King Charles of Canada makes a rare public speech calling for aid from the Commonwealth to support Europe in defending against the US. It’s broadcast on Canadian TV.

Who do you join? The US or the UK?

  • Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago
    • an offensive war is much harder than a defensive one.

    Agreed

    • America would have to maintain gigantic transoceanic supply lines.

    True, but America already maintains these, even without ongoing conflicts. If they moved carrier groups from the Pacific, even easier.

    • America has a low tolerance for casualties, especially in foreign lands.

    I don’t think so. They seem pretty okay with casualties in every war since Vietnam. Compounded with the likelihood most casualties wouldn’t be extracted to the US until the end of a major conflict, it gets even easier.

    • Such an invasion would cause huge social unrest at home. Presumably such an invasion would be instigated by trump who would then be compelled to deploy the military at home as well.

    Sadly, this could legally work. The USA military is beholden to the president over anyone else. So long as an action isn’t unconstitutional, it’s legal if it comes from POTUS.

    • Lauchs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      America would have to maintain gigantic transoceanic supply lines.

      Those supply lines aren’t subject to attack though. They’d have to defend them against submarine attacks across thousands and thousands of kilometers. In that sort of fight, advantage to the attacker.

      They seem pretty okay with casualties in every war since Vietnam.

      Not in the numbers required for a ground war in Europe. America lost some 7,000 troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and its been considered a major debacle. Consider the number of casualties in Ukraine…

      The USA military is beholden to the president over anyone else.

      Oh, probably legal. Buy there would be massive protests, maybe riots etc. It would be a huge internal headache and distraction.

      • LeFantome@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Counter argument. The US probably knows the current location of everything that could pose a credible threat to either a nuclear submarine or an aircraft carrier.

        Defunding a large ocean perimeter is a lot easier when you know where everything is. Again, the first step would probably be to disable most of this stuff.