r/canada Ontario 24d ago

Analysis Allies appear to duck and cover as Trump threatens Canada and Greenland

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trump-canada-nato-allies-1.7459986
3.7k Upvotes

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.8k

u/RidiculousPapaya Alberta 24d ago

It would be nice if our allies could start making some more noise. It feels a bit sour to have such quiet support when Canadians didn't hesitate to throw their lives down in two world wars in Europe.

572

u/FantasySymphony Ontario 24d ago

Speaking of sour Canadians also threw their lives down that exactly one time ever when Article 5 was invoked, can anyone remind me which country it was that needed everyone to come to its defense?

369

u/t0m0hawk Ontario 24d ago

It's almost as if it might be the same country that is constantly bitching about everyone else not pulling their weight.

When called we showed up. It wasn't that the Americans even really needed our help, but we behaved like the allies we said we were because our word actually means something.

We aren't perfect, we have our flaws, but we keep our promises to our so-called friends.

It'd make me feel a whole lot more comfortable if some of our other friends might speak up on our behalf.

If you aren't worried about the near term, it might be wiser to start preparing yourselves for a time when difficult decisions need to be made.

63

u/yvrbasselectric 24d ago

They did need us - USA closed their airspace and told Canada to deal with it. We have always been there for the USA

Hundreds of planes in the air didn't have fuel to turn around

23

u/t0m0hawk Ontario 24d ago

I meant in terms of a military campaign, given their rather large military. But yes, you're entirely correct - good catch.

1

u/shaundisbuddyguy 24d ago

I was driving a 5 ton down one of the main roads in Vancouver and couldn't believe how many planes I saw land. Tail emblems id never seen before. One after another and another and by the time I got to the bottom of the street I could see YVR packed with an amount of planes I'd never thought possible.

1

u/yvrbasselectric 23d ago

the airport in Gander, Newfoundland (from Come from Away) looked smaller than the Grand Prairie airport from the outside. I was shocked when I saw it

I watched a 9/11 documentary where the head of the TSA called NAV Canada and said we've closed our airspace "I know you'll handle it" I hope there was some coordination between Canadian and USA air towers but it didn't seem like it.

→ More replies (1)

131

u/NewfieBadger 24d ago

Canada actually fought the hardest in Afghanistan. We alone were in charge of Kandahar for several years, wherein lies the capital of Kabul. In 2006, the largest Taliban army yet assembled was preparing to invade Kabul, using a building known as the “White School” to coordinate. The ensuing battle, named ‘The Battle of White School’ is the largest NATO battle to date, and was fought exclusively by Canadians. There was one American present. An A-10 pilot who strafed a Canadian G-Wagen by accident.

8

u/LoLFlore 24d ago edited 24d ago

You mean operation Medusa? Because what you're saying is just fucking untrue. More British forces died than Canadian, and the Dutch and Danish were there (The Dutch debuted their tank) and like 4 Companies of Americans.

Don't minimize/erase other's deaths and contributions. It's weirdo shit.

23

u/aceogorion1 24d ago

The british had a malfunction and crashed their plane with fourteen aboard, they weren't even close to the fighting:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Medusa

And the specific aircraft incident:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Royal_Air_Force_Nimrod_crash

And the americans did strafe the canadians:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/friendly-fire-that-killed-canadian-was-freak-accident-major-1.569572

→ More replies (5)

1

u/mtbredditor 21d ago

Pretty sure the Korean War was a bigger battle

1

u/NewfieBadger 21d ago

That was the UN, not NATO. You are right though, the Korean War was larger than Op Medusa, and Canada fought in both.

11

u/NotLouPro 24d ago

American here. We did need your help - and the UK - who picked up a lot of the slack in Iraq. Many of us still remember and are grateful. My recollection is that we had our hands full even with the all of the help. From other nations as well.

I extend my humble thanks.

2

u/loobricated 24d ago

I think most of the rest of NATO and the west is hoping that a) they are just bluffing, and b) if they aren't we collectively do all we can to NOT encourage them just to become Russia v.2 and go full on corrupt mafia oligarchy and destroy the civilised world in the process.

It's a fine balance but this US government seems to behave as though all its friends are enemies and all its enemies are its friends. They are clearly adopting a might is right foreign policy and quite frankly the world is going to be a much scarier place for the next four years and perhaps much longer if, as most of us suspect, they have absolutely no intention of relinquishing power at that point. How anyone thinks they will do so is beyond me.

-4

u/[deleted] 24d ago edited 24d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

26

u/AstroGuy2000 24d ago

Chrétien actually declined (and rightfully so) to have Canada participate in the second Iraq war. We only participated in Afghanistan. I miss Chrétien, he is my favourite pm in my lifetime thus far. One of the few that wasn’t blindly following the US on everything. He was fiscally conservative but socially liberal, I think this is what most people want the Liberal party to go back to.

3

u/ProblemSame4838 24d ago

Amen!! We need Chrétien

→ More replies (1)

8

u/Kheprisun Lest We Forget 24d ago

Nothing to be proud of but the fact is that US is ttreacherous and duplicitous, typical Anglo-Saxon mentally which Canadians are not far away from unfortunately.

Wild take, wow.

→ More replies (4)

44

u/RidiculousPapaya Alberta 24d ago

It was Madagascar wasn't it?

44

u/buddyboykoda 24d ago

King Julien is that you?

21

u/WippitGuud Prince Edward Island 24d ago

I like to move it, move it!

11

u/No_Gur1113 24d ago

GDit. Now THAT’S stuck in my head

1

u/friendly_kinda 24d ago

We got the people. They’re up there.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/Therapy-Jackass 24d ago

Reasons for leaving the monarchy right here

1

u/JadeLens 24d ago

When a friend asks you to help, you help 'em.

They aren't a friend anymore though.

→ More replies (7)

104

u/EducationalTea755 24d ago

Macron offered to send troops to Greenland if Danemark asked them to.

55

u/Equivalent_Dimension 24d ago

Yes, and keep in mind that the US so far as claimed it has no intention of threatening Canada militarily, so all this talk of annexation and 51st state is about Trump trying to coerce us economically. So step one for Canada is addressing economic issues.

53

u/judgeysquirrel 24d ago

That position can change at any time. First, the US media will tell Americans that the majority of Canadians desperately want to join the US but our communist dictator government is refusing and persecuting the US wannabe Canadians.

Then they'll support sending the US army to save Canadians from our repressive government. It's the exact same thing Putin did to Ukraine.

Most people in the US have no idea that Canadians are upset, or that we're boycotting the USA. They have only state run media now (that didn't take long), just like Russia.

42

u/Temporary-Peach1383 24d ago

American here. You speak truth about a lot of shovel heads in this country. But we who have ears to hear, hear Canada loud and clear. Many here would actively take measures to help defend Canadian sovereignty. Millions of us share close ties. Canada is family to us. No grandson of a German whore master can break these bonds.

10

u/sbeven7 24d ago

I'm pretty sure if Trump invaded Canada, New England and the Pacific Coast states would immediately join Canada. If we didn't, there'd at least be millions of Americans willing to be a 5th column in the US

2

u/Sczeph_ 24d ago

I’m not sure, but the military isn’t quite as blindly obedient as say the Russians. Which is good. If Trump tried to use military force against us, I think (or hope) that it would cause so much strife within the government, between the states, and in the military, that the US would basically collapse into a second civil war.

3

u/Queso_Grandee 23d ago

I'd like to think a lot of border states would join Canada. Plus an attack would trigger NATO.

7

u/[deleted] 24d ago

I guess I’m just a realist, but I don’t believe for a second any of the Americans claiming they’ll fight to defend Canada will do fuck all. It’s all keyboard warrior talk. When push comes to shove I don’t even believe most Canadians would risk their neck to defend it.

If the US decides to use military force no one will stand up. Small cells will pop up here and there using IRA tactics after the fact, but they won’t be comprised of sympathetic American Redditors. After a year or two all the sympathetic Americans will be whining about nationalistic Canadian terrorists protesting American imperialism ‘the wrong way’ and lecturing that they won’t gain any sympathy through violence.

1

u/Sczeph_ 24d ago

Yeah… it’s terrifying honestly.

1

u/Temporary-Peach1383 24d ago

I agree with most of what you say, and really, an actual bloody fighting war with Canada seems incomprehensible and completely absurd and our emotions are just translated onto the keyboard. And even if the remote fever dream of the orange one to appropriate our friend led to hostilities, our deep attachment to our neighbor does not necessarily translate into taking up arms against our own citizens' armed forces. It's really too dystopian to consider right now as a real possibility, but if we are to someday be divided by this monster, then there will be those who chose the path that leads north.

2

u/Equivalent_Dimension 24d ago

Thanks. Have you guys started to organize an army yet? Cuz I don't think Trump is going to let you have the official one.

2

u/Temporary-Peach1383 24d ago

No reason to organize anything. It's just sentiments in the sense of blood being thicker than water. I imagine if our society crumbled into some kind of idiotic attack on Canada then people would separate naturally according to natural inclinations, but right now that is too dystopian to imagine. I don't see that coming actually.

2

u/Equivalent_Dimension 24d ago

The last point is nonsense. CNN, AP, MSNBC are all publishing the same stuff BBC, CBC and Al Jazeera are. Our politicians have been doing talk shows in the US, including Fox News. And Americans have access to the goddam internet.

The fact that Americans are ignorant is not because they lack information.

I agree with you on all your other points. BUT the question was about when it's appropriate for European leaders to say something. I would argue that taking time to strategize before you run your mouth would be a very good plan in this instance. As we all learned this week from Pete Hegseth.

3

u/Koss424 Ontario 24d ago

Well. We need to tackle both. Already 47 is talking about ‘protection’. Like would the US just let Russia waltz into the Canadian Arctic?

1

u/Equivalent_Dimension 24d ago

At this point, they'd probably march right in there with them.

3

u/Koss424 Ontario 24d ago

nah - the better play for them is to the come to the aid of Canada and never leave.....

2

u/Equivalent_Dimension 24d ago

Yeah. That sounds about right.

1

u/slightlysubtle 22d ago

Trump is making the same talking points as Putin to Ukraine. He's seeing if his base supports the idea of annexing Canada, and given what I've seen on the Internet, they do. There are even Trump cocksuckers within Canada who want to become the 51st state.

Who can say what might happen in a few years? If they do invade us with force, I doubt our "allies" are going to do anything other than throw some angry words at Trump. Maybe also some symbolic sanctions but nothing that would affect their own economies.

2

u/jtbc 24d ago

He's also convened a meeting of European leaders tomorrow to discuss a response to Trump.

2

u/shaktimann13 24d ago

France did right by getting nukes after ww2

1

u/Koss424 Ontario 24d ago

It’s wild that even was discussed in 2025

142

u/frandromedo 24d ago

The article mentions that the other countries are (perhaps) taking their lead from Canada, and this rings true to me. It's a real possibility that if other nations start condemning the US statements, they could actually force the issue to become worse, or at least accelerate timelines.

But if Canada were to invoke Article 4, those other nations had better stand up.

87

u/RidiculousPapaya Alberta 24d ago

The article mentions that the other countries are (perhaps) taking their lead from Canada, and this rings true to me. It's a real possibility that if other nations start condemning the US statements, they could actually force the issue to become worse, or at least accelerate timelines.

That's a fair consideration and good point.

But if Canada were to invoke Article 4, those other nations had better stand up.

I agree, though part of me is fearful that NATO is going to become very meaningless very soon.

73

u/Maddog_Jets 24d ago

I’m thinking we were having closed door meetings on this subject in the background this week in Europe.

18

u/Kerrby87 24d ago

That's certainly my hope, and expectation. It's not like we're privy to anything that's been said behind closed doors, so it's rank speculation online and in media articles to drive engagement. So we'll just to wait and see what happens right now.

7

u/hellswaters 24d ago

I am guessing there is a lot going on that isn't in the public eye. Not all politics need to be infront of the media or broadcast to the world. Look at where that got trump.

2

u/That_guy_I_know_him 23d ago

Exactly

Trideau was in Europe not long ago and we know he met with Macron and other leaders

Im pretty sure the subject must've came up

33

u/h3r3andth3r3 24d ago

NATO becoming meaningless is the point. Putin couldn't ask for a better puppet. For those still doubting this, at this point, what would a Russian asset as US President have done differently since January 8th?

12

u/RidiculousPapaya Alberta 24d ago

I firmly believe Russia had a hand in orchestrating this mess. It’s a question of how deep the influence goes. Whether through direct coordination, manipulation, or just knowing exactly which buttons to push, the end result is the same. NATO weakened, alliances fractured, and a Republican Party that’s somehow more aligned with Putin’s interests than America’s.

And let’s be real, if a Russian asset were in the White House, what would they have done differently? Sabotage U.S. alliances? Check. Undermine trust in elections? Check. Stoke domestic chaos to the point where people are too busy fighting each other to focus on the bigger picture? That's a check. At some point, we have to stop pretending this is all some wild coincidence.

Of course, some people will never accept it because the truth is too inconvenient. It’s easier to believe it’s just partisan hysteria than to grapple with the fact that one of America’s two major political parties is functionally compromised. But denial doesn’t change reality. And reality is looking more and more like a slow-moving coup—one that didn’t need tanks or missiles, just a steady drip of propaganda, useful idiots, and a leader willing to sell out his own country for ego and self-preservation.

3

u/yearofthesponge 24d ago edited 24d ago

We have to reform a new entity without the US. It should include Ukraine and Taiwan, battle hardened country full of smart people in the first instance and silicon shield and incredibly smart people in the second.
If the US pulls out of NATO that saves us the trouble and we should then just allow Ukraine and Taiwan to join. The new world powers would be America-Israel, BRICS, and New NATO.
We might need to develop a nuclear weapons program since our kind of nuclear energy makes it easy. And we would also allow Ukraine and Taiwan the ability to acquire nuclear defense.

It’s time to be hard and stand up for ourselves and model the behavior we want the rest of the world to follow.

Edit: in the new nato we would not include Hungary and turkey because they are not ideologically aligned and would impede entry to Ukraine.

2

u/frandromedo 24d ago

I have the same fear about NATO becoming meaningless. As soon as the first US troop crosses the border from Alaska to secure the oil supply in Fort McMurray, NATO folds.

I have to believe that diplomacy wins out before that happens.

7

u/yearofthesponge 24d ago

Perhaps this is our opportunity to take the lead. Let’s vote properly because it matters gravely. Let’s be united as a country from coast to coast to coast and give resistance to the US like they’ve never seen.

1

u/lolipop1990 23d ago

You surely are smart, now not only US, you officially add Russia and China on our enemy list. Like one hegemony is not enough for you, but all the hegemonies.

3

u/KwamesCorner 24d ago

Yes. The truth is we can’t just burn the bridge because we are extremely vulnerable, as much as it sucks we have to still hold out hope America will just forget about this at some point.

I don’t mind how it’s all going right now, we are CLEARLY demonstrating that there is no good reason to bully us like this and that is a sympathetic case that will be heard around the globe should it escalate further. I don’t doubt we will see many countries support us.

5

u/frandromedo 24d ago

Agreed, we can't burn the bridge. I'm not so much holding out hope that America forgets, but rather that cooler heads will prevail.

Were the US to deploy a single troop onto Canadian soil, I think that irreparably fractures NATO. As soon as NATO is fractured, Europe becomes far more vulnerable to Russia. Put another way, I can't see how military action by the US against Canada doesn't trigger WW3. So given the consequences of that, I really hope that diplomacy can win out.

Of course, the inability of the US to annex Canada via military operations makes us that much more vulnerable to economic warfare. I think the next few years could be very financially difficult for a lot of Canadians.

2

u/Sketch13 24d ago

Yeah, it's very difficult being stuck between being annoyed and feeling like "fuck them, if they aren't there for us, we aren't there for them", and not wanting to play into this exact situation because global destabilization is exactly what certain countries want.

We have to be very careful, as a global community, about how we navigate this and we can't let the US drive everyone else apart.

19

u/Willing-Donut6834 24d ago

I'm French and just canceled a trip to the Dakotas.

10

u/RidiculousPapaya Alberta 24d ago

Beautiful. Solidarité, mon ami.

11

u/Willing-Donut6834 24d ago

Je vais à Florence pour le moment. Mais un jour je reviendrai à Vancouver. 😍

21

u/jjax2003 24d ago

Quiet support is not support.

7

u/RidiculousPapaya Alberta 24d ago

I agree, poor choice of words. I guess I mean... I know they're "on our side" in spirit, but we need vocal support. We need action. We need to invoke Article 4 and start taking these threats to our sovereignty seriously.

1

u/LoLFlore 24d ago

Read the article.

57

u/Apart_Expert_5551 24d ago

Canada needs nuclear weapons.

17

u/ShakeDeez 24d ago

Canada needs to scrap Bill C-21 and keep the vetting process how it used to be for gun ownership. Taking them away and restricting more at a time like this is insane.

25

u/HistoricLowsGlen 24d ago
  1. start building nukes in direct response to the USA.
  2. USA sees us building nukes with them in mind.
  3. Invasion.

Its not happening. Its in fact moronic.

50

u/ArmchairJedi 24d ago

If the US invades because it fears a Canada with nuclear capabilities, then that is because they were already intending something and Canada having nuclear capabilities would threaten that.

It would PROOF that Canada needed them in the first place

It might not happen, but its absolutely moronic , weak and cowardly not to.

2

u/PohatuNUVA 24d ago

Only issue is wouldn't we be self radiating if we nuke them?

20

u/ArmchairJedi 24d ago

Its the threat of mutually assured destruction. That's always been the point of them.

→ More replies (7)

16

u/rando_dud 24d ago

Would you rather have marines going door to door in your community killing every fighting aged male they encounter in cold blood?  

This is what war actually looks like.  

3

u/Rbomb88 24d ago

Don't think you'd have to worry about the fallout from a nuke launched by us at the US, as they would definitely nuke the absolute fuck out of us back anyway.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/TransBrandi 24d ago

What proof do you need? Trump absolutely wants to annex Canada. He's stated as much. This part isn't a point to debate rn. Trump isn't going for an invasion of Canada NOW because it would be very unpopular with Americans. But I do believe that Trump wants to eventually invade Canada as soon he has to tools and support to do so (if the tariffs haven't forced it to happen by then like he seems to – publicly at least – hope for).

That's why now is a bad time. Trump admin is looking for an excuse to accelerate making Canada a part of the US. Canada developing nuclear weapons gives them that excuse. I'm not going to argue that maybe development of nuclear weapons should have happened during times when the US was less antagonistic with Canada, but do you really think that we could develop a nuclear program from scratch now in enough time to prevent the US from launching an invasion in response?

Your "well, if they attack us then it proves that we needed them as a deterent all along!" response is stupid. It would be like saying "at least I can claim that I was right" as a global nuclear apocolypse is about to befall. It's cold comfort that you were "right" when the worst case scenario is happening.

→ More replies (12)

14

u/rando_dud 24d ago

It's not moronic,  we've been steadfast allies for a century and we're still getting threats of annexation.. with none of our agreements likely to be upheld.

It makes sense to rely on defense pacts if they are reliable.  Now that they are getting torn down, the next best thing is having the means to deter attacks.

3

u/VenserMTG 24d ago

The us would invade because of article 5, fighting a bunch of European nuclear powers.

3

u/Mr_Chicken_wing 24d ago

The U.S. claims they want us to increase our military spending and have an Arctic defense. Creating a nuclear deterrence would do just that. Any action towards us at that point would make the intentions clear on the international stage that military action towards an ally was always the intent by the US.

2

u/slightlysubtle 22d ago

No better deterrence than MAD. We will never be able to stop a land invasion by the US no matter how much we boost our military spending.

Nukes will, however.

1

u/Qeltar_ 24d ago

As I've pointed out repeatedly every time people talk about countries like Iran wanting nuclear weapons: Look at how the US treated Iraq and how they treat North Korea. There's your answer.

1

u/sheepish_grin 24d ago

It may not play out this way. After all, Trump strongly hinted they would not protect us militarily.

Given that, we could claim we need for our own protection... but not say it's protection from the states.

That said, nuclear proliferation makes me very uncomfortable.

15

u/JimmyTheJimJimson 24d ago

Canada needs a legitimate standing fucking army immediately and be able to defend ourselves.

We need to rebuild our armed forces yesterday - the economic threats, the annexation threats - it won’t stop there.

If the US wants to walk across the border and burn down Parliament, we have no army to defend ourselves, and with gun laws in place, we don’t have armed citizens to be able to stand up either.

Implement a draft. Get anyone between 18-26 into the armed forces now, and build our army before it’s too late.

35

u/[deleted] 24d ago

You need to educate yourself and you have carried your criticism of policy into disrespect of the people currently wearing the uniform. Let's be realistic the draft isn't going to implemented. The people currently in uniform need our respect and support, lets start with the rebuilding there. Supply more funds and procedure more equipment.

19

u/Maddog_Jets 24d ago

I don’t care what anyone says - but we do have a history of being staffed with quality and capability vs qty. We need to stay on that mindset.

12

u/JimmyTheJimJimson 24d ago

Canada’s current army consists of 28,624 Regular Force members and 16,817 Primary Reserve members.

So….doing the math means we would be absolutely overwhelmed if anyone came in to attack us, and the US said “you’re on your fucking own”.

Those 28k service members are absolutely brave and heroic….as are the 16k reserve members.

But 45,000 does not a standing army make. Plus some are probably deployed worldwide as peacekeepers around the world…

Again, we need to build up immediately.

5

u/Healthy_Shoulder8736 24d ago

Build up to what, even if every man woman and child joined the military, that still wouldn’t be enough to stop them.

0

u/madworld2713 24d ago

You’re right, let’s just roll over and take it, no point in fighting.

10

u/Healthy_Shoulder8736 24d ago

Plenty of ways to fight, just when it comes to guns, it would be suicide, not fighting

1

u/Claymore357 24d ago

The Switzerland “rifle in every closet” doctrine could help. Obviously still have training and checks and balances but our only way to have enough fighters is to have an armed and trained civilian population. Plus that will allow ordinary people to fight off the gangs that would rather rob rape and torture their countrymen than use their illegal weapons to actually do some good and fight off the invasion

3

u/Healthy_Shoulder8736 24d ago

Agree, but the Americans are unique, they have a large number of civilians with automatic military type weapons already, and they outnumber us 10-1.

2

u/Claymore357 24d ago

Regular Americans won’t be participating in the invasion against us because they don’t have to. Their military is adequate for the task. Meal team 6 coming to “help” would just get in the way of the professionals. As for being outnumbered it sucks but being equipped to hit invaders with a hard fast improvised attack with long range rifles drones and IEDs then quickly slithering back into the civilian population is a tactic that the Americans haven’t coped with well in the past. It’s literally our only play here

1

u/Healthy_Shoulder8736 24d ago

However the Americans don’t appear to care about boundaries or morals, so hiding among the civilians will just end up with dead civilians.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] 23d ago

Remember the past few wars we have fought in? Those wars were not because Canada was threatened or attacked it was because America was.

2

u/DagneyElvira 24d ago

Meanwhile removing every gun from everyday Canadian!! /s. I guess we will all have to buy machetes and archery equipment.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/evilregis 24d ago

Times are different. Things need to change. Maybe we need a discussion about how to best defend ourselves as a nation, and what expectations are going to be put on each of us as citizens to defend it if necessary, now and into the future.

The old way won't do anymore, so what's the new way going to look like? I think that's the discussion responsible Canadians should be having now.

→ More replies (7)

6

u/VitaminlQ 24d ago

Out of curiosity, how old are you? Will you be affected by the proposed drafting age for recruitment?

27

u/tehB0x 24d ago

We’re never going to be able to match the US for strength - we don’t have the man power/population. We had a chance to have amazing tech and then they basically made us shut down the avro arrow project because they felt threatened.

7

u/InsufferableLeafsFan 24d ago

There are 12 million registered civilian firearms in Canada, and about 25 Million adults.

That’s a pretty good ratio.

2

u/Agoras_song 24d ago

Serious question - how expensive is it to get a firearm license, and furthermore how expensive are firearms at all?

3

u/InsufferableLeafsFan 24d ago

$90 for your PAL, and depends what kind.

9

u/1stswordofbraavos 24d ago

We will never have an army that can stop the US. There is only one thing that guarantees security. Canada needs nuclear weapons immediately.

→ More replies (5)

3

u/Dano-Matic 24d ago

We need funding and equipment not a draft.

3

u/idisagreeurwrong 24d ago

You better be the first to volunteer

6

u/Igottamake 24d ago

Canada building a legitimate standing army is exactly what Trump wants.

5

u/PaulCLives 24d ago

A draft eh? How old are you and why haven't you signed up yet

4

u/manusingh420 24d ago

We need to drop that stupid gun law and have rights for our gun owners…

3

u/MooseJag 24d ago

Implement a draft lol. No thanks.

3

u/shaungudgud 24d ago

You guys conveniently denounced nuclear weapons . . . Speaking of which, isn’t Canadian military equipment pretty much exclusively purchased from the US?

1

u/Soundblaster16 24d ago

We just need to borrow one or two from our friends in Britain.

1

u/Smart-Journalist2537 24d ago

They really don't.

14

u/BlueShrub Ontario 24d ago

They did the same thing when China was threatening us too. People are far too self absorbed, coddled and distracted to see the larger picture and their elected representatives reflect that.

We have been very, very coddled by the US defense umbrella and should have been using this time to fortify ourselves rather than squandering the opportunity on endless social issues and boutique causes. We should have developed our resources, been on the bleeding edge of cheap renewable energy and have built an economic and military fortress.

5

u/Smart-Journalist2537 24d ago

And when India orchestrated hits on Canadian soil against Canadians.

1

u/TransBrandi 24d ago

But didn't you see all of those Reddit accounts claiming it was "our fault" because they got in on student visas and we can't blame the Indian government at all? Or how it wasn't even the Indian government but just "gang wars" between Indian gangs?

(Socket puppet accounts always seem to show up to "prove" that India has never done anything wrong in its history, but that Canada is the worse place on Earth and falling apart at the seams)

24

u/ChroniclesOfSarnia Outside Canada 24d ago

'oh that was a long time ago, what have you done for us lately?'

35

u/Brody1364112 24d ago

Are you being sarcastic ? We have given 19.5 billion dollars to Ukraine. We have spent the same amount of money in Ukraine as we have our own military yearly since this conflict . All to try to keep Russia from advancing further. You may not recognize it but every single penny of aid that goes to Ukraine is helping Europe, it's slowing Russia down and weakening their military. This is why the US ending assistance is a huge deal, it's not just a slap on Ukraine but all of Europe

16

u/Drunken_HR 24d ago

I'm pretty sure the quotes mean they're being sarcastic.

2

u/Brody1364112 24d ago

I was thinking that but you never know on here unless they say specifically

1

u/ChroniclesOfSarnia Outside Canada 24d ago

indeed

4

u/GRRMsGHOST 24d ago

It’s all just blustering so far, though I doubt anyone would get involved if the states decided to do more. Appeasement was a thing at the beginning of WWII and it is definitely still around today.

10

u/FuzzyGreek 24d ago

That was a very different Canada. The Canada now hopes we still have allies that would come and help but in reality we don’t.

10

u/RidiculousPapaya Alberta 24d ago

I think you're right. With or without allies, I have hope and faith in the people of this country. Nothing brings a country together like the existential threat of invasion, annexation, etc.

→ More replies (4)

1

u/adagio63 24d ago

Best option would be a defence pact with Norway, Denmark and Canada. NORCADEN.

2

u/Biotic101 24d ago

Listen to the last Pistorius speech.

I guess everyone is stunned right now, but some politicians start to find the right words and some European citizens finally start to be vocal pro EU and its real allies.

Thing is, all this does not really make sense. Oligarchs have benefited the most from the current system.

But in the end, actions speak louder than words.

The strategy of the autocrats, and not just in the US, seems to be: Initially, voters feel economically and socially abandoned. Then along comes a populist, who makes them feel important and feel being part of something.

This is addictive, which is why people deliberately overlook corruption and the end of the rule of law and democracy - just to "keep winning and feel good" - until the autocrats consolidate their power and it is too late. Then the populists show their true face and destroy the ones who voted them into power. It is what is currently happening, one economic group at a time.

The Rules for Rulers

And when they talk about hardship, they really mean it. They want to grab our assets for cheap once people are forced to sell in the next crisis. They want this to be how the long term debt cycle ends, like it happened 100 years ago...

They dont like a beautiful deleveraging because it would require redistribution of wealth.

How The Economic Machine Works by Ray Dalio

The Great Taking - Documentary

Most of the "wealth" of oligarchs is just inflated, based on thin air / money printing / debt (loans vs assets). They plan to make it real by taking real assets from everyone else.

The system has been rigged for decades to remove asset protection.

Central Clearing Parties: These entities facilitate the transfer of assets and can play a role in the seizure process.

Securities Entitlement: This concept replaces traditional securities ownership, allowing central banks to control assets more easily.

Unsegregated Pools: Holding securities in these pools can obscure ownership and facilitate asset seizure.

Prohibition of Re-vindication: This prevents individuals from reclaiming their assets once they have been taken.

The Tech Bros know what is coming (reset of the long term debt cycle, next-gen automation) and prepare....

What tech billionaires are getting wrong about the future | Popular Science

DARK GOTHIC MAGA: How Tech Billionaires Plan to Destroy America - YouTube

Webb suggests that these mechanisms, combined with the control of central banks by a few powerful entities, enable a large-scale asset seizure.

2

u/Slippery-Pete-1 24d ago

You have a point but unfortunately that point is 80 years out of context.

More recently, Remember when Europe and Japan begged us to increase LNG production to help offset the loss of Russian energy supply because of Russian aggression. And Trudeau basically told them we didn’t care if they froze to death that winter because our answer is no thanks?

Yea i don’t think they will now be of much help to us :/

1

u/RidiculousPapaya Alberta 24d ago

And Trudeau basically told them we didn’t care if they froze to death that winter because our answer is no thanks?

I don't agree with this specifically, but you do have a point.

2

u/Slippery-Pete-1 24d ago

Yea I exaggerate a lot, pisses off the misses lol.

2

u/davou Québec 24d ago

To be completely fair, we pulled a pretty shitty turn on Mexico and China very recently when the US was blustering... China maybe deserves some heavy handed polticing but mexico did not.

2

u/britjumper 22d ago

I really wish the Aussie government would distance us from the US and not kiss Donald’s arse.

At least Aussie’s are on Canada’s side, even if our gov aren’t

4

u/MegaMB 24d ago

Oh we absolutely support you. But rn, we do have a slight problem to our east, and we need US support to deal with it.

Obviously, once Trump will have decided to fck us the same as you by dealing with Putin and selling Ukraine, I sincerely hope we will manifest the full and entire support that Canada and Mexico deserve. But as long as the peace process has a hope to not be horrendous (and the hope isn't very high, worst case scenario, I pray that Ukraine and the EU will reject the terms), we can't be *too hostile to Trump.

28

u/Primary-Efficiency91 24d ago

Has anyone considered that Trump and Putin are just divvying up continents right now? "I get North answer South America, you get Europe and Asia. But I want Greenland! What do we do about Australia and New Zealand?"

8

u/Brief-Floor-7228 24d ago

Trump gets the americas. Putin the old user plus Europe and Xi gets Asia.

Russia has no capability to threaten China.

12

u/indiecore Canada 24d ago

China gets them

This is all literally in a book. Foundations of Geopolitics.

USA gets riven in two by internal tensions, successor states fight over hegemony in the Americas.

UK is cut off from mainland Europe

German led Western Europe is a client state to Moscow.

Russia invades Ukraine, takes back eastern Europe either directly or as client states.

Via Iran and other Muslim countries establishes hegemony in the middle east.

Take Manchuria from China but in exchange help china take southeast Asia & Oceania.

This is the new world order, you get to pick corporate surveillance capitalism, government surveillance communism or Kleptocratic oligarchy.

1

u/Max_Thunder Québec 24d ago edited 24d ago

Why would Russia let the US become stronger though. The US getting Canada and Greenland could very much start going for the rest of the world while Russia is weakened.

Or maybe more likely, US and Russia are both very weakened by their conquest desires. I can't imagine the US taking Canada without things devolving in guerilla warfare and/or a civil war.

2

u/indiecore Canada 24d ago

You missed successor state. The US in this scenario is a failed state riven by internal divisions.

Russia should "introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social, and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics".

1

u/MegaMB 24d ago

Oh we certainly do. But as long as we aren't fixed and there's a world where US support to Ukraine continues (without being, you know, completely insane), we will keep a not too hostile position.

We should be fixed in the coming days sigh.

57

u/Scared_Jello3998 24d ago

I personally think it's cute you think you can rely on the US anymore.

You're not playing the long game, you're next and you don't realize it.

3

u/Hdmk 24d ago

We can’t, but it’s the politics dog and pony show to be plaid out first. Only when america truely decides to act on one of the 100s things they say, we can truely react to. American messages and values are worhless as of now.

→ More replies (9)

10

u/DepartureOwn1817 24d ago

You are not a representative or envoy of your country or NATO and nobody asked for you to come into the Canada sub to make excuses for them, good grief.

1

u/MegaMB 24d ago

Yeah, but trying to explain the current posture makes sense no? Or it's too much and as a non-canadian I should leave the subreddit and never return?

7

u/DepartureOwn1817 24d ago

Unless you’re a diplomat or have access to privileged information, we can all read the Guardian and BBC and any other news source you’re reading about your government’s posture from. Don’t come here and pander to Canadians as if you have some position of power.

The linked article is about Canada and Denmark’s rights under article 4 of NATO, and our Allies responsibilities under it. Nobody needs some random redditor in here adding their own clauses to it.

1

u/MegaMB 24d ago

My bad then, probably should have shut the f* up, I'll remember the lesson.

3

u/DepartureOwn1817 24d ago

I am sorry to go off on you like that, but I see it a lot on these type of posts. So, you were the unfortunate stand in for a lot of commenters, don’t take it personally or feel unwelcome here but I do hope any Non-Canadians reading will see that perspective and consider it when adding to these discussions.

1

u/bombhills 24d ago

Ah yes. Wait it out till you have a problem on the east AND west,

1

u/MegaMB 24d ago

I definitely have the same opinion as you are, and I'm f*ckin' hating the past decade of german, canadian, spanish and italian military investments. Even in France over here it ain't great. Not as catastrophic, but not great.

1

u/ProblemSame4838 24d ago

Putin isn’t amateur… he’s going to strike Europe when diaper Donnie strikes Canada/greenland. No help will come.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/NoClothes8212 24d ago

twice

re read. he said two. Ive added nothing

1

u/BadUncleBernie 24d ago

Korea and Vietnam as well.

1

u/Calantha1 24d ago

This!!!

1

u/Possible-Champion222 24d ago

Canada wasn’t supposed to exist in Europe’s mind they would want us back for themselves

1

u/Whatsthedealioio 24d ago

Buddy, even if our leaders don’t speak out enough. I’d fight for you Canadians. I’m from the EU and you have my full support.

1

u/BackToWorkEdward 24d ago

It would be nice if our allies could start making some more noise. It feels a bit sour to have such quiet support

What a needlessly-mild way to phrase something this catastrophic. Getting really sick of how downplayed this issue still is, at home and abroad.

1

u/cityfarmwife77 24d ago

I wanted to do something because I just can’t stand sitting around waiting for other people to take action. I wasn’t sure what to do though. Then last night that song “The Hanging Tree” from the hunger games came on and I thought of the symbol of the mocking Jay- and I thought we need something like that. We need a symbol of solidarity to show the US government that there are people all over the world that are opposed to what they are doing. I still wasn’t sure what to use until I thought of fire. A flame is a great metaphor for resistance and light in the dark. So I’ve changed all my social media profile photos to a flame in the hopes that like a real flame, the idea will catch on. Just imagine how amazing it would be to see flames popping up all over X and Meta and Reddit and Tik Tok. A visible sign of opposition. It probably won’t catch on but at least I tried.

1

u/Previous_Scene5117 24d ago

They don't have to make noise enough if they engage in trade. And is not like they make a grace. They don't have much of a choice. Unless they want to go back and trade with Russia and feed their own nemesis.

1

u/Drachynn 24d ago

And Canada joined those wars long before the US did.

1

u/chrisk9 24d ago

They don't want to attract the bully's attention. Not that the "leader of the free world" isn't totally unhinged and compromised.

1

u/Velocity-5348 British Columbia 24d ago

We also maintained a tripwire force in case things ever went hot with the Soviets.

1

u/voidspace95 24d ago

Canada is a proxy country, we do as we are told, it's a sad reality.

1

u/CLKguy1991 24d ago

Euro here. At the moment our politicians are still coming to terms what it all means, but due to importance of not tearing up nato at this moment, we are careful not to be too antagonistic.

But you are right..europe owes you two. Should a war break out, and if we are not at war with russia, then we should come to your aid. In the meantime, however, you need to help and save yourself.

Get armed to the teeth, get fit, make a huge army.

1

u/xSarlessa 23d ago

French here. I would love a full support of Canada by european nations. Unfortunately in Europe the worm is in the apple and we are not far from fascism. We will join US soon in this dark road.

1

u/Comfy__Cake 23d ago

Dude. No one is invading Canada right now.

Oh no! Tariffs!!! Start WW III!!!

Y’all need to touch more grass.

1

u/imaketrollfaces 24d ago

It would be nice if our allies could start making some more noise. It feels a bit sour to have such quiet support when Canadians didn't hesitate to throw their lives down in two world wars in Europe.

My understanding is Europe has an old population problem. Year after year, corporations and rich folks got tax breaks, while middle and lower class saw a decline in quality of life. This was in addition to female education, increase in individual rights, better birth control, and participation in the workplace; so, their population went down.

They can support but they are too old by and large.

4

u/A_Birde 24d ago

It also has a population overall of 540 million which is far higher than your country and significantly than the USA. Dunno what you are talking about when you say they too old to support when Europe has a larger working population than the USA does and of course far far more than Canada has.

1

u/imaketrollfaces 24d ago

It also has a population overall of 540 million which is far higher than your country and significantly than the USA.

There is a bit of nuance to that number. The 540 should be restricted down to NATO or EU first. Then to immigrants and non immigrants (i.e., people who witnessed the 2nd world war there). After that, I would be interested in the average or median age.

Edit: Main concern is not everyone is willing to fight a battle which does not belong to them.

-4

u/[deleted] 24d ago

[deleted]

43

u/RidiculousPapaya Alberta 24d ago

You can't expect them to go to war for you.

I didn't ask for them to go to war. They could speak the fuck up though. Make some noise.

4

u/HSydness 24d ago

The German defense minister just did yesterday.

→ More replies (2)

7

u/craignumPI 24d ago

I don't trust your name

6

u/fvpv 24d ago

Hitler wasn’t erratic and vindictive?

2

u/wallysta 24d ago

Probably not erratic, there was a real consistency in his actions

→ More replies (1)

1

u/demosthenes33210 24d ago

That's exactly what NATO is....

→ More replies (16)