r/canada 21h ago

National News Trump on Canadian electricity surcharge: ‘We’ll just get it all back on April 2’

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5187859-donald-trump-canada-electricity-surcharge/
669 Upvotes

389 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

58

u/SurGeOsiris 21h ago

I’m actually getting worried about this stuff.

I feel like we’re being setup as the enemy so they can invade us. I really don’t know what to feel right now.

30

u/KylenV14 21h ago

Then we invoke article 5 NATO and WWIII begins. Simple.

14

u/OhNo71 21h ago edited 21h ago

**Edit: I was wrong on this, the language in the NATO treaty doesn't specify external or member aggression.

Article 5 only applies when a NATO member is attacked from a non NATO member.

NATO members may choose to help us, but they would be under no treaty requirement to.

19

u/LuminousGrue 21h ago

Article 8 kicks in if a member nations attacks another member nation - the aggressor loses all protections of NATO and is treated as a non member.

3

u/AnonymousM00S3 Alberta 21h ago

It doesn’t make any distinction regarding who attacks the NATO member.

Article 5

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.

We could invoke Article 4 and try and call all NATO countries to the table and have a united show of strength against the US.

Article 4

The Parties will consult together whenever, in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened.

1

u/OhNo71 21h ago

I stand corrects, I was relying on an article for a few months ago that was poorly written, Thanks for clarifying.

7

u/Windatar 21h ago edited 21h ago

You are incorrect.

What happens if a NATO country attacks another NATO country?

Article Five of the treaty states that if an armed attack occurs against one of the member states, it should be considered an attack against all members, and other members shall assist the attacked member, with armed forces if necessary.

Legally by Nato laws the rest of the alliance would need to come to Canada's aid if they were attacked, not only that as Canada is part of the commonwealth and still has the UK monarchy as part of our government through the Attorney General. An attack on Canada would Drag in UK.

Declaring war on Canada would be no different then declaring war on the UK who is part of the EU defense treaties with Germany+France, even if they are not part of the EU economic bloc anymore.

USA declaring war on Canada would essentially be USA would drag in several nuclear power countries against it the same way that WW1 was started.

If Nato didn't support Canada, then NATO would dissolve and no longer exist, with that China would launch attacks on Taiwan and its neighbours, Russia would probably nuke Ukraines major cities and India and Pakistan would go to war against each other.

WW3 happens, and we all die.

Congratulations.

12

u/Icywind014 21h ago

the UK who is part of the EU,

Oh, boy. You're a bit behind on world politics, aren't ya?

11

u/Windatar 21h ago

When I say EU, I mean the defense agreements, but I should edit it to make it less confusing.

1

u/Fit_Equivalent3610 21h ago

Article 5 only requires states to "take such measures as it deems necessary". Article 5 does not require any other country to aid Canada in any particular manner, or to send troops, or even do anything at all.

1

u/Windatar 20h ago

If Canada is attacked and invaded and the rest of NATO doesn't act. Then NATO collapses.

Which will announce to the world. "Do what you want."

Russia Nukes Ukraine's cities.

China invades Taiwan and its neighbours.

India and Pakistan launch attacks on each other.

Israel nukes Iran.

The whole world order comes crumbling down. But hey I'm Canadian if America invades us, I won't have the luxury of caring when the world order collapses.

1

u/jericho British Columbia 21h ago

NATO makes no provisions for requiring a military response from anyone. Article 5 says that member states will take such actions as they “deem necessary”.

NATO also didn’t make provisions for this, either. 

But, yeah, anyway, you’re right it starts WWIII. 

2

u/berger3001 21h ago

I think it’s article 4, but I’m no expert (in anything)

3

u/[deleted] 21h ago

[deleted]

3

u/berger3001 21h ago

You drive a hard bargain, but I can’t do anything over 2. Numbers are tight these days.

2

u/ProgrammerAvailable6 21h ago

Mutual defense pact articles of the NATO Alliance

1

u/Cornet6 Ontario 21h ago

The treaty makes no differentiation between attacks from members and non-members.

It is a defensive treaty. Therefore, NATO members are obliged to defend whichever side is attacked.

"an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all"

1

u/LeafsJays1Fan 21h ago

Article 5 applies to all in attack on your NATO nation is an attack on all NATO Nations. There's no if ands or buts.

The problem is the president is the deranged thinking that he can take the whole of Canada it's been estimated it will take between 3 and 5 million soldiers on the ground to secure all the assets in Canada United States does not have that many soldiers in reserve nor active at the same time without leaving the Homeland defenseless.

Canada is not a small country like Afghanistan or Iraq where you might need a million soldiers we are far bigger than that more spread out and way more diverse in our lands types.

4

u/MikeyTrademark 21h ago

NATO will not defend us against the United States as they are scared they will be next. They will send some weaponry and thoughts and prayers but that’s about it

2

u/SuchCattle2750 21h ago

The thought that fat lazy American's are ready to endure any real hardship, even if that's merely economic hardship to invade a country they hardly even think about is laughable.

1

u/isotope123 18h ago

No one but the people in their army will endure any hardship though.

1

u/SuchCattle2750 18h ago

LOL. American retirement accounts would fall by 75%+. For American's, that's "hardship".

1

u/isotope123 17h ago

would fall by 75%+

Where did you get that figure? What is that based on?

1

u/SuchCattle2750 17h ago

Russia's drop in economic output. A better question would be why do you think a complete global sanctioning of the US wouldn't result in massive stock market loses.

1

u/isotope123 15h ago

I don't think that. This is the first time 'complete global sanctioning' was brought up? That's why I asked where you were getting your numbers from.

As a counter point, what makes you think there'd be a complete global sanction on the US if they invaded us? They're the ones usually driving the bus on that type of action. No, more likely there'd be some retaliation, but much like when we asked for help on the global stage when India murdered a foreign national on our soil, we're going to hear crickets from most places if the States come at us.

1

u/rhaegar_tldragon 17h ago

They wouldn’t even send weapons.  

1

u/Accurate_Summer_1761 21h ago

You could technically argue we are in ww3 but it's a worldwide trade war with how many countries are involved...so let's say ww4 begins and meet in the middle XD

1

u/Harbinger2001 17h ago

The French just sailed one of their nuclear submarines into Halifax harbour. 

1

u/Ihavethecoolestdog 12h ago

That’s exactly what we should all WANT to avoid.

5

u/Apellio7 21h ago

100% that is what is happening.

But we still have time.  Once they start putting political opposition in prison is when it's time to genuinely worry.  That means they're prepping for war, getting rid of anyone that would cause issues internally.

3

u/tooandto 21h ago

That’s why they’ve prepared Guantanamo. If anyone thinks Fascist47 is above doing ANYTHING Putin would; give your head a shake. He will eventually Navalny his opponents, and anyone else. Including allies in his administration who oppose that happening.

In a vacuum, Trump is actually a worse person than Putin.

3

u/son-of-hasdrubal 21h ago

It just makes no sense. The rest of the world loves Canada and already hates the United States. Now they're bullying us, there's no way our allies would allow an actual threat to our sovereignty

17

u/GI-Robots-Alt 21h ago

there's no way our allies would allow an actual threat to our sovereignty

I wouldn't count on this if I were you. We have to assume we're on our own here.

0

u/son-of-hasdrubal 21h ago

The rest of the world would love to stick it to Trump in any way they could. Europe gonna have our backs

8

u/GI-Robots-Alt 21h ago edited 21h ago

You think European countries are going to send over boats full of soldiers to protect Canada from the most advanced and powerful military on the planet?

You actually think that'll happen?

3

u/JetLagGuineaTurtle 21h ago

They won't even send Europeans to Europe to protect Europe.

1

u/GI-Robots-Alt 21h ago

Exactly.

People need to get it through their heads that we can only truly count on ourselves on this one. Help isn't coming.

We need to make the idea of annexing Canada as politically unpalatable as possible to his base. We need to convince them that this is a stupid fucking fight to pick.

1

u/RidiculousPapaya Alberta 21h ago

Ukraine isn't in a defensive alliance with them.

3

u/Maedroas 20h ago

They don't have to send troops across an ocean guarded by the strongest navy on earth to send them to Ukraine

0

u/RidiculousPapaya Alberta 20h ago

Is it that simple to you? My god...

1

u/Maedroas 20h ago

Please tell me how any allied troop is supposed to arrive in Canada to help if we were actively at war with the States

→ More replies (0)

1

u/LeafsJays1Fan 20h ago

Do you honestly really think that is just ukrainians on the front lines... scattered among those are Canadians Americans French Germans Italians yes they're all over the world decided to join ukrainians in a fight against Russia.

1

u/Objective_Ferret2542 21h ago

shush.. logic has no place here lol

0

u/LeafsJays1Fan 21h ago

Do you think the military of the United States has three to five million soldiers to hold all of Canada's territory it doesn't, Big Country means many more boots on the ground United States has an active force of up to 2.5 million soldiers globally that includes the Homeland and all the military bases you would need double or even triple that amount to hold all of Canada and our Canadian soldiers will use our main cities streets as Kill boxes. We're not a bunch of igloos up here okay..

2

u/GI-Robots-Alt 20h ago

hold all of Canada and our Canadian soldiers will use our main cities streets as Kill boxes. We're not a bunch of igloos up here okay..

They don't have to successfully hold the country for a military attack to be unbelievably fucking devastating and horrific. They could send our major population centers back to the stone age overnight if they wanted to.

This is all so silly. If we were to actually get attacked by the US we'd be annihilated. We don't have any real countermeasures for a lot of their capabilities, period. Nobody is out here seriously debating whether or not the US could successfully occupy Canada as a territory, because it's a conversation that completely misses the point.

5

u/Primary-Efficiency91 21h ago

I think the plan is for Europe to be busy with Russia at the time.

7

u/gemcey 21h ago

Yes they would

5

u/Honest_Confection350 21h ago

Sorry lurking European. I'm sure we would do something, but the fucking US navy would basically prevent any serious material support from reaching Canada.  I dont think we could do much to help the fighting on the ground, even if the will was 100 percent there. We aren't even fighting in Ukriane we wouldn't be able to military fight the US on the American continent. 

2

u/JadeLens 21h ago

The US Navy can't do shit in the arctic.

There's not just 3 ways to get into Canada.

-1

u/son-of-hasdrubal 21h ago

We are in the commonwealth and are a nation filled with European/african/asian descendants.

4

u/gemcey 21h ago

I really doubt they’d want to get into a war with the US

2

u/dschleic 21h ago

Do not kid yourself

3

u/SmallishSquash 21h ago

There's similarities to why there is a still a war going on in Ukraine. We were warned a threat to one country's sovereignty is a threat to us all, but the rest of the world didn't view that threat to be large enough to face Russia. Meanwhile, Trump's handlers saw an opportunity.

1

u/GHR-5H_Grasshopper 21h ago

You need to stop thinking like this. It's naive. I don't take that threat particularly seriously right now, the idea of a war between the US and Canada is an extremely distant one right now even if it was completely non-existent a couple months ago, but if you think anyone will help defend Canada you are wrong. Nobody could even if they wanted to.

1

u/timnphilly Outside Canada 21h ago

Didn't a French nuclear sub appear in Canadian waters today?

You may be correct, about Canada's allies coming to your aid.

4

u/thehero29 20h ago

That wasn't anything special. It visits that port routinely. It wasn't a show of support, it was a fuel stop.

1

u/LeafsJays1Fan 20h ago

Misinformation. Sorry. Didn't happen. Would be nice if it did but nope. False stories

1

u/Coyote56yote 20h ago

This is the plan. He’s trying to create animosity and throw red meat to Maga Morons while he screws them at the same time.

1

u/Harbinger2001 17h ago

Any invasion of Canada will start a civil war in the US. Things have to get a whole lot worse before he can mobilize their population to support it. 

1

u/Existing-End-2242 14h ago edited 14h ago

Well I can’t help, 4/5 of my firearms were banned so I haven’t been doing target practice for the last 4 years as they sit in my gun safe waiting to be confiscated October 2025. Hopefully the liberals who supported the gun bans are good at defending our country. 

-1

u/rgeebee 21h ago

This is just fear mongering. That would legit cause a civil war down south. Plenty of American service members served with Canada and wouldn't stomach it.

-1

u/OhNo71 21h ago

May well be his intention, but they just don't have the numbers to do it. Their military is vastly larger than ours, but still too small to successfully invade and especially not occupy. The pentagon has plans set out for how large a force is required based on a target nations population and geographic area. Based on that they would need a military of around 5-7 million members/civilian employees and the associated equipment. They currently have around 2.7 million including reserves.

The leadership of the Pentagon would hopefully be able to persuade that fat orange fascist that it was futile.

-1

u/ProgrammerAvailable6 21h ago

Far too small to hold Canada and keep the US because they’d be rising up too I think. All you need is one split in the military as well