AmiaSmith Greenland and Canada are both impossible because BOTH of them are in NATO and it would be against the NATO treaty to attack another NATO country and a US general would have to refuse.
It is possible to attack Panama just as he did for Venezuela but a much less clear objective there to somehow regain control of the Suez canal because Trump’s only objection there is to the charges for ships passing through the canal. He has never seriously prepared for unlike the Venezuelan case which has been on the go for months now.
Trump demanded that Panama reduce the fees for US ships passing through the canal or to return it to US control.
He hasn’t talked about that for a fair while.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98l9wj67jgo
So that’s unlikely.
Why Trump wouldn’t attack Mexico
On Mexico - there are numerous political obstacles to prevent Trump attacking Mexico.
US and Mexico are friends not enemies and no way that he attacks Mexico - that would be war with Mexico.
He could assist Mexico in law enforcement in some way maybe but not attack them not in reality.
This is a fact check of a fake story about Biden invading Mexico from March 2024 but it covers some of the main issues.
QUOTE A U.S. invasion would be an abrupt departure from how the U.S. has engaged with its longtime ally. The U.S. State Department describes Mexico as “one of the United States’ closest and most valued partners,” noting on its website that the two countries have had 200 years of diplomatic relations
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2024/03/04/us-not-invading-mexico/72792322007/ False claim US wants to invade Mexico; countries are longtime allies | Fact check
And this is a detailed op ed commenting on the Republicans, Ron De Santis’s claim he would attack Mexico
QUOTE STARTS
First, Mexico would most likely respond to a U.S. military strike by expelling the DEA and other U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies operating in the country.
That would result in an increase in fentanyl smuggling across the border.
Second, Mexico would also immediately stop cooperating with Washington on migration issues.
Under current bilateral agreements, Mexico is deploying its National Guard to keep migrants from Central America, Venezuela and other countries from crossing the U.S. border. It also allows asylum seekers to wait in Mexico while their petitions are reviewed by U.S. immigration officials
Third, a U.S. military strike on Mexico would, at the very least, slow down trade along the U.S. border and hurt the U.S. economy.
Unbeknownst to many Americans, Mexico in July [2024] surpassed China as the United States’ largest trading partner. If trade along the border is crippled, U.S. cars prices would skyrocket, because many U.S. vehicles and car parts are imported from Mexico.
Fourth, a U.S. invasion of Mexico would make a mockery of America’s criticism of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and of Washington’s defense of the rule of law across the world.
“Any Mexican president, whether it’s the current one or any of his recent predecessors, would react by terminating bilateral cooperation agreements,” former Mexican foreign minister Jorge Castañeda told me.
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/andres-oppenheimer/article278616079.html#storylink=cpy The nuttiest idea from the Republican debate? DeSantis’ call for the U.S. to invade Mexico | Opinion
[Added bullet points]
I know that’s from before Trump’s presidency but it gives an idea of the political obstacles here.
Main thing for Mexico - water dispute - worst case 5% extra tariffs for exports to the USA which would impact on exporters but also on US consumers
There is a dispute over water, 800,000 acre feet shortfall.
Trump has threatened a 5% tariff on imports from Mexico as a result.
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/12/09/trump-mexico-water-tariffs/87683092007/
Mexico says the treaty lets it postpone a shortfall to the next five year cycle.
Both sides have drought conditions right now.
QUOTE STARTS
President Claudia Sheinbaum has asserted that Mexico is complying with the water treaty and has highlighted the severe drought affecting various regions of the country, which has prevented it from fully adhering to its part of the treaty.
“It’s been three years of drought, and to the extent water is available, Mexico has been complying. The International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC) has continued working to identify solutions that are favorable to both countries,” Sheinbaum remarked.
The National Water Commission notes that the treaty is flexible regarding the delivery of water by both nations, and that Mexico has the option of compensating for any shortfall in the next cycle, although noncompliance in two consecutive periods is prohibited.
https://english.elpais.com/economy-and-business/2025-04-14/the-1944-treaty-under-which-trump-accuses-mexico-of-stealing-water-from-texas.html
Worst case here is a 5% tariff on exports from Mexico to the USA. Which would increase prices in the US for imports from Mexico. As well as potentially reduce exports from Mexico if they are less competitive in price.
It’s not something to worry about at the personal level.
