this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2025
312 points (97.0% liked)

World News

49167 readers
1715 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 24 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The US isn’t ready for a two front war where the whole world wants to get rid of them. They don’t have the cards.

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Please... I'm not a big fan of the US right now either. But that is just an absurd claim. No one is going to willingly open up a front against the US.

Like it or not, but they absolutely have the cards.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

Canada would know that if the US attacks Mexico then it would be next, that would be the only time to fight.

There isn’t a choice, this means Europe joins.

Europe joining means China will join so that it can replace the US in Europe.

Mexico at war is going to bring many countries below it in because they don’t want to be the next smaller country on the US doorstep.

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Canada isn't a smuggle route worth billions.

The only reason they could even potentially go into Mexico is due to the Cartels and their billion dollar drug trade. (I don't have facts saying it's a billion dollar drug trade. But I'm making an educated guess that's it's worth a shit ton of money)

There is just no way in hell Canada would ever strike first on the US and be the aggressor. Even if Canada would strike at the US, why the hell would Europe side with Canada? They are now the aggressor. Attacking a fellow NATO member no less.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 hours ago

The realism of my previous statement, no one would view it as a strike first, it’s retaliation for attacking Mexico.

The alternative is to just get picked off one by one.

After Canada comes Denmark so be realistic about it.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

US doctrine since WWII has been to have the muscle to fight on two major fronts and one brush fire. We've gone down to one major front.

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

what "front? there are already millions of Mexicans deep in the USA that would not stand for an attack on their country

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Let's entertain your idea here for a second. How do you think that's going to go?

My guess, the at the first hint of any type of insurrection, best case. Latinos and Japanese-Americans are gonna have something in common. Worst case; full blown ethnic cleaning carried out by local militias.

I'm not condoning either. That's just what I personally think might happen.

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago

lol you assume Mexicans are as meek as Americans proved to be

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You mean the country they willingly fled, often due to cartel violence?

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

the vast majority are economic migrants... and yes talk to any Mexican, they are loyal to Mexico, always and forever

[–] vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 day ago

That's wrong, the US can eat a couple of countries just fine. The efficiency is atrocious, but the sheer inherited strategic power and logistics and stockpiles, and the amount of funding allowing to, say, build drones analogous to Russian "Geran" 100x times more expensive in the same amounts as Russia does, - all these make many wars a certain victory in the sense of destroying the other side's forces and possibly civilian population.

Anyway. Two things.

1 - In his previous term there was squeal from all sides how he's going to institute fascism right now. "The boy who cried wolves" may be a valid analogy or it may not. I think before anything like this the US will have an open change of the regime. At the same time - it's very convenient to have the land border with other countries very narrow, when instituting totalitarianism (resistance fighters, people trying to flee, all kinds of stuff), so possibly eating Mexico and Canada and doing a regime change after that is good enough.

2 - Perhaps any kind of a war is easier done after, suppose, an economic crisis happens. AI bubble burst, or something like that.