this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2025
191 points (95.3% liked)

World News

39504 readers
1765 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
 

Summary

Donald Trump suggested using "economic force" to acquire Canada, citing trade deficits and national security benefits.

He also claimed the U.S. "subsidizes" Canada by up to $200 billion annually.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau dismissed the idea, saying, "there isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell" Canada would join the U.S.

Meanwhile, U.S. President Joe Biden praised Trudeau’s leadership as he prepares to leave office amidst rising U.S.-Canada trade tensions and tariff threats under Trump.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cryan24@lemmy.world 51 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Doesn't seem wise,the US depended on Canada for 60% of its crude oil last year..

[–] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 35 points 1 day ago (1 children)

they will need some freedom, you say?

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 21 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Yeah. But Canada was dumb enough to build pipelines into America instead of their own refineries or shipping, so they're kind of stuck.

And Trudeau is resigning and while I don't know much about his likely replacement...

He doesn't seem great

[–] palordrolap@fedia.io 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Pipelines can be shut off. It's a Putin-approved tactic.

[–] errer@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And then Canada sells this unprocessed oil to…who exactly? Gotta get it to a coast if you can’t pipe it through the US and Canada is yuge

[–] palordrolap@fedia.io 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Oil doesn't go off if you store it properly. Or don't extract it in the first place. The fact it has been in the ground for millions of years is testament to that.

And, there's that whole Putin thing I alluded to. Europe might well be interested in surplus oil.

Yeah, we should be using renewables, not fossil fuels, but a lot of the old infrastructure is still here. There's bound to be some interest.

I do feel for the oil workers who might be affected by all this, though, which might be what you're getting at.

[–] Saleh@feddit.org 2 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Oil (EDIT: in the ground) is stored under a lot of pressure, oil wells cannot be shut off and restarted easily, some might never start again when being shut off, building refineries and pipelines takes years and storing large swaths of crude above ground is incredibly inefficient.

In the end you need a good processing and logistics to get the stuff on the market constantly.

[–] Zahtu@feddit.org 1 points 1 day ago

Why cant Canada introduce legislation to Stop providing cruse oil through those Pipeline? Starting from Trumps Inauguration or at least from the start of the next contract renewal. Would be one hell of a Inauguration present

[–] vanderbilt@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Now you see why he’s trying to normalize the idea of annexation. Greenland has potential to be resource rich and Canada is resource rich.

I predict the next world war will happen on the cusp of smaller nations creating nuclear arsenals to defend their sovereignty.

[–] Wiz@midwest.social 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

By "resource rich" I assume you mean "One of the few habitable places on earth in 20 years."

[–] DicJacobus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Most of Canada isn't even habitable for weird Canadians. I live close to Maine, and there are some times of the year where you arne't leaving home for a day or two until the snowplows dig everyone out. and our winters are MILD

[–] thejml@lemm.ee 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That’s probably one reason he’d like to annex it then. All that crude would be ours.

[–] Cryan24@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Or they cut you off and you dont have the oil to mobilise your army against them..

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

And aluminium, and wood