If Xi's underlings were in Mexico City all the time telling the Mexican government and even the cartels (similar to the Ukrainian Ultra-Nationalists/Nazi's like the Azov's) that they're going to support Mexico every step of the way in aggressive provocations and even war with the United States, we'd be invading tomorrow. Particularly if Mexico stated the intended to join BRICS or something similar.
We most certainly would not do that, even under your extremely tortured analogy.
Name a single time that a country on our periphery has aligned themselves with a geo-strategic competitor where the United States has not done at least one of these things: Invaded, attempted invasion, supported insurgencies, prosecuted coups, attempted to prosecute coups, blockaded (that's a military action), assassinations, attempted assassinations, economic sanctions, supported opposition politicians (even if they were the worst people on the planet)
In several cases, we've done, "all the above"
Hold on, it’s going to take me a while to get to the new goalposts.
The same goalposts have always been in the same spot. The problem you know you have is that you can't name a single instance where the United States has not done most if not all of those things when a geo-strategic advisory aligns itself with a periphery or near periphery neighbor.
Also, simply admit that as a #neocon, you are fully behind the United States doing whatever it takes to thwart a Geo-strategic advisary that's playing in the U.S. backyard, while you also fully support U.S. global hegemony.
BTW, as other countries move and seek settlements that by-pass the U.S. dollar, the lashing out is only going to get worse. Congrats #neocon, more wars are coming.
