You haven’t been paying attention if you haven’t noticed that Trump – who constantly blurts out whatever comes into his head – has consistently been making explicit takeover threats against Greenland, as preposterous as those threats are. He has not ever made such threats against Canada. He just whines about trade deficits and fentanyl.
Were the US to take over Greenland in the name of national security, false pretext though that be, a takeover of Canada with the same pretext is suddenly much easier to sell. Particularly if the government of Canada takes NATO seriously and defends Greenland.
In other words, a military threat to Greenland IS a mitary threat to Canada, at one short remove.
The response to this unlikely eventuality will not be up to the Government of Canada but to the collective NATO alliance. The fact that the US is a dominant member of NATO would turn this alliance on its head. The whole hypothetical situation is preposterous and I have to believe that there’s enough sanity left in the American system of checks and balances that it couldn’t possibly prevail, because if it does, it means that the Founders screwed up bigly and that it’s possible within the Constitution for the executive branch to assume king-like supreme powers and become totally authoritarian merely because some demented orange asshole was voted in because the price of eggs was too high.
I’d like to believe as you do, but here we are.
Trump announced his intention to annex Greenland while sitting next to the Secretary-General of NATO and the guy noped straight out of getting involved:
I do not see why Canada would be any different. Now it could certainly be the case that the NATO S-G was just dismissing the hypothetical but he certainly had the option to remind Trump about how Article 5 might apply and he chose to keep that to himself.
This doesn’t mean he can’t make such threats, only that he hasn’t gotten to it yet. Did you see how quickly his rhetoric became warlike when Doug Ford threatened to cut off electricity? All Trump has to do is get offended by anything (and we all know how capable he is of doing this) and it will be war.
Canada could not take military action. Aside from the fact the Americans could take Nuuk in a day, Canada simply doesn’t have the ability to intervene in a meaningful way.
I don’t know why you keep relying on a written document to stop real life events. Reality is not what you want it to be; reality is what it actually is. Constitutions don’t matter if people in a country don’t think they matter, and a shocking number of Americans don’t think it matters. You’re denying it could happen while the President, Vice President, and various cabinet members are openly talking about it.
The real Constitution of a country is a near-universal agreement on a basic set of laws and customs. The British don’t even have theirs written down, but it works, because pretty much everyone thinks it matters. MANY well written Constitutions have failed because not enough people cared about them.
Anyway, nothing in US law or the Constitution prevents Trump from ordering an invasion of Greenland. Or Canada.
If the Constitution doesn’t matter, then there’s also nothing stopping the person who Trump gives that order to from deciding that he’s no longer president and having him thrown in the White House dungeon.
Are you saying that if the US attacked another NATO member, Canada would not honour the treaty? Or are you saying that Canada would not be able to make any practical difference?
Nobody thinks Canada could defend, or rescue, Greenland from the US military. I do, however, think that Canada would use all of its soft power and some military power to come to Denmark’s defence, out of self-interest if nothing else.
We would not be able to do anything practical, and incidentally, the treaty doesn’t require actual use of physical force by every member.
If that person could get the armed services to follow him then you’re absolutely right. Have you never heard of a military coup?
Was that in response to my post? I am saying based on NATO’s non-reaction to Trump’s Greenland plan, Canada should not assume they’d get involved on our behalf either. NATO is obligated to come and save us if the US attacks but they won’t. They will find a way to stay neutral.
But even if NATO did get involved on Canada’s behalf, I think it would just add variety to the uniforms on the dead bodies. NATO doesn’t have the capacity to make a meaningful difference versus the US when the US has home-field advantage. NATO will probably also be busy defending (or at least preparing to defend) against Russia.
If Canada supported Greenland militarily against the U.S. that would pretty much guarantee an invasion of Canada.
While composing this I had the stunning realization that explains all of Trumps conquest obsessions, Canada, Greenland and Panama. I’m sure I’m not the first one to think of this, but I haven’t seen it elsewhere:
He wants those five extra armies a turn. I’m not actually sure whether or not I’m kidding.
I believe that at 12 noon on January 20th 2029, the day that Trump’s term ends, Canada will still be, and remain a sovereign nation.
It would actually make more since if Trump tried to annex the conservative provinces like Alberta,
Manitoba, Yukon, Nova Scotia, P.E.I., Newfoundland, and Labradore as 7 seperate red states.
Saskatchewan would be a swing province.
But the others would be blue states, so why would a republican president anex a deep blue state that Canada as a whole would forever be?
I am not sure what Trump’s real agenda with Canada as the 51st state really is.
As a source of resources and slave labor; they wouldn’t actually let Canadians vote. Also, so America can be bigger on the map; Trump is very shallow.
Dementia.
I’m sure that’s a major contribution, yes. Along with stupidity, ignorance and arrogance. People keep predicting some sort of cunning plan behind his apparently stupidity, but no; he really is as stupid as he seems.
The eastern provinces are not particularly Conservative leaning and there is no way that Newfoundland and Labrador would be split into separate states. Labrador as a stand alone only has 25,000 people.
The eastern provinces actually are very conservative in my personal estimates (former maritimer myself). However, the type of conservatism that holds the most sway there is old school Toryism, which isn’t the flavour of the modern Conservative movements (neither in Canada NOR the US).
This post misunderstands Canadian politics, and for that matter Canadian geography, in a pretty extreme way. Yukon is not a province, it’s a territory with a very low population (~40,000). Newfoundland and Labrador (no e) is 1 province, if you were to split Labrador it would have a population of ~30,000. Also, more than half of those places are not particularly conservative. Yukon has mainly voted liberal or NDP for the last 30 years, PEI has been nearly straight Liberal for 40, and Nova Scotia and Newfoundland are also Liberal strongholds. Some of them you might consider conservative in a different sense - valuing conservation, history, and traditional industries and ways of life for example - but certainly not in the way the word is understood in the US.
-
Making a greater United States by giving her colonies.
-
Intimidating Canada from doing anything Trump would not like, including contributing to the defense of Greenland.
As for a 51st state, a bill to create one would not get 60 votes in the Senate. So Canada would be an unincorporated territory whose citizens, like American Samoans, could not vote in federal elections, even if they managed to move to the states.