Yes, let us look up the US law that prohibits annexing additional land or another country.
>A charitable interpretation of your comment is that you intended to use the word accession.
A charitable interpretation of your comment is that you think "annexation" = "hostile takeover of territory". (Hint: The US annexed Hawaii and Texas after their governments agreed.)
>As for annexation it's important to keep in mind that this would be an illegal act of aggression against a peaceful ally
Beyond your pointless repetition, as I said:
>I'm not talking about a military invasion (Trump explicitly ruled that out when speaking of annexation, instead stating "economic force"); I'm stating geopolitical inevitability.
(And no, Dutch gratefulness for Canadians helping to liberate their country in WW2 != waves of Dutch paratroopers landing on Halifax beach to help liberate Canada from Adolf Trump.)
If trade can be used to eliminate a nation's sovereignty, was that sovereignty ever real in the first place?