In this case, no. The Royal Navy doesn’t have more admirals than ships because of Donald Trump, for example. Reducing every single thread to Orange Man. Bad. is repetitive and frankly, boring.

No one said that Donald Trump is responsible for the Royal Navy's fleet size. What Donald Trump is responsible for is the deep frost in our relationship with our allies.

That reflects a choice, and one that rests with the change in U.S. approach to our allies created by the President. We certainly have the option to alienate our allies. If one decides that the UK or Canada's navy isn't big enough for it to continue to be in our interests to maintain alliances with those countries, then that is a policy that we could pursue.

To me, it seems foolish and shortsighted. The U.S. gets minimal benefit from these countries having marginally higher military forces, which is completely outweighed by the damage done to our relationships in other fora in which allies matter: economic, diplomatic, institutional, and a host of other interrelationships. Especially since the Administration is going about it in perhaps the most aggressive and alienating way possible - for example, there's no benefit to us in continually degrading Canada, talking about it as the 51st state, making domestic political attitudes towards the U.S. so poisonous that their elected government has little choice but to distance themselves from us. To say nothing of our recent policy decision to take the decades of close economic interrelations between the countries and exploit it to try to extract concessions from them. Yes, because we're bigger than they are and the trade is asymmetric we can exploit that fact to try to force them to make concessions - but the risk was always that rather than concede, they would instead take steps to reduce that interconnectedness and instead distance themselves even further. The "seeking new friends" of the thread title, since we've decided to treat them as bitter rivals rather than allies.