141–150 of 382 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>China didn't strongly suggest that Canada should become its 23rd or 24th province. China ransacked and then sank Nortel.
So? If we are going to talk about economic damage, the USA isn't going to come up looking better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
i don't think they're really expecting people to serve a useful role in the military. it's a "supplemental reserve", meaning a level below ordinary reservists. it sounds like basically if the country was ever in a situation dire enough that they were calling on ordinary citizens to help with defense, an ordinary citizen with a week's training would be better than one with no training. or more cynically: it's a way to…
Maybe I wouldn't be very useful in combat but maybe I can peel potatoes or mop the floors in case of an invasion. I am thinking it frees up someone who is "combat ready" from kitchen or janitor duty. It helps, right?
Maybe it's helpful just for you to understand the way the military is organised: if you are conscripted you should report to this base, you'll sleep here, your commanding officer will be someone from this branch of the armed forces, you'll be in a group of X people sharing Y shifts, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The difference here is presumably for the last hundred years, ending last November, there was simply no chance of a invasion of Canada. Nukes might fly overhead and end the world as they struck targets on either side, but other than that we were safe and any significant military action we took part in would be overseas and thus not justify calling up a huge number of reservists. Meanwhile Norway was occupied in WWII,…
> The difference here is presumably for the last hundred years, ending last November, there was simply no chance of a invasion of Canada. The chance of Canada being invaded didn't change at all in November. The amount of hyperbole about Trump has been utterly astounding, and fears of an Canadian invasion are an instance of that. And my sense is that actually a fair amount of the bad stuff Trump has done (though defin…
So maybe he should'nt've have broken laws. Not give them anything to pursue.
How much useful combat skills can be taught in only a week? It seems like an extremely low estimate on the training needed to play a useful role in the military.
A lot of military burst capacity is about freeing up soldiers who went through all the training and basic and specialization, but are stuck driving that truck.
The guys and gals who fire bullets are just the sharp point of the spear and all that.
It's also why Russia ballooned their "National Guard" forces even though they cannot be deployed outside Russia; They free up soldiers who can.
One of the most important things for a government in an actual "Oh shit real war" situation that requires significant mobilization is a simple census of "Who has the capability to do what menial job?"
How much useful combat skills can be taught in only a week? It seems like an extremely low estimate on the training needed to play a useful role in the military.
They are significantly less likely to do the correct thing if attacked, but a war isn’t going to just be over in 24 hours either so they can be trained up on the job.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I resent the implication that us being separate countries is a "historical quirk." It's condescending at best and exemplifies why we feel increasingly distant from the US. I mean that's a bit of an exaggeration. Canadians are basically Americans for all practical purpose to the degree you can barely tell them apart. It doesn't help that Canada has lacked any real national identity other then listing the few minor d…
> Canadians are basically Americans for all practical purpose to the degree you can barely tell them apart. It doesn't help that Canada has lacked any real national identity other then listing the few minor differences between it and the USA for decades. Why does this even mean? Does national identity even really matter? It's like saying Californians are basically Texans for all practical purpose. Men and women are p…
In the context of this whole article aka getting people to join the military it 100% matters. Do you think people are going to fight and die for a concept they don't care about?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Any attempt to do so would trigger a civil war within the US What makes you say that? I could see heavy protests, even violent protests, as it's not something Americans want. I'm not sure I could envision any semblance of an actual civil war, though, but perhaps I'm underestimating things.
If the United States tries to seize Canada they will do so after a protracted blockade in winter that coincides with air strikes on Canadian infrastructure. A lot of Canadians talk big talk about some sort of insurgency like Iraq, Afghanistan or Vietnam but all those places have borders with other countries that can enable smuggling of supplies to the resistance. Canada will be blockaded and after a period of cold an…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The difference here is presumably for the last hundred years, ending last November, there was simply no chance of a invasion of Canada. The chance of Canada being invaded didn't change at all in November. The amount of hyperbole about Trump has been utterly astounding, and fears of an Canadian invasion are an instance of that. And my sense is that actually a fair amount of the bad stuff Trump has done (though defin…
> Democrats fear and loathe him, so they pursued all kinds of legal actions against him while he was out of office So maybe he should'nt've have broken laws. Not give them anything to pursue.
It's not so simple: 1) everybody breaks laws, and 2) in at least one case those laws were stretched and abused in unusual ways to specifically target him (his felony convictions, which unsurprisingly were immediately turned into an electoral attack). I'm not a Trump fan, but I'm not a Democratic partisan either, and I think that prosecution was really, really gross.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US has been consistently signalling that it is considering annexing us since Donald Trump was re-elected in November of last year... the politicians are unlikely to say it outright but I think this is pretty clearly aimed at the US and making it too costly to do so.
The US invading Canada isn't a realistic possibility. Any attempt to do so would trigger a civil war within the US, to say nothing of obliterating the geopolitical system. Attempting to annex in any way shape or form is currently nothing more than the musings of an old man, the only way any territorial changes could happen are through peaceful, mutually agreed upon transfer. If the US were to seriously entertain the…
A possible scenario: Alberta votes for independence, and then applies to join the US - similar trajectory to how Texas went from Mexico to the US via independence, albeit likely much more peacefully
Is this actually going to happen? Probably not. But personally I think it is more likely than all the other farfetched scenarios some people here seem to be taking seriously
[flagged]
I resent the implication that us being separate countries is a "historical quirk." It's condescending at best and exemplifies why we feel increasingly distant from the US. It's like saying that Belgium and the Netherlands, or Spain and Portugal, or Germany and Switzerland are one historical quirk away from being the same countries.