• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

US Threat to 'Take back' the Panama Canal

Darat said:
Quite seriously they should get ready to destroy the canal the second the USA invades them. Blow it to smithereens.
Click to expand...
Would not even be that hard. Just wreck the locks..which you do with a few pounds of well placed plastc explosive...and the Canal would be jusells for along time.
 
theprestige said:
I suspect that if Panama destroyed the locks, they would never resume control again. The US would take over, rebuild and widen, and never ever return control over the canal to Panama.
Click to expand...
The canal is too long to protect from the guerilla style insurgency that would immediately trigger. The result would be lots of US soldiers lives and a major cost for literally no gain as the canal would be useless. I see Trump and his cronies stupid enough to do so (especially with the rubber stamp GOP he has now), but it would just be another Vietnam/Iraq/Afghanistan, ie a failure in the long run.
 
Trump being Trump, just won't pay the bills. he'll send US navy vessels through the canal and not pay. if Panama refuses to let them through for free, well that'll be seen as an anti-US action and sanctions will follow, perhaps the US will just blockade the canal until the US gets free passage for naval vessels. Even if all nations naval vessels transited for free it wouldn't be a big loss for Panama, the only country to significantly gain would be the US. It would be a big win for Trump.
 
arthwollipot said:
Do you believe that the US would literally go to war against China over this?
Click to expand...
Can we identify exactly what the "this" is, which anyone might consider war over? Resentment at China using stuff America built?

China's "Belt and Road" initiative has seen it pour investment into infrastructure projects in multiple countries. China's cash-rich because it manufactures for the world, and investing in projects which help it ship its exports while developing good relations with the countries it's investing in just makes sense. I gather it's invested heavily in port infrastructure at both ends of the Panama Canal. I even heard suggestions of its building parallel new sections of larger canal, though I don't know if that's going ahead.

Now Trump says China "operates" the canal, but Panama says no it doesn't. So what's this threat of war about? I mean, I get that the canal has been a major military asset for the US in time of war, but realistically we're pretty much past the era of battleships these days. So, what's at issue?
 
Lukraak_Sisser said:
The canal is too long to protect from the guerilla style insurgency that would immediately trigger. The result would be lots of US soldiers lives and a major cost for literally no gain as the canal would be useless. I see Trump and his cronies stupid enough to do so (especially with the rubber stamp GOP he has now), but it would just be another Vietnam/Iraq/Afghanistan, ie a failure in the long run.
Click to expand...
Ukraine is currently holding a much longer line against the world's largest and most well equipped guerrilla insurgency.
 
Not to mention, at the moment at least the US is very squeamish about US soldiers dying, whereas Russia is... not
 
Lukraak_Sisser said:
And how many large and slow cargo ships are passing that front line along it's entire length on a daily basis?
Click to expand...
You mean the ones that park in harbors at either end until they're cleared to transit the canal? There's not a lot of places in Panama for insurgents to hide on either side of the canal, and launch infrastructure attacks without being detected and destroyed from the air.

And there's not a lot of hope for an insurgent commando team to stow away aboard a ship undetected. Where are all these insurgents supposedly coming from, anyway?
Lukraak_Sisser said:
Not to mention, at the moment at least the US is very squeamish about US soldiers dying, whereas Russia is... not
Click to expand...
I suspect most LATAM insurgent commanders are also much more squeamish about throwing away their troops than are most Russian mobik commanders.
 
Lukraak_Sisser said:
And how many large and slow cargo ships are passing that front line along it's entire length on a daily basis?
Click to expand...
Well, not so many ships, but there were commercial airliners overflying the line, and that only stopped when Russia's trigger happy Little Green Men shot one down.
 
If I were in charge of Panama (I'm not) I'd just announce we're addressing American concerns by reconsidering canal fees. Then in a couple of weeks announce we're giving US ships a discount from their previous fees. And not change the fees in the slightest because all Trump cares about is what's said, not what happens. In fact I'd stealthily raise the fees incrementally over time, just for the inconvenience of having to deal with that poultroon.
 
theprestige said:
Aaaahahahahaha seriously?

This wouldn't be Ukraine, begging for NATO's table scraps. This would be the US military industrial complex in all its glory, on home ground.

And that's before we get to the part where the US and China both have a vested interest in keeping the Canal open. China has nothing to lose, by letting the US take over day to day operations.
Click to expand...
When did Panama become part of the USA?
 
I would sink a ship in every lock and blow all the gates.

Tell them it's theirs.

It would take the US years to get it running again if Trump and his cronies are in charge.
 
Remember when "conservatives" in the forum used to sound reasonable? Trump changed all that. Did they change or did they realize that they could let the kkkrazy show?
 
Mojo said:
That's OK, Donnie will fix that by stopping the Californians protecting fish.
Click to expand...
There is loads of water available from canada for that just like for the LA fires. But liberal policies are just dumping it in the ocean.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom