He’s not expecting to be one of the fighters.
I think there’s some chance that even some of the current “Republicans” will balk at attacking Canada. At least, any time soon.
A sea invasion is an entirely different affair than a land one. And the possibility of the US intervening is another factor.
But if China could just teleport their troops onto Taiwan all those conscripts would just inflate the body count as China ran right over them.
If you really think the US will invade and want more guns, order some from American manufacturers right now. We’re still allies and no one will blink at an order for, say 100,000 M-16s from the Canadian Armed Forces. Although it may be better to split that order into smaller chunks and send them to multiple manufacturers.
As a (very, very) young child in the Rhodesian Bush War, I can affirm. Rhodesia was tiny, miniscule. And the guerillas won.
I support Canada conquering the USA, but they are too nice to invade. The peace treaty would be basically, “sorry that we fought back so strongly that you failed”.
I sure don’t.
The USA should be a strong, soveriegn, democratic state, like it used to be.
The 2028 elections (and quite possible the 2026 midterms) will not be legitimate and the American populace is just moseying along to that. That’s a threat to Canada.
This plan sounds preposterous. If Canada needs guns, it can make them. If it can’t make them, it can buy them on the international market. If it can’t do that quickly enough, buying them at retail in the U.S. sounds like just about the worst, most complicated way to get them. Every person going to the U.S. on this mission would be a foreign agent subject to capture and interrogation and the jig is up if even one gets caught.
It would make more sense for a single agent for Canada to set up a gun distributor in the U.S. and divert some portion of its inventory to shipments over the northern border. This would attract zero attention if they agent was a U.S. citizen. If they set up a few retail stores too, the retail operations might provide enough legitimate profit to make the diverted inventory basically free. The number of people who need to know about this scheme is probably two - the head of the distributor and whoever does the inventory accounting. Maybe three if you want to loop the truck driver in but it’s probably not necessary. Everyone else can be left completely in the dark.
Small arms aren’t going to be the decisive factor in any armed confrontation between the U.S. and Canada in any event.
An individual with a rifle is just inviting death. Tim isn’t gonna win a firefight with professional soldiers and most hastily trained militia members are likely to get shot before getting a round off.
A proper resistance in the 21st century means explosives, used by people who have received training specifically in insurgency warfare. This also means the creation of networks of people working together.
Were the plans etc. of these aircraft destroyed because other countries (looking at you, USSR!) might have gleaned some valuable information from them?
I believe the population of Canada is about 41 million. If everyone over, say, 14 was given a hand-held anti-tank grenade launcher with additional anti-personnel capability such as the Russian RPG-7 has, I believe this would be a significant deterrent against any potential invader, and at a relatively low cost. “You think Colonel Colt made us equals? Say hello to my little friend!”
I am sure any anticipated problems with this scheme could easily be worked out.
Is there no merit in acting and saying, “others are doing evil and I cannot stop them. But I refuse to do evil myself”?
What could possibly go wrong …?
I kind of like these sorts of plans where it is clear there is a very human misunderstanding of scale.
Acquiring or manufacturing several million grenade launchers is a non-trivial task, much less the tens or hundreds of millions of grenades to use with them. And to do so in a short time frame and train an entire populace in their use (say less than a few years) is not within the realm of reality. It is not a problem of politics or economics (though those would apply as well) but of simple supply.
Kind of a “can you form some sort of a rudimentary lathe” to build a weapon while the rock monster is staring right at you.
Isn’t that precisely the history of the War of 1812?
Also drones seem to be important to 21st century warfare. I expect insurgencies would use them to great effect.
I never used a drone when I served, but clearly they seem to be the future of delivering smaller explosive weapons, for both conventional and guerrilla forces.
But of course, that just creates the problem of sourcing a few million drones.
Well, you don’t need a MILLION.
Some people would seem to disagree.
I’ll take their word on it, all things considered.
Exactly!
Probably cheaper than tanks, artillery, airplanes, and training armed forces to use all of these…
Anyway, it was not meant to be taken seriously but to help us think through these questions of scales and popular resistance by way of a thought experiment, admittedly a ludicrous one.