Summary

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, in a private meeting inadvertently broadcast via a hot mic, warned that Donald Trump is seriously considering annexing Canada to secure its critical mineral resources.

Speaking to business and labor leaders, Trudeau claimed Trump’s administration is keenly aware of Canada’s resource wealth and sees annexation as a means to control it.

The comments, cut off after staff realized they were audible, underscore growing economic and political tensions.

He also stressed the need to diversify trade, noting, “Geography means we’re always going to both benefit and be challenged by trade with the United States.”

  • Teknikal@eviltoast.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    39 minutes ago

    Trump must realise Canada one of the founding members of Nato and an attack on one is an attack on all.

    Im not Canadian I should add but yeah this kind of thing really will not go well for anyone same goes for Greenland.

  • JackbyDev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    We really got 51 states before GTA 6.

    We really got a 51st state before Puerto Rico is a state.

    Fuck.

    Fuck.

  • Etterra@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Okay not to downplay the fucked up reality of this situation, but does it bother anyone else that the Orange Idiot thinks Canada should be just one State? And one hostile to him and his party at that, out of spite if nothing else.

    • Branch_Ranch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      i knoe Alberta is probably red, what about the other providences? Any Canadians want to chime in? What would the hypothetical blue/red breakdown be?

      • dubyakay@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        AB would join before ANSCHLUSS.

        SK red.

        ON swing state, it’s rust belt all over again.

        Maritimes votes along with New England.

        MB is dealing with mosquitoes.

        BC blue.

        NL swing but mostly blue.

        PQ 3rd party, but generally very strong blue. I don’t see PQ annexation happening though. It’d sooner fight for independence from either.

  • But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    I would kill and die in a war with Americans if they tried to force us into becoming Americans. I would rather die and take as many of you with me as possible than become an american

    • Furbag@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Guarantee I’d be sabotaging shit on this side to help you guys win. Every sensible American loves our Canadian neighbors and respects their sovereignty.

    • Snowclone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      I’m American and I’d be 100% on your side, there is every reason to not be in the US, you don’t deserve our fate.

    • Hathaway@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Minnesota will likely join you. And if you don’t know our state history, don’t fuck with Minnesota.

      • iowagneiss
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Yeah I was gonna say let me cross over real quick. I’m American, so I’ll bring my own guns as long as you can provide some healthcare.

    • CoolMatt@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      6 hours ago

      How would that even work. It’s an an entire country made up of provinces. We have our own provincial governments. Canada is fucking huge. How would they enter? The border spans the whole width of the continent. Do they even have a big enough military to even do that?

      None of this even makes sense, it sounds like the biggest dumbest joke any president has ever came up with, besides building a wall along the opposite border, which may have started but never even finished, or turned out way too expensice to be realistic or something like that, what ever the fuck happened.

      • Snowclone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        58 minutes ago

        For Canada’s population they are a remarkable country, but even so, for Canada to win a war they don’t need to fight, they only need to walk backwards and wait for winter.

  • Krik@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I’m an outsider.

    Do you think the military will comply with an order to invade Canada? Usually the higher ups are pretty sane people (in the West).

    • Sl00k@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Even if the higher ups somehow agree (which would be insane), the actual troops are the ground are 50% POC or minorities. I can’t imagine them going through this hatred by the whitehouse and still continuing to follow orders. There will be a break in chain of command at some point.

      Also peep the military subreddit on Reddit they are talking about breaking chain a lot, whether they will it’s still to be tested but it’s definitely indication of where things lie.

  • conicalscientist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    7 hours ago

    This quite a historic geopolitical paradigm shift. It’s been implicitly assumed that the two countries are forever allied out of mutual interest.

    • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Thwre is never a permanent ally or permanent enemy in the context of countries and alliances.

      USSR was an “ally” until the the axis lost, then immediately became an enemy overnight. Japan then went through the occupation and changed from an enemy into an "ally of the US.

      China (ROC), was once an ally of the us, then CCP took over and became an enemy, then the “Opening Up and Economic reforms” happened and now the US and China are sort of “frienemies”, but now with trump’s tariffs, its enemies again.

      Heck, the US revolted against UK, and now they are sort of allies all the way throught the world wars until now with trump’s isolationism.

      There is no “allies” or “enemies”, just temporary co-operations and competitions

  • SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    Trump is using Putins playbook. Constantly threaten to annex your neighbors. Neighbors take those threats seriously and start to build up a standing army at the border. Convince populous that the neighbors are threatening the nation and are preparing for an invasion. Yada yada yada. Start a “special military op“ and invade neighbor.

    • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 minutes ago

      He is Putin’s pawn

      Wrote up a summary months ago (with reputable sources!) and warned about Nazis too and was permabanned from Lemmy news and politics for it.

      Idk man, you can tell people stuff, but it’s so hard for them to access what’s real right now. There’s a concerted online effort to suppress factual info.

      https://lemmy.world/comment/13431373

    • CritFail@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 hours ago

      I mean Trump has literally forced both Canada and Mexico to move a standing army in the thousands to the borders now, so I see he is not wasting time with this casus belli.

  • leadore@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Ya know, even with all the apt comparisons to Hitler and Putin, one thing I didn’t have on my bingo card was him actually trying to expand US territory by invading and annexing other countries. I thought that was one big difference.

    Everything else I could imagine is now in progress: Disregard/end of the Constitution and rule of law–check. Dismantling of democracy into an authoritarian dictatorship–check. Mass deportations and concentration camps–check. Full-on implementation of Project 2025–check. Blatant corruption, lawlessness and self-enrichment for trump family and oligarchs–check. Implementation of Christian Nationalist policies–check. Dismantling of federal agencies and beneficial aid programs–check (so far DOJ/FBI, USAID, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Dept of Education).

    As yet unchecked, but only a matter of time (it’s only been 3 weeks!): dismantling of additional agencies and programs: SNAP, medicaid first, then social security, medicare, all the stuff they hate. Use of military against civilians, requirement to carry ID papers with proof of citizenship, sham elections, and more!

    Unanticipated by me: Musk given free reign to dismantle whatever parts of the US government he feels like, and now invasion and annexation of other countries and territories!?! In the sights: Panama Canal zone, Greenland, Canada, and Gaza. Could this really happen?

    • rumba@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Could this really happen?

      No. Just like most of his agenda so far, he’s dead serious and wants to do it, but he keeps finding out he’s far too inept to pull it off.

      Hitler was evil AF, but he was also smart and charismatic, and he knew how to fill a government with supervillains.

      Maximum effort, trump might start amassing some military on the border. When that happens watch the other news for shit they’re trying to sneak by.

      • SabinStargem@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        36 minutes ago

        Also one thing Hitler and his Nazi friends have over the Business v2.0 plotters: genuine combat experience. They may be shitty people, but they also got blooded. They were willing to kill and be killed.

        A fair chunk of the military minorities that Trump has alienated are veterans, and more importantly, know they will die if he got his way. On the other paw, we got Proud Boys, ICE, and the Xitler Youth. That bunch, as a general rule, are cosplayers. I suspect this what it would look like if they went up against minority soldiers:

        • rumba@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 hours ago

          He couldn’t even shut down USA aid. All he needed to do was have a semi-intelligent person walk into there and see what the consequences would be for shutting it down. He’s consistently just playing checkers on a chess board and having to roll every move back.

          He’s going to piss a lot more people off and make a lot more problems but he does not have the competency in himself or his team to pull off an operation like that against an actual trained country.

          Don’t get me wrong, he will eventually shut a bunch of very important shit down probably inadvertently.

          Maybe we’ll lose a third of the population to an illness or something on his watch.

          I’m a bit more worried overall that he’s now going to permanently be in power than anything. I don’t think the US has it in them too kick him to the curb, and I’m definitely not going to count on the military backing us in a coup.

          • leadore@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            55 minutes ago

            But he did shut it down. The office was cordoned off, the flag and signage removed, administrative employees placed on leave and overseas employees ordered to return home. Leaving massive amounts of food and medicine to spoil on ships.

            Yes, a judge has ordered a “pause” on the shutdown until a hearing takes place, but we haven’t seen them go back to work so far, since it’s Friday–we’ll see what happens Monday. Point is he’s going ahead and doing illegal things and daring someone to stop him. My concern is whether they’ll ignore court orders. Because it’s not like there’s a way to enforce them other than he chooses to comply.

  • samus12345@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    8 hours ago

    “United States declares war on United States after unprovoked attack on NATO ally Canada”

    • SabinStargem@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      29 minutes ago

      I am hoping that it would be The Blue States, NATO, and Mexico dog-piling Vichy America. Behind the Bastards theory of “Fuck that guy.” at work.

  • Gerudo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Yo, this won’t be an annex. It will be an invasion if he really wants it, same with Greenland. You think Canada will just roll over? Imagine if fucking Mexico decided to take back Texas. (At this point, please do, I could use some new leadership here)

    I’m so sorry Canadians, yall just up there doing your thing and these assholes just trying to fuck your shit up.

    • whoisearth@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      I’m in the GTA. I’m ready to die for my country. Are Americans ready to say the same when their president gives them the order?

      Rest assured you do not want to fuck with us Canadians. We are deeply embedded in your country. You would see terrorism the likes of which you have only seen in your nightmares. 9/11 will seem like happier times.

      Seriously as a Canadian I want them to try.

      • Tiefling IRL@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 hour ago

        If y’all ask, our economically developed states will fight on your side. Just promise us you’ll adopt us afterwards. We’ll do it for Tim’s

      • jimmux@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 hours ago

        As an Australian, I have no idea how my country would respond to this officially. The US alliance is basically our entire defence strategy, and we have fostered that by supporting the US in every conflict they’re involved in. On the other hand, we could never go against another Commonwealth nation. The cultural weight is too great.

        Perhaps the best we could offer is assurance that any Canadian visitors (refugees) to Australia can probably overstay your visas for as long as necessary. For some reason we only care when immigrants arrive by boat. Just follow all the Aussies when they start leaving your ski fields.

      • SreudianFlip@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 hours ago

        No worries folks, any infiltration violence in resistance isn’t likely to be directed at random civilians.

        A lot of vandalism, though. And some judicious sniping would be likely.

      • Billiam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Fun, totally unrelated to absolutely anything fact:

        Three of the top ten longest confirmed sniper kills were Canadian.

          • nomy@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            7 hours ago

            Everywhere snipers are a thing, the best ones are always the ones that grew up hunting. There’s a lot of really wild areas with really big game in Canada, it makes sense that some people are going to be very good with a rifle and scope.

    • usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      No need to invade. The US can just tamper with our elections enough to get people in power that’ll just roll over and give them everything

      • gift_of_gab@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        9 hours ago

        I don’t know who downvoted you, but whomever did go check out Danielle Smith in Alberta. She sure likes Trump, and Ford over in Ontario used Roger Stone as a campaign advisor.

        Trump has created a problem for the Cons, though:

        “The start of a tariff war with the United States is changing voters’ moods. It’s harder to talk about a broken Canada when there’s a growing sense of patriotism,” another Conservative source said.

        Our Cons need bogeymen to rile up our Centrist voters. They rail about borderguards or evil carbon taxes (that are given back to the vast majority of Canadians) or whatever, only now we’re getting Nationalist Cons rising up, despite their favourite leader Harper being a vanguard of International Conservatism.

        We have an absolute issue up here with our Con voters, (when Léger asked Canadians about the Biden-Trump match up in the fall of 2020, 41 per cent of Conservative voters sided with Trump.) and they are extremely susceptible to Russian propaganda:

        image

        • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          From the recent polls I’ve been seeing, Trump has apparently reminded a lot of conservative voters that they are Canadian. When asked how we should respond to Trump’s tariffs, “equal retaliation” and “escalation” combined for like 80%.

          This whole thing seems to have poked that button we have where we can watch a hockey game, see someone start a fistfight over a perceived slight, and consider that a perfectly reasonable response.

        • SreudianFlip@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Yeah, a reminder to Canadians that our blueshirts (equivalent to brownshirts etc) were rounded up and interned during WW2. They got back to work somewhat right after because the country was still freakin racist, but it took until recently for actual fascism-with-Skippy to pop up again.

    • Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Currently, Trumps team is just trying to get something boiling so that if/when polievre gets in power, the situation can be “resolved” without bloodshed.

      • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        I’m definitely curious to see what happens in the polls when we find out who the Liberals choose. I don’t get the impression that people really trust Poilievre to handle Trump.

    • Allonzee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Canadians are not as pathetic as us Americans, who’ve been rolling over for 50 years.

      They will fight.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Two things to remember about that guy:

    1)Trump is stupid

    2)Trump is the president

    Whatever we do, we all must work around those two things. Point 2 implies that he is not permanent, but who knows what the future might hold.

    • SabinStargem@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      27 minutes ago

      One big worry I have is about the fate of the Project 2025 authors. Elon Musk and Trump could easily become the fall guys for this whole fiasco, allowing Yarvin’s Cabal to escape justice. ALL of the Business v2.0 plotters need to be put on trial and executed.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    164
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Nothing Trump says is a joke, unless he realizes he’s getting too much pushback on it for going too far. Then it’s a joke.

    • OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      49
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Trump has zero sense of humour. He never jokes. Every comment he makes is a serious possibility in his mind.

    • BassTurd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      10 hours ago

      I just had this conversation with my boss yesterday. He said he thinks the comments are funny because he thinks he’s joking and just making everyone mad. I said no, he may present it as a joke to test how far he can go, but if there’s not enough pushback, he keeps going.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Still never a joke to him, that’s what his supporters say for cover.

      ‘I don’t kid’: Trump says he wasn’t joking about slowing coronavirus testing

      Administration officials have scrambled in recent days to clean up the president’s remarks from his weekend rally in Oklahoma.

      They had said, “Ha! He was making a funny!”

    • Banana@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Rumours that the United States, in conjunction with Wile E. Coyote, are going to Nuke North Korea into Next Tuesday are GREATLY EXAGGERATED

    • Obinice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      9 hours ago

      You’re in NATO, if the USA betrays NATO and attacks NATO, they will presumably trigger the famous Article 5 and be at war with all of NATO.

      Besides that, you’re also in the Commonwealth, and as such I expect the UK and her allies to come to your aid. Our government is spineless shite these days, but I expect we won’t shirk our most solemn of obligations.

      Either way, if the fascist US invades Canada, it’ll be all out war between the US and all of NATO. Won’t end well for anybody, but it definitely won’t end with the US annexing Canada.

      Might end with the Western world being an atomic crater (including the USA) with nations like Russia and China picking over our corpses to establish a new world order, but won’t end with Canada being annexed.

      The US government would have to be suicidal to do this. Utterly suicidal, to the point of actually being traitors to their own nation.

    • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      97
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      That’s not enough. They should immediately negotiate an agreement with Britain and France to have British and French nuclear weapons stationed on Canadian soil. Have them there long enough until Canada can acquire their own domestic arsenal.

      Canada needs the bomb. It sounds insane, but I am not joking. That is the obvious lesson of the Ukraine war. Canada is already an advanced near-nuclear state. They could have a domestic arsenal within a year or two if they wanted. And borrowing a few nukes from London or Paris in the meantime would provide cover to allow that.

      And I say this as an American. I know Canadians may be loathe at the idea of a Canadian nuclear arsenal. But be realistic. It is the only way for Canada to ever be able to credibly deter a direct threat from the US. We can no longer be trusted.

      Canada needs the bomb.

      • shittydwarf@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        74
        ·
        13 hours ago

        The fact that that your comment even makes a bit of sense is so completely fucked. Of course I don’t speak for everybody but I think it’s fair to say that most Canadians do not want to be a nuclear power. We do not want to hurt or threaten anyone, particularly our American brothers? When Pearl Harbour was attacked we declared war on Japan before America did ffs… shit is fucked up down there

        • OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          31
          ·
          11 hours ago

          When Pearl Harbour was attacked we declared war on Japan before America did

          Must be nice having allies like that. Those are the kind of friends you should hold on to and not inflict ridiculous tariffs on or anything like that.

        • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          11 hours ago

          Unfortunately, this is not about what Canada wants. This is about what Canada needs. I do not want Canada to have to build a nuclear arsenal either. Realize, I am advocating for the construction of nuclear weapons that will be pointed at my own head. THAT is fucked up. I do not make this recommendation lightly.

          Reality check. 90% of the Canadian population lives within 150 miles of the US border. An M1 Abrams tank can drive that distance in an afternoon. The Canadian military is woefully unprepared to resist such an advance. The Canadian military is not designed to resist the might of the US. It’s designed to provide some valuable but niche roles as part of the NATO alliance. And this is not some failure to plan on the part of my Canadian brothers. Frankly, Canada was never going to be able to develop such a capability. Canada has approximately 12% of the population of the US, and a vast territory to defend. Even if Canada become as militaristic as North Korea, Canada simply does not have the resources to develop the capability to militarily resist the US using conventional arms.

          Do you think an alliance will save you? NATO membership means nothing in this context. When an outside country invades a NATO member, they can activate Article 5. However, nothing happens automatically. The NATO members then must convene to formulate a response, and any single member can veto the resolution. Greece and Turkey, both NATO members, have fought several armed conflicts while both being NATO members. NATO will not be coming to save you.

          The Commonwealth? Could you dust that thing off and appeal to King Charles for aid? I’m sure he’ll send his dearest sympathies, but the redcoats will not be coming to save you this time. Compare the stats of the US Navy to the Royal Navy and let me know how that would go. I’m sure the Royal Navy’s 160 aircraft will be a formidable match for the US Navy’s 2600. We could also look at other military branches. But the disparities would be similar, and the forces of King Charles would have no way to get to Canadian soil. I’m sorry to say, but 1812 was a very long time ago. The forces of King Charles would struggle to resist, with conventional arms, a US invasion of the UK mainland. Realistically, if the UK wanted to offer any meaningful assistance to Canada, it would have to come in the form of thermonuclear weaponry.

          What about the EU? Could Canada join the EU? Would that save you? First, it takes years to join the EU. But even if you could waive a magic wand and join tomorrow? The EU does have the population and economy to potentially stand up to the US. But they don’t have the defense sector necessary. There is no vast EU expeditionary army that is going to sail across the Atlantic and go to-to-toe against the US Army and Marines. There is no formidable EU Navy that’s going to serve as a credible threat to the Americans. In time, the EU could build that capability. But we’re talking, extremely optimistically, a decade to spin up that magnitude of a military industrial complex. US army soldiers will be fishing on the northern coast of Nunavut before the EU parliament even passes the budget appropriations.

          Could Canadian irregulars resist the advance? Canada is not some war-torn country in the Middle East that has had insurgent fighting going on for decades. There isn’t some vast network of Canadian insurgent groups with the skills and resources to build improvised explosives and knowledgeable of insurgent tactics. There aren’t thousands of guerilla fighters that might credibly slow down a US invasion. How many suicide bombings has Canada had in the last year? Canada is not Iraq or Syria. I have no doubt that a fierce resistance movement would eventually develop after a US invasion. But irregulars would not be able to actually prevent such an invasion.

          If Canada wants to actually deter a US invasion, they need to consider a domestic nuclear arsenal now. They should have considered it the moment Trump started talking about annexation. Canada should negotiate with Britain or France to have British or French weapons stationed on Canadian soil. And that would provide a meaningful deterrent while Canada develops their own arsenal.

          Now, the French or UK arsenals cannot come close to matching that of the US. Combined they have 500 warheads, while the US has 5,000. But nuclear weapons are the great equalizer of international politics. Even 50 nuclear warheads on Canadian soil would successfully deter any potential US invasion. It would mean that whatever the US might hope to gain from invading Canada would be dwarfed by what the US would lose in the conflict.

          Sorry for the long response. But TLDR, Canada is hopelessly outmatched against the US in conventional military forces, and there is no realistic way its allies will be able to defend it using conventional weapons. A nuclear arsenal is the only way for Canada to ensure its survival as a nation against a US gone mad. And I write this as an American.

          • ubergeek@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            11 hours ago

            An M1 Abrams tank can drive that distance in an afternoon.

            Just one thing…

            No, it can’t. Took us 16 days to drive a squadron of them from Kuwait to Baghdad. Most of the time they spent on flatbed tractor trucks, because of the a) fuel consumption per mile (Like 15 gallons per mile or so) and b) maintenance. Those things throw tracks bad on asphalt. But, they slow down a lot on dirt.

            • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 hours ago

              OK, I just looked up the top speed and divided by the distance, but there may be logistics issues that make that impossible. But really, 2 weeks or an afternoon? It makes little difference.

        • wisely@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          edit-2
          11 hours ago

          Might help to remember he is at war with everyone who isn’t far right, even citizens. Canada is seen as a country of liberals. Your conservative party could fit in with some of the democrats that he calls far left lunatics.

          He is open to doing things like denying disaster relief to blue states for not voting for him and sending in the military to force them into enforcing hate.

          With him there is no moral standard or relationship that matters besides if he can personally profit off of you. If he knows he can do anything to you and there is nothing you can do about it he will exploit that. It’s not about ties between countries but ties between your country and him personally.

          His support is a little less than a third of the country. The majority of Americans still look at Canadians as close friends.

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          12 hours ago

          When Pearl Harbour was attacked we declared war on Japan before America did ffs… shit is fucked up down there

          I had not heard that.

          At the point in history their government was working at least as well as ours (for good or evil), so I don’t know what conclusion to draw.

          • shittydwarf@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            12 hours ago

            I’m not an expert in WWII but by that point Canada had been at war in Europe for a few years already, and America was trying to stay out of it. I guess it took a day or two for the sleeping giant to wake up, or something to that effect

              • OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                11 hours ago

                No, after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, Canada and Britain declared war on Japan before the US did.

                Interestingly, though the United States suffered the most casualties and damage from Japan’s multiple attacks on December 7 (December 8 in Japan and east Asia), the American government wasn’t the first to declare war on the Japanese Empire. Even before President Roosevelt convinced Congress to approve a declaration of war, both Britain and Canada had declared war on the Imperial nation on December 7, 1941.

                https://pearlharbor.org/blog/declarations-war-pearl-harbor/

        • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 hours ago

          We could probably whip one up in a month or so. We have all the technology and manufacturing capabilities required. And if CSIS doesn’t have some blueprints squirreled away somewhere, I’m going to be surprised and disappointed.

          • kandoh@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            If we’re talking nukes and their ultimate results, we could just make our reactors go Chernobyl if they invade.

            • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              3 hours ago

              Ironically, with our reactors, it’s actually easier to make weapons materials than it is to make them go boom. It’s one of the reasons why we never sell them to non-nuclear nations.

      • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        11 hours ago

        You should watch Perun’s “All bling, no basics”. Maintaining a nuclear arsenal is expensive.

        • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          12 hours ago

          You’re assuming Canadians will be immediately granted American citizenship and representation. Most likely, Canada would become a US territory like Guam or Puerto Rico, and kept that way for at least a generation.

          • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            10 hours ago

            I really don’t think you can not give 41 million people the vote. Even trump when he says 51 state implies that it’s a merger, to use that word.

            • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              8 hours ago

              Why not? Denying 41 million a right to vote is a minor crime compared to forcefully conquering a peaceful neighbor that had been your closest neighbor. You’re talking about a conflict that would easily kill 10% of the Canadian population, and likely level every major Canadian city, by the time the resistance efforts were finally stomped out.

              He’s saying they would make a 51st state eventually. The US’s client state, Israel, denies the right to vote to nearly half of the population of the areas it controls. And we’re their greatest ally. Why can’t we deny the right to vote to 10% of the people in the territory we control? (Canada’s population would represent about 10% of the combined US-Canadian territory’s population.) Hell, we already disenfranchise millions due to felonies. And we disenfranchise millions through voter purges. And it was only in the 1960s that we stopped outright legally disenfranchising people due to skin color. You’re seriously trying to argue that a fascist government would have moral qualms about disenfranchising large numbers of people!

              The US could quite easily even go far as to say, “all Canadian citizens in the occupied territories are resident aliens and will not have the right to citizenship. Their kids will have citizenship, but no one who has ever held Canadian citizenship will get US voting rights.” Every Canadian currently alive simply never gets to vote.

              This is entirely possible. A right wing authoritarian government is not stupid. They’re not going to immediately grant voting rights to people that will immediately vote them out of office. The only way they would do that is if they were confident that elections were so utterly corrupted that giving Canadian’s American citizenship wouldn’t change the outcome.

              • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                8 hours ago

                Since you seem to be taking this seriously, the only way to do this without becoming THE international pariah on the likes of North Korea is to do it peacefully.

                If there is an invasion that comes to blows, the US will become person non grata on the international stage. Everyone will boycott everything from the US and to do with US. This is where you say but but but iraq, and that’s where I say that was different. If the US invades an ally, its finished internationally. I know it’s all rah rah USA number 1 but you need international support/trade/commerce/cooperation. It’s not that people care that much about Canada, it’s that no one will ever want to do or find the need to do business with the US again when there is no trust. They would have just showed that there is no such thing as cooperation with the US. It will be down to Russia and NK (and China will sell things, but China basically thinks they are above having friends/allies). So it you think a right wing authoritarian government is not stupid, they wouldn’t do it, except “peacefully”.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        12 hours ago

        I’d consider supporting it, if there was a serious public discussion on the matter.

        The one argument against it - besides the lame “that’s violent” or “we couldn’t actually need one” - is that saving this one nation isn’t worth the increased risk of a nuclear exchange.

        • ShepherdPie
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          12 hours ago

          saving this one nation isn’t worth the increased risk of a nuclear exchange.

          If a nuclear exchange happens anywhere, I imagine every country on the planet is going to be affected by it, so you might as well protect yourself.

          • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 hours ago

            Risk as in risk of it happening, not risk if it does happen.

            Nuclear proliferation is what we’re talking about, and the basic idea is that if you have n nuclear powers, that’s O(n2) potential conflicts that could start at any moment.

        • TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 hours ago

          I don’t think you have time for “serious public discussion on the matter”.

          Once all the 2025 assholes are in place it’s go time.

          • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            8 hours ago

            Hmm… I’m actually not sure if the government could do this without passing a bill. If they have to pass a bill, you bet there will be public discussion during the debate period, and probably before as well.

            The the government of the day could just do it, I guess it’s not impossible, although they’d have to be a Doug Ford-level blowhard.

            • TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              7 hours ago

              I feel it would kinda be a :

              wink wink nudge nudge

              Holy shit! 3 UK and 2 French nukes just appeared in our arsenal! Would you look at that!! They even have the keys and everything!! Guess we didn’t even know we had them this entire time! What were you saying now, you orange colored sack of shit?

      • Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        12 hours ago

        You must be smoking some good shit.

        The US did not allow nukes in Cuba in the 60s. We very nearly had a nuclear war over it. You think the US will roll over and allow a second tier power like France to do it now?

        • ShepherdPie
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          12 hours ago

          The difference here is that we’re not in a cold war with Canada or France.

          • Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 hours ago

            Russia was a peer adversary and we had a very intelligent and calm president at the time.

            Today France can’t project power into Africa without the US providing logistical support and our President is nuttier than a fruitcake and is itching to let the military off the chain with any pretext to annex Canada.

            Dream on.

      • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        13 hours ago

        I cannot stress enough how bad of an idea it would be to allow nuclear proliferation at this point

        • Takapapatapaka@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          12 hours ago

          I cannot agree with you more, and i’m very sad to see so much upvotes in favor of nuclear intensification Bombs do not protect from bombs, guns do not protect from guns

          • ubergeek@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 hours ago

            Bombs do not protect from bombs

            So, why are we letting Russia run roughshod over Europe?

            guns do not protect from guns

            Dead nazis agree.

          • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            11 hours ago

            That’s a nice and noble idealism, but what evidence do you have for it? Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons, and look how that turned out for them. There is a reason Zelensky has been pushing so hard for NATO membership. It’s easy to idealistically reject nuclear weapons when you’re a nation that is comfortably protected by the nuclear umbrella of a friendly allied superpower. It’s easy to tut-tut, scoff, and say “bombs do not protect from bombs.” But I have yet to see a nuclear-armed nation ever face an existential threat of invasion from a hostile outside power. Despite how much you might claim they are useless, nuclear-armed countries sure do tend not to get invaded. Notice how Trump routinely talks about invading Iran, but no one talks about toppling the North Korean regime anymore? Or why haven’t the Western powers come riding to Ukraine’s aid like they did Poland in World War Two? Despite your idealism, as a practical matter, it is not possible to invade and annex a nation that has a nuclear arsenal.

            Nuclear weapons, despite how distasteful they are, are the international relations equivalent of “high fences make good neighbors.” Canada has been protected by a nuclear arsenal for generations. But they’ve had the luxury until now of pretending they aren’t.

            Canada needs the bomb.

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      67
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      American here: yep. NATO is going to become effectively useless in short order, and it’ll be all our fault. Save yourselves; hopefully we can get our shit together at some point, but I’m not counting on it tbh.

      • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        ·
        13 hours ago

        there’s a reason France maintains a second, non-NATO, arsenal. there’s also a reason Poland is buying what France is selling

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          12 hours ago

          there’s also a reason Poland is buying what France is selling

          Oooh. What’s the story there? Like literally buying equipment, or just suggesting some kind of new defence pact (that Canada should definitely join).

          • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            11 hours ago

            no longer trust their sources for USA licensed designs so drawing on the NATO compliant, but not NATO standard, French weapons. France has maintained those since the founding of NATO because they side eye us in all things. a behavior i bet they’re feeling pretty good about right now

            • ubergeek@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              11 hours ago

              France has maintained those since the founding of NATO because they side eye us in all things

              Historically, the US shat on France every time we got the chance. Started about 2 years after they financed our revolution.

      • Cyborganism@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        13 hours ago

        My question is: when push comes to shove, what are you gonna do if Trump declares war on Canada?