultural disruptions. It wasn't until much later, with acts like the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971, that some formal recognition and compensation were given to Alaska Natives for their lands.
  • Consultation Practices: The concept of consulting indigenous peoples on matters affecting their territories was not a common practice in international law or diplomacy at that time. It would be decades before such considerations became part of international human rights discourse, particularly with the adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in 2007.

In summary, the residents of Alaska, meaning the indigenous populations, were not consulted in the traditional sense during the purchase of Alaska by the United States from Russia. The transaction was handled at the governmental level between the two nation-states involved.



Walt said:
Texas decided to join, though it was mostly made up of Americans at the time, so that was easy. And with Texas, there was a huge payment of cash.
Click to expand...


Prior to its annexation by the United States in 1845, the Republic of Texas had a diverse population, but a significant portion was indeed made up of American citizens or immigrants from the United States. Here's a breakdown:

  • American Settlers: Many settlers in Texas came from the United States, particularly from the southern states. These settlers were attracted by land grants offered by the Mexican government in the early 19th century, before Texas declared independence. This group included individuals like Stephen F. Austin, who led the "Old Three Hundred" settlers to Texas.
  • Tejanos: There was also a substantial population of Tejanos, people of Spanish or Mexican descent who were living in Texas. They were the original inhabitants or descendants of those who had lived in the region under Spanish and then Mexican rule.
  • Native Americans: Various indigenous groups also resided in Texas, including the Comanche, Apache, and others, though they were not part of the formal political structure of the Republic of Texas.
  • Immigrants from Other Countries: There were also immigrants from Europe, particularly from Germany, who came to Texas after the independence from Mexico but before annexation by the U.S.

When Texas declared independence in 1836 and became the Republic of Texas, the demographic included a mix of these groups. However, by the time of annexation in 1845, the American influence had become predominant due to the influx of settlers from the U.S. and the political leadership which was largely composed of Americans or those who aligned with American interests.

There was not a "huge payment of cash" directly involved in the annexation of the Republic of Texas by the United States. The annexation was accomplished through a Joint Resolution of the U.S. Congress in 1845, which did not include any direct monetary payment to Texas for annexation.

In the broader context of the Mexican-American War, which was partly triggered by the annexation, there were financial settlements. After the war, under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, the United States paid Mexico $15 million for the Mexican Cession, which included territories beyond Texas. This payment was not for Texas, but for a much larger area of land ceded by Mexico.


@Grok
 
Walt said:
Can you imagine how much it would cost to support all those new "American citizens"?
Click to expand...

Of the 50 states in the United States, 31 began as organized incorporated territories. Here's an overview of how territories typically became states:
Territories to States Process:
  1. Establishment of Territory:
    • Congress would pass an act to organize a territory, which usually included the appointment of a governor, secretary, and a judiciary, along with the creation of a legislative assembly. The territory would be governed under the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 or similar subsequent laws, which set precedents for land governance.
  2. Population and Infrastructure Growth:
    • The territory needed to grow in population and develop infrastructure. The Northwest Ordinance required a territory to have at least 60,000 free inhabitants before it could apply for statehood, though this number was not always strictly adhered to in practice.
  3. Drafting a Constitution:
    • When the population was deemed sufficient, residents would elect delegates to draft a state constitution. This document would define the new state's government structure, often following the model of existing states but with some local adaptations.
  4. Congressional Approval:
    • The proposed constitution would be sent to Congress for approval. Congress reviews the document to ensure it aligns with federal laws and the U.S. Constitution, particularly regarding civil rights and government structure.
  5. Enabling Act:
    • If Congress approved the constitution, they would pass an Enabling Act, which formally permitted the territory to proceed with the process of becoming a state. This act might include conditions or recommendations for the final state constitution.
  6. Ratification by the Territory:
    • The territory's residents would then vote on whether to accept the constitution as drafted and approved by Congress.
  7. Statehood Admission:
    • Once the constitution was ratified by the voters, Congress would pass an Act of Admission, and the President would sign it into law, officially admitting the new state into the Union. This act would specify when the statehood begins.
  8. Electing State Officials:
    • After admission, the new state would hold elections for state officials, including governor, senators, representatives, and other state positions.
Notable Examples:
  • Ohio (1803) was the first state admitted under the Northwest Ordinance after being part of the Northwest Territory.
  • California (1850) bypassed the territory phase because of the gold rush, applying directly for statehood under the Compromise of 1850.
  • Alaska (1959) and Hawaii (1959) were the last two territories to become states, each with unique circumstances due to their geographical isolation and strategic importance during the Cold War.
This process, while generally consistent, could have variations based on specific historical or political contexts at the time of each territory's application for statehood.



@Grok
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top