• BossDj@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    3 hours ago

    “Panama should abandon its accommodating policy towards the U.S., which can only lead to escalating demands”

    Why do countries have to figure this out so slowly

  • usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Watch for any movement / build up of troops. He could still be bluffing here, but this is more than what he’s done for other places as far as I’m aware. His actions and orders from here out will be much more telling than any of his words will be

  • 🇨🇦 holdstrong@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 hours ago

    The US is threatening to invade a democratic nation and nobody seems to care. Where are all the freedom loving dudebros on this? Subjugating free countries is okay now? This is so exhausting

  • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    80
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    The minute we set foot in a sovereign country with intent to seize, we’ll be sanctioned into the ground by NATO. It will be completely warranted, yet Trump will somehow convince MAGA that they’re ‘attacking’ us economically.

    • My_IFAKs___gone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      Of all the people to blindly believe and follow, why him? Absolutely nothing I’ve seen about him even hints a wisp of “you can trust me” vibe. Did he do something amazing on The Apprentice? I never watched that screen feces, so I don’t know what was portrayed. I can only assume it was something spellbinding and miraculous based on the cultist compulsion millions of human brains seem to exhibit.

      Or did they all just hate Hillary Clinton or Obama SO MUCH that it permanently broke their brains?

      • FatsoJackson@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Or did they all just hate Hillary Clinton or Obama SO MUCH that it permanently broke their brains?

        don’t underestimate how incredibly racist and sexist some parts of the states are

      • PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Of all the people to blindly believe and follow, why him?

        Trump openly promises fascism in terms stupid enough that fascists can understand.

        There’s not much more to it.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      I assume you mean a western country with intent to seize, because we invaded Iraq and Afghanistan and NATO supported those campaigns.

    • in4apenny@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      Then Trump will be legally allowed to invade the hague.

      “The United States is not a member of the International Criminal Court (ICC). The American Service-Members’ Protection Act authorizes the President of the United States to use “all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court”. This authorization led to the act being nicknamed “The Hague Invasion Act”,[4] since the act would allow the president to order military action in The Hague, the seat of the ICC, to prevent American or allied officials and military personnel from being prosecuted or detained by the ICC.[5]”

      EDIT - While I realize this doesn’t apply to sanctions, it still sets a scary precedent for checking USA’s actions.

      • warm@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        6 hours ago

        International law couldnt give a fuck about that. That’s like saying Russia could legally invade Ukraine if they have a law saying it’s okay.

        • alkbch@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          While NATO’s Article 5 states that an attack on one member is an attack on all, it does not mandate a specific response, but rather each member decides what actions it deems necessary to assist the attacked member.

          Besides, Panama is not a NATO member.

        • rockSlayer@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          That clause is null and void between member states to prevent a WW1 situation.

          Also, Panama isn’t a member and would be defending, not invading.