Invading Canada

[kingpengvin]

@griffin1977

Since 1812, last time the US invaded ? (that didn’t go so well )Not even 200 years, not all that long… I’d say any of Switzerland’s relationship with any of its neighbours would be more peaceful than that (they declared neutrality in 1815 but I believe the last war they had was with France in 1700s)

There is also the minor skirmish with 800 of the American Fenian Brotherhood in the 1860s. There was also the tension between Washington and Upper Canada when Confederate spies were allowed to operate in the Niagra Falls area.

Not major fights but not exactly totally peaceful.

Now, in the case of an unprokoked invasion of my home and native land I’d consider taking up arms against the enemy, and if absolutely necessary, go south to cause the people to reconsider their nation’s actions .

I know its fun to poke at the Canadians as a bunch of wimps or defensless morons but we are a tough resiliant people who despite our lower population have a very proud Military history.

We have paid more than our fair share of blood in our short time as a nation. With the exception of the boer War I think ever fight we’ve been in was justified and right.

I’m not saying we’d win a stand up fight, we don’t have the numbers, but in a prolonged geurilla action I think we’d put up enough of thorn in the side to make the venture costly.

The biggest thing that would make it hard on the US is that we are physically joined. Actions would spill over into your country. The fight would be taken to your streets as well.

But this is just silly speculation. As posted by Lemur866 there is no reason whatsoever for an action to occur

[Civil_Guy]

Yes… the OP doesn’t make much sense at all. I can’t fathom any issue that would split the U.S. and Canada along any kind of geographic lines… and the two countries are similar enough ideologically, that each country would probably split themselves equally on any issue, rather than find any need to fight each other.

Another Civil War, this time with members of the U.S. and Canadian sympathizers joining together on either side of whatever issues. Unique, possibly: a civil war involving two countries at once. Bloody? Er, yes.

Anyhow, I’d say the U.S. survived the last CW, but from this distance in history, it’s a little hard to say the U.S. “won” the Civil War.

[zoogirl]

I think if the US tries to invade, we should sic our toughest, most highly skilled and tenacious crew on 'em -

The Canadian Women’s Olympic Hockey Team!

That’ll fix 'em!

[XT]

@Savannah

We’re really big, geographically. Seriously, do you know how big we are? Canada stretches to the friggin’ North Pole. And for all our apologetic politeness and sometimes ineffectual ways with the wider world, there is a deep and solid core of love for this country that no one should take lightly. We are not USA Lite.

I think of all nations on earth we are in the best position to know just how big you guys are. Its our Euro brethren who don’t seem to comprehend the scales of either of our nations after all.

That said though you have to admit that a lot of Canada is miles and miles of…well, miles and miles. I’ve lived there when I worked for CNG and Williams Canada. Outside of the cities there is a lot of baren and unpopulated area that is all part of Canada. Its not exactly friendly territory either…I certainly wouldn’t want to head into the bush (well, tundra) in Canada to stage an insurgency against the US…especially not in winter.

Its ridiculous anyway. No one that I know of in the US WANTS to anex Canada…just as you Canadians don’t WANT us too. We are both perfectly happy with the situation as it is. Its your French speaking bretheren who seem the most unhappy living under the umbrella of a unified Canada…and I think thats just them being, well, French (like).

@RickJay

No offense, but the United States is barely in control of its own borders, you know. Given current U.S. military capabilities, there is no possible way it could seal off its borders AND Canada’s. All you need to fuel an insurgency can be trucked across the border from the good ol’ USA.

No offense taken. You are right that we don’t have iron clad control of our borders. Certainly a lot of stuff will come in from the US to Canada in the event of war. But…would it be enough to sustain even the kind of fighting happening in Iraq? After all, well, we are here. Presumably our military would be here. So, surveilence would be much greater than it is in Iraq. The Navy would be patrolling your coasts and the Air Force would be over flying your air space…and the border. In the event of war I figure its a good bet that the Army and Marine Corps would also be patrolling the border…and we’d have electronic surveilence everywhere.

Would it be air tight? Not a chance. But it wouldn’t really have to be…it would just have to stop enough supplies getting in to keep a really hot insurgency going. Considering the size of Canada and the weather up there, especially in winter, I think we could probably manage to keep the sheer numbers of insurgents to a minimum by keeping them very lean. Within a few generations you won’t be looking to the Queen anymore…but to King George the First!

:smack: Come to think of it, where do I sign up for the resistance???

-XT

[RickJay]

@Savannah

We’re really big, geographically. Seriously, do you know how big we are?

Psst. Ginger is Canadian. “Of the North” does not mean “Minnesota.”

You’re right, though. The “Canadians are nice and so there’d be no insurgency” is silly.

People everywhere are generally the same, to be honest; people do not substantially differ on account of nationality or race, and their reactions to things tend to be based on perceived necessity and circumstance. Canada has been a peaceful country for a long time in large part because it hasn’t had any reason to be combative, militaristic, or what have you. If that circumstance were changed, the reactions would change appropriately. Canada seemed quite capable of killing lots of people when the necessity arose. Canada deployed nuclear weapons for what, 25 years or so, when it seemed like it needed to do so. (Yes, we did.)

I would think a Canadian resistance would be a LOT worse than what we’re seeing in Iraq. Many, many times worse, worse by an order of magnitude, a state of open insurrection in multiple centres at all times, and low-level violence and scattered attacks on a continental scale, as well as attacks within the USA itself. The Iraq situation would be a fond memory in comparison.

Whatever we think of the Iraq War, the absolute unvarnished fact is that the American occupation brings considerable immediate and potential benefits. A lot of Iraqis are better off as a result. Iraq was already an economic basket case, run by a murdering bastard, with no real apparatus of state other than what Saddam had personally devised. I mean, how could you be WORSE off under the Americans? At the very worst, it’s the same.

Canadians, in our hypothetical war, have nothing to gain and everything to lose; they’d be worse off in every possible way. The economy would be horribly damaged, their freedoms would be taken away, so on and so forth. This is, of course, one of the reasons it ain’t gonna happen; it can’t possibly be justified even to the most ardent Republican. The President’s approval rating would drop to approximately whatever percentage his immediate family constitutes of the United States. The reaction in Canada would be, quite frankly, one of tremendous fury and horrible violence, and both sides would suffer terrible losses.

[XT]

Canadians are NICE??? Did I ever tell you of this bar fight I got into there…

-XT

[RickJay]

@xtisme

Canadians are NICE??? Did I ever tell you of this bar fight I got into there…

-XT

It wasn’t at the Prince George in Kingston, Ontario sometime in July of 1992, was it? They never let us back in to the place.

[XT]

@RickJay

It wasn’t at the Prince George in Kingston, Ontario sometime in July of 1992, was it? They never let us back in to the place.

Naw, it was at a bar in Ottawa. I didn’t even start the damn fight (for a change)…it was a pro-English Canadian and a pro-French Canadian talking about…politics. Pretty much incomprehensible to me, even though I had lived in Ottawa for about a year at that point. I was dragged in and eventually a huge fight ensued. WE never got to go back in there again either…

-XT

p.s. I actually got called a ‘Yank’ if you can believe it. I hadn’t been called a ‘Yank’ since going to England. I was more amused than upset of course, not seeing it as the deadly insult it was intended to be.

[Northern_Piper]

@RickJay

Whatever we think of the Iraq War, the absolute unvarnished fact is that the American occupation brings considerable immediate and potential benefits. A lot of Iraqis are better off as a result. Iraq was already an economic basket case, run by a murdering bastard, with no real apparatus of state other than what Saddam had personally devised. I mean, how could you be WORSE off under the Americans? At the very worst, it’s the same.

Well, according to the discussion in this thread from last fall, no, it’s worse under the U.S. occupation, in terms of the ordinary citizen’s chances of being killed: One of Saddam’s henchmen’s lawyers killed

@Biggirl

I have never been a supporter of this war or this administration but this:

In Baghdad alone, officials at the central morgue counted 8,035 deaths by unnatural causes in 2004, up from 6,012 the previous year, when the U.S. invaded Iraq. In 2002, the final year of Saddam Hussein’s regime, the morgue examined about 1,800 bodies.

has got to be. . . wrong. There are 6 times as many murders since the Butcher of Baghdad was disposed? Or maybe the scores of people Saddam killed were not counted in the morgue. Or is it that he didn’t kill people in Baghdad.
Seriously, that can’t be right, can it?

[alice_in_wonderland]

Another important difference between Iraq and Canada (heh) is that I don’t think most Canadians are all the unhappy with Harper as the PM - in Iraq there’s a sizeable portion of the locals, familiar with the land, weather, etc, etc that are fighting with the US. I think you’d be hard pressed to find local Canadians willing to help out in the same way.

Secondly, it’s really frikin’ cold here a good deal of the time. I wonder how troops trained in the southern US would fare after a few months in the ground war that would have to happen for any sort of useful occupation to occur. Keeping in mind that at least at one point, Canadian troops would train in the winter and build igloos for shelter - I actually saw this with my own face, so I don’t have any other cite per se. I’m not suggesting that US troops never train in colder climes - just that the Canadian forces might have a bit of an edge in that area.

Assuming that the US actually wanted Canada to be inhabitable, I don’t think it would be as easy as you might think at first glance.

[Northern_Piper]

@Lemur866

@Bryan Ekers

After a wholly unexpected and completely unprovoked invasion… I think I might give it a shot. I just wouldn’t claim I was doing the work of God in the process.

Wait. You’d honestly drive an explosive-laden truck into a bunch of five year old children, just because they were American?

No, not just because they were American - but because the Americans had invaded and were occupying my country by brute force - yes, I can see that happening.

It’s easy to say that these horrible things are being done by the insurgents in Iraq because they’re nasty, Islamic fanatics, and that’s that. Now, no doubt that’s all true - they are nasty fanatics. But, part of the reason it is happening is because in the eyes of a substantial number of Iraqis, the US is a foreign occupying power that has been the cause of the death of a large number of Iraqi citizens.

People will defend their country. And the US, both in the OP and in the Iraq case, is the foreign occupier. In both the hypothetical and the real cases, there will be insurgents who do bad things to the occupier power, to try to drive it out.

Personally, one of the strongest images of the war for me was the photo of the ten year old Iraqi boy who had both his arms blown off when the US forces bombed the house he was in. By the laws of war, that action was within the bounds, as the house was right beside a military target. The fact that a 10 year old boy had his arms blown off, well, that’s just that “collateral damage” people talk about. It wasn’t an “atrocity” or a war crime or anything. But it was an atrocity. It was an atrocious thing to happen, and the US did it. And I could easily understand that boy’s relatives deciding to go and kill any American in sight in direct retaliation.

Local people view foreign occupying powers as evil. No matter how much Americans have an image of themselves as inherently good, if you are the occupying power, you will be dealing with local people who view you as inherently evil. Some of those people will do whatever they can to drive you out. They will justify it to themselve because in their eyes, you are evil.

[XT]

@Northern Piper

No, not just because they were American - but because the Americans had invaded and were occupying my country by brute force - yes, I can see that happening.

Actually this isn’t a valid question to ask. By and large the majority of suicide bombings in Iraq aren’t even against US troops…they are against their fellow Iraqi’s. So…would you bomb a bunch of CANADIAN children (or a market in Canada filled with Canadians)? Perhaps because they were French/English Canadians…or maybe because some were Liberals and some Conservatives? Or perhaps because some Canadians followed one sect of Christianity and some another?

There really isn’t much of a parallel between our invasion of Iraq and a theoretical invasion of Canada…mainly because none of us can come up with a plausable set of circumstances in which the US would actually do it. The US that would invade Canada with the intent of annexing it is so far beyond the pale that we really don’t know WHAT they would do or try.

-XT

[RickJay]

@Northern Piper

Well, according to the discussion in this thread from last fall, no, it’s worse under the U.S. occupation, in terms of the ordinary citizen’s chances of being killed: One of Saddam’s henchmen’s lawyers killed

Citing one cherry-picked claimc that alleges a slight increase in “unnatural deaths” over the course of one selected year kind of misses the point of the thread. Actually it doesn’t just miss the point; it turns around in the opposite direction and shoots one of the spectators. We’re making a comparative study here.

The Iraqi “Government,” such as it was, under Saddam Hussein was of no legitimacy or loyalty to the majority of the population of that country. It wasn’t even really a government in much of the country. Most Iraqis lost nothing when it was deposed and are no worse off today. Even if you believe that “unnatural deaths” went up 2,000 in 2004 - a dubious claim - for most Iraqis, the fact is little was lost, and there’s a perception that things can get better now. It’s not a coincidence that the resistance is largely centred among those Iraqis who have something to lose, especially in the Sunni community. I’m not a war supporter, either, but let’s face it: Most Iraqis don’t miss Saddam. Because Iraqis are not fucking insane. Why would they miss him?

By comparison, that being the key issue here, were CANADA to be occupied, essentially all Canadians would lose, big time. The economy in Canada is now roughly as wealthy as any economy for any reasonably large nation-state has ever been. It would get much, much worse; the effect of war would be to cause considerable economic disruption, spike unemployment, raise poverty and worsen the quality of life of most people. Furthermore, Canadians would, rightly, perceive that a government of thier choosing was taken away from them. Before 2003, few Iraqis had any say in how their country was run; today, however, all adult Canadians have a say, or perceive they do, in how Canada is run. Our government is legitimate, and is perceived as being so. So Canadians would lose, and lose big; lose their jobs, their wealth, their freedom, their voice. To take it away by force would make virtually the entire populace very, very angry. And you’d be damned hard pressed to find anyone willing to help the Americans, as so many have helped them in Iraq.

Let’s be honest; in terms of resistance against the USA, this Iraqi thing has been strictly AAA league as resistances go. The U.S. has lost two people a day, on average, since the war began. If they went nuts and occupied Canada they’d be lucky to get away with less than two per hour.

[I_Love_Me_Vol.I]

The first question in the OP was: ‘how hard would it be for the USA to take over Canada?’

The second, “what it boils down to” question was: ‘US military vs: Canadian military. Bloodbath or cakewalk?’

These two questions are actually a bit different. The answer to the first one is, ‘impossible’, and to the second one, ‘bloodbath’.

The USA (and allies) can not even totally take over Iraq. And IMO, the Canadian military is a much more dangerous and difficult enemy than the 2003 Iraqi military.

Unless the USA was willing to nuke or at least carpet bomb and shell every square inch of inhabited Canada, the Canadian terrorists would always be there setting off bombs, sniping, spying, sabotaging (easy to do since they look and act much like Americans), and in general, just keeping things deadly and bloody for the USA . It would never end until either: A) the US commited to total war; including killing as many terrorists and civilians as possible, or B) the USA cut its losses and withdrew.

I say “terrorists” of course because we call the people fighting the US occupation in Iraq terrorists, so obviously the Canadians defending their homeland would be terrorists too, right? :rolleyes:

The Canadians–like the Iraqis–ain’t stupid. But the Canadians have a lot more military assets. Much would depend on how many/much weapons, ammunition and other supplies the Canadians were able to quickly move and hide. And don’t think for an instant that they don’t have weapons/supplies stockpiles the USA doesn’t know the whereabouts of.

So… the Canadians retreat, regroup, and form guerrilla units and there ensues a long bloodbath that only ends with, as I said above, USA withdrawal, or USA commitment to Total War and Total Terrorism resulting in their acquistion of a part glass, part ice, but ALL uninhabited, piece of Hell.

Good job.

[Uzi]

I guess it really matters what the motivations are. If the US invaded with the intention to make all the provinces states and give people the same rights as Americans, then I’d most likely shrug my shoulders, watch the progress on TV, and then go to work the next day. Taxes going further south than the easterly direction they do now make no difference to me. I am not going to die to protect some line drawn on the map years ago by old dead guys. Especially, if the people doing the invading are as similar to Canadians as Americans are (yes there are differences, but hey pale in comparision to those of the rest of the world.).

Now if Jesusland was to invade I’d be more than happy to send his followers on to live with him. The more the merrier. In a way, it could be seen as doing God’s work

[I_Love_Me_Vol.I]

I’m sorry… I want to add one more thing. The Canadian civilians would fight together far more effectively than the Iraqi civilians do. The Canadian society is not deeply fractured into various sects like Iraq is with their Shia, Sunnis, Kurds and others.

What’s that? You say Quebec wants to be independent and really doesn’t care for or identify with the rest of Canada?
Oh. Um… OK…

Maybe that’s true to a degree right NOW, but nothing would unite Canada more quickly than a US invasion.

[astorian]

A ridiculous question, but the OP already knows that, and is asking just for fun.

If the question is simply, which country has a stronger Army, OBVIOUSLY the USA does. But…

1. Conquering and occupying Canada would take a MUCH larger Army than we have, or have ever had. An impromptu, spur-of-the-moment invasion is utterly impossible.

2. Putting together such an invasion would take months, if not years, and we can assume that the Canadians wouldn’t stand pat during those months and years. They’d start making plans of their own to make an American invasion costly.

3. The Canadian Army isn’t nearly large enough to repel a full-force American invasion, but the elite units of the Canadian Army are very, very good indeed, and would inflict heavy casualties on the invaders, before finally being overwhelmed by superior numbers.

So, if the USA were crazy/stupid enough to want to conquer Canada, yeah, I guess we could do it… though I can’t imagine what we’d want from Canada that we couldn’t just buy for a lot less money and trouble.

[Uzi]

@astorian

3. The Canadian Army isn’t nearly large enough to repel a full-force American invasion, but the elite units of the Canadian Army are very, very good indeed, and would inflict heavy casualties on the invaders, before finally being overwhelmed by superior numbers.

Air power. Canada has none that we haven’t purchased from the US and even that is minimal. I assume the US wouldn’t be stupid enough to sell high tech military equipment to foreign powers without putting a back door into it to shut it down if necessary (probably not a safe assumption, I know). If it was a surprise attack you’d get those troops on their home base napping. What would be left of them would be easy pickings.

[Daffyd]

Come on, how much damage could the Yanks do when they’re crossing the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor in August wearing parkas and mukluks? They’d be passed out from heat exhaustion before they hit the 401! (The Highway from Windsor to the border of Quebec)…

If they manage to stagger on, Windsor is about as far as they’ll get anyway - we’ll bankrupt em in the casinos, captivate em in the strip clubs, and trap em in the bars since the drinking age is 19 in Ontario.

[Spoons]

@Daffyd

If they manage to stagger on, Windsor is about as far as they’ll get anyway - we’ll bankrupt em in the casinos, captivate em in the strip clubs, and trap em in the bars since the drinking age is 19 in Ontario.

And don’t forget the Cuban cigars!