Can Trump be stopped, or are international rules basically optional now?

[Anytimeilookaround]

I’m genuinely asking this rather than trying to start a rant. Can Trump actually be stopped by anyone?

The UN condemning things with words feels meaningless when there is no action behind it. We are watching a US president openly dismiss international law, threaten other countries, and act as if there are no consequences, and so far there do not seem to be any.

I know people will say powerful states have always broken the rules, but what feels different now is the lack of discipline or even pretence. There is no attempt to operate within the system anymore, just an open rejection of it.

This is where Gaza keeps coming to mind for me. Not because war itself is new, but because what happened there showed how far things can go with no intervention beyond statements of concern. It felt like Gaza became the resting point of what the world will tolerate when a powerful ally is involved. Once that line is established, it does not stay contained.

If international law is optional, the UN toothless, and alliances unwilling to check their own members, then are we actually living in a rules based order at all? Or just a power based one that we have not admitted yet?

I am open to being told I am wrong, but I would genuinely like to understand what, if anything, actually constrains a US president now.

Seriously, I don’t know where these posters are coming up with the idea that the US government ever cared about the ‘international order’ but I guess it was okay to delude yourselves when you were on the American side.

Now that fractures appear, you are getting nervous because you’re the only ones on the planet who ever cared about things like international law and the post WW2 order. These ideas were a reflection of European values to begin with, how could you expect the rest of the world to take those seriously??

Your time is better spent deciding how to move forward in such a world, instead of lamenting what was ‘lost’

Yup RTE news has a reporter there, and he just said there are no Chinese or Russian ships for thousands of km.

However, if I was Starmer, I would play Trump at his own game. Trump says there are ships, ok, so we best send troops to defend Greenland.

This is nearly the same as a Yes Prime Minister episode. St Georges Island. Lets send a regiment of fully armed troops on a "goodwill visit".

The UN Security Council have sanctions on individuals rather than Afghanistan as a whole so a quick google won’t bring it up for you. These have recently been renewed.

At Doha Afghan women were excluded as any engagement with the Taliban was prioritised. You can certainly criticise that decision. You could also say that the UN are restrained politically and it’s fair to say they are toothless. But it is categorically untrue that they have done nothing or that, considering their aid arm, that all actions are useless.

There are many legal immigrants being arrested and detained by ice. Do you agree that’s ok?

The international rules based order has only ever put a veneer of civilisation and order on the reality of the power based and turbulent world of international politics.

The biggest change is that Trump is signalling he doesn't believe Europe is spending enough on it's military to collectively defend itself, and that the USA won't carry the costs of all NATO defence anymore. This means we need to be spending more to defend ourselves, and to be fair all UK political parties have accepted that.

In terms of constraints on Trump number 1 is domestic public opinion in the USA, and number 2 is that whilst the USA has the most powerful military in the world it can't fight wars on all fronts simultaneously, and there is little to no domestic appetite for long, costly wars of attrition with long logistics chains (like Afghanistan or Iraq). Hence why Trump is talking the talk of isolationism, whilst also looking for quick wins in terms of regime change ops.

I think all rules have to be backed up by military might or they do not work. Sanctions can be imposed but also worked around.

In 2000 Europe was pretty close to the economy of the US now we are near half that.
In the 1975 the Russian economy was 60% of the US and a genuine threat to them but now is about 7%.
Europe as a regional power is losing relevance, and NATO is less needed, which we used to keep the US aligned with us.

It’s Europe’s fault I think that it became so reliant on the US for defence, I think that we got too used to sitting on the sidelines and criticising without the burden of responsibility.

Immigration is a privilege not a right.

What has always puzzled me is the complacency.

Why is the UK/Europe seemingly okay with falling behind America and increasingly China?

The fact that 20 years ago the US and EU were economically at parity, and now they have plummeted that far, should be alarming.

They cannot be weak in a world that doesn’t believe in their values

Trump doesn't need to go to war to get Greenland! That's the batshit crazy part. The Americans already have an alliance and base on there. He could ramp it up with NATO's blessing. None of this bullshit language is needed.

Also, the minerals extraction is a bit of a red herring. The lack of roads and infrastructure means you are looking at decades of work before payoff. It's worse than Venuzualan oil economics.

Greenland is a distraction. It keeps the attention on him, off the failures of ICE, venuzuala and the ongoing Medicaid shambles. Epstein is still a concern - both for him and his inner circle. No one has yet accused him of being a child rapist and there's a horrible unverified story in the released files that a 13 year old gave birth to a baby that was subsequently drowned by Epstein's crowd. True or not, that sort of allegation could torpedo the GOP in the midterm. Of course, that is assuming Trump is thinking rationally. A lot of what he does is purely for attention.

They’re way too powerful to be stopped. I don’t think any country is strong enough to take them on alone. A collective force could but that relies on liberalism which has in recent years declined. Trump doesn’t care about the world order, he is not a rational actor.

Trump has jumped, is jumping and will jump over any international rule that may be on his way, with no thought about it whatsoever.
He is also turning a blind eye, at best, and promoting, more often than not, other crazy country rulers, like Putin, to keep ignoring laws, the UN, and whatever.. Everything goes.
This has crashed any real chances to bring some order without armed conflicts.
The US needs to be kicked out of the UN and NATO. Before he attacks Greenland. Or he gets any form of armed retaliation from Venezuela. And let's not think of any further wars in the Middle East. We cannot let him drag any countries along with his crazy shit. And we have to make clear that no country is just sitting there for him to take it.
Canada, another State of US.... for example.

Article 4 of NATO is of interest.

The North Atlantic Treaty | NATO Official text

Article 4
The Parties will consult together whenever, in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened.

And article 13

Article 13
After the Treaty has been in force for twenty years, any Party may cease to be a Party one year after its notice of denunciation has been given to the Government of the United States of America, which will inform the Governments of the other Parties of the deposit of each notice of denunciation.

So Denmark could invoke article 4, that would force a meeting to discuss the threat.

And, the USA can't really leave ?

Anyway, now we know. Any future treaties will need to take all eventualities into account, and not assume one will go rogue.

The US constitution is the same really. It just assumes POTUS etc will be people of honour. Too late to fix that now it seems.

For the USA , Russia and China just read: Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia .

I would be shocked if there haven't been Russian ships in their waters.

What I find frustrating is that Europe has chosen to take itself out of the game in terms of being able to do anything to promote those values or their own interests.

And people did point this out.

But that is the choice the voters made, and now we see the consequences. And people are all acting as if it is out of the blue.

Not particularly, no. Do you agree it's ok to say things that are truthy, rather than the truth?

What does "truthy" mean?

The US knows it can do what it likes, it has the biggest military set up in the Western World. What can Europe or NATO actually do if he goes on a rampage of annexation and war? Seriously now.

I think people need to look at some of the other inhumane megalomaniacs at large in the world before they single out Trump. I’m not defending him, I’m just saying if this was the Top of the Pops countdown we’d have worse to fear than him.

But the rest of them are not pretending to be our Allies are they?

Prove I’ve lied. And you “don’t particularly agree” with legally documented immigrants being arrested and detained? Or you will outright condemn?

Oh well let’s just arrest everyone we originally welcomed into the Country then 🙄

...

It's something you see quite often in politics, where people (often a political figure) will feel justified in saying something that is not really accurate, because it feels like it is correct and describes the real situation.

It's almost a poetic description meant to convey feelings or values, the problem being that it tends to bend the actual facts.

I didn't say you lied, I said your statement wasn't accurate. And it isn't. What I think of the policy, or how they are actually going about implementing it, isn't relevant.