So now we can add “directly capturing a sovereign leader” to the list of crap the US has done. So what do you think will actually be “the straw that broke the camels back” for world leaders to actually do something? Think it’ll be significant or something mundane?
I think the answer to your question is contained within the question. Americans are greedy people and a coordinated effort by China, Japan, and the UK could sink the US economy.
But I doubt that would even be necessary. Why kill someone intent on suicide? The US economy will likely collapse on it’s own if it continues on the path it’s on. I’m not talking about some recession like in 2008, I’m talking a collapse you’ve never experienced. Something similar to the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Also if you were going down the military strike route, an aircraft carrier would be stupid. Trump has broadcast to the entire world what the achilles heal of the US is and it isn’t the aircraft carriers. It’s something that’s dug up from the ground and needs to be processed by refineries.
These three countries aren’t aligned, much less in alignment ideologically. Hell, they aren’t even aligned internally. The US isn’t the only county that reverses directions every four to eight years.
Bo Xilai was very nearly China’s Premier and would have taken the country in a radically different direction absent his expulsion in 2013.
Nigel Farrage’s Reform UK has a totally different plan for the country than Starmer.
The county cycles through recessions every 10 years or so. If anything, we’re overdue. It doesn’t end after a bad business cycle.
Kinda like how the US, UK, and the Soviet Union were not aligned before the 1940s?
Alignments can change when there’s a common enemy. Sure those alignment changes may be temporary but they can last long enough to see a country bombed flat and the leaders dead in a bunker.
You’re obsessed over ideology but that’s mostly irrelevant in geopolitics. If it’s in the best interests of a bunch of countries to work together to destroy the US economy, those countries will work together regardless of ideology or internal politics. In WWII the UK had a government of national unity with both the Labour and Conservative in a coalition. Perhaps the US is incapable of having political parties working together for the common good of the country, but not every country has the same weaknesses the US has.
And countries can always go back to being adversaries for bullshit ideological reasons after the enemy is destroyed like the US and Soviet Union did after WWII. So animosity between countries can be put aside temporarily.
If Trump thinks he can be an existential threat to a large number of countries in the world, it’s a FAFO situation.
The US and the UK were flush with anti-communists who actively courted war with the Soviet Union even in the midst of WW2. Truman pivoted into the Cold War before the Pacific Theater was secured, in no small part because he didn’t want to risk Japan being divided North/South like Europe had been divided East/West.
Trump isn’t the only perceived threat.