Is it semantics?

There is a question that the entire ‘annexation’ of Canada brings to light. Is it the setting of an unintelligent person to employ humor (I try to steer clear of the word stupid) or is there a larger setting? So what is the actual meaning of this?

The previous story gave you part of that, but CBC (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trump-absorb-canada-response-1.7426177) gives us (optionally) more. It starts with ‘No longer a joke: Ministers say Trump’s threats to absorb Canada need to be taken seriously’ where we are confronted with “Trump said Tuesday he’d be willing to use ‘economic force’ to join countries”, we saw that and as such it would not be enough. 

But there is more, the setting of “Finance Minister Dominic LeBlanc said Wednesday that U.S. president-elect Donald Trump’s assertions that Canada should become the 51st state should be taken seriously, after he initially dismissed them as a joke. “The joke is over,” LeBlanc told reporters in French. “The president and his allies continue to repeat this — we know it’s not going anywhere — but the fact that he’s repeating it, it’s not very constructive.”” You see, this is true. But as we have surmised several times in the past, there is a need for any politician to seek the limelight (not that this is always wrong). As such we are given and shown that Finance Minister Dominic LeBlanc, Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly, Immigration Minister Marc Miller and International Trade Minister Mary Ng all have their say. Yet, they all miss a few corners. You see we are overwhelmingly confronted with ‘influencers’ all seeking limelight and they ‘know’ that outbursts of Donald Trump give them the emotional rhetoric to flame settings. Now they all get the chance to drill into 40 million Canadians, all eager to grow their ‘momentum’ that is the lose for to a lot of this. And it is a lot like the setting in the Patriot (that movie with Mel Gibson). Why swap 1 political party 5800 kilometers away when you could have 58 political players 100 kilometers away? That would make no sense and Canadians need to be aware of this. What is the optional stage oil that people like Donald Trump and Kevon O’Leary (a Canadian no less) will opt for the direct marketing of 40 million Canadians to get the upper hand. Whatever O’Leary claims, he will be in it for the money. He wants to ‘secure’ his 400 million and preferably add some (hundreds of) millions to it and as I see it, anyway will do. The man is the direct opposite of Ryan Reynolds. He is in it for his money in his own way, but a lot more intelligent. Any party he engaged with enriched him and he enriched them by a lot. And there is a social/national pride in his achievements. That is the proper way enterprising and capitalism needs to work. I wonder why no one sees that. 

The larger issue is not that, it is the setting what the Commonwealth needs to do. At some point it is forced to bulk up their borders and that is the strapping setting. The UK, Australia and New Zealand will be forced to take a stance. Optionally not New Zealand, their Sopwith Camels don’t have the range to fly to the US. And I don’t think that they have an operational Army either, good enough for humanitarian jobs and rescue operations, but actual war on another shore? I doubt that.

So the Commonwealth could start crying foul and invite China to become the aid party of choice. China will love that, now it gets army and navy posts right at the front door of America. And now we get a new Cuban missile crises, but one at the front door of Los Angeles, Hollywood (the burning one), Chicago, New York and Washington DC. Yes, a real good sense of humor, mr. President elect. And let the influencers get the blame, it was his posts (allegedly) that is setting the flames sprawling and unlike the ones in California, these flames will have a national impact. Americans asked for this, they elected the man. So what comes out is on their own heads. As a commonwealthian I share the feelings of Justin Trudeau who said on January 7th (source: CBC) ‘Trudeau says ‘not a snowball’s chance in hell’ Canada joins U.S.’ And as that setting evolves I wonder if I should swap my optional future in Toronto with a more secure lifestyle in Abu Dhabi. The idea of having an apartment next to a mall (Yas Mall) and 4 tourist attraction becomes highly appealing especially if the Harry Potter universe is added in 2025 to the Warner Brothers Abu Dhabi park. Perhaps IBM needs IBM Statistics support staff in Abu Dhabi. With a (delusional) sign on bonus of $15 million I’ll be game to witch Australia for the United Arab Emirates. Still willing to move to Toronto (for the same amount mr Ellison), so what are my options? Unless something is done with the President elect, I merely see the UAE as an option. Consider that, that people are willing to leave Canada and the beauty it holds for a different kind of beauty (UAE, Abu Dhabi). And in the end it will merely delay the bankruptcy by 5 years, which gets Trump out of deep water and after that America will drag Canada into the same mess it created for itself, well done Wall Street.

All that for a sense of delusional humor? I will let you decide, yet consider that America opened to door to grow China in near exponential size, because they could end up with options in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. As Elon Musk has shifted his interest into ousting Keir Starmer from the post of PM of the United Kingdom (which is not the worst idea), however whatever he wants to replace him with will be a person HE can control and that is not on with me.

The last country will open doors all over Europe. How is the expensionarlism of Trump hitting you now? On the upside, these four nations will see a larger investment from China in their regions. Not the best option, but taking in account what America had in mind a optional preferable one.

Have an optional great day.