Look at a map. Most of the large Canadian cites are along the border. The interior of Canada is smaller towns.
The US has benefited greatly with a non-militarized border. Up until 9/11 towns were divided by the border and local people could travel freely. It’s more formal now. Even if the border crosses your yard.
I would really hate to see that friendly relationship ruined by the next President.
Trust can’t be easily restored. Trump could create a strained relationship that could take decades to restore.
He’s already done that in his first term, by being coy about whether he would respond to an article V request from a NATO country that was invaded in Europe. (Knowing that there’s likely only one country in Europe likely to invade another one …). That did terrible damage to NATO.
He’s done it in his first term by imposing tariffs on Canadian steel after making a finding that Canada was a threat to the national security of the United States.
I saw an interview with a retired Canadian diplomat around 2018 who said that the operating assumption in Canadian diplomatic and government affairs was that the United States is an unreliable ally that cannot be trusted.
After a certain point, yes, mainly after about 1880.
But Canada was the first foreign territory invaded by the United States, with the goal of annexation.
The Quebec Act guaranteed freedom of worship and religion to the King’s Catholic subjects in Quebec. That Act was grouped with the Intolerable Acts by American revolutionaries, because it allowed « papism » to flourish.
Two Canadian provinces were founded by political refugees fleeing the United States because of political oppression and in some cases political terrorism.
Then Canada was invaded again by the United States, again with the express goal of annexation.
It’s been said that the US Revolution created two countries, not one: The republican United States, and the monarchical Canada, which rejected the revolution and what it stood for.
This may be our salvation, as long as Republicans are in power. We don’t want them, and they don’t want us. They can continue to destroy the social fabric and the common wealth of America, but as long as they leave us alone, everybody’s happy!
My Canadian relatives in Sask and BC do not like the idea of joining trump, altho they admit that once in a while, when the PM does some loony thing or the Quebecois get even crazier- they have pondered the idea. But not seriously.
Maybe so…eventually. I hope the fascists are not in power long enough in the US to make this happen.
I’m of the opinion that Trump is just running his mouth about Panama, Greenland, and Canada to set up some sort of economic deal. I’ve learned not to worry as much about what he says as I do what he does. During the first Trump term, he raised hell about NAFTA. So, they re-negotiated NAFTA and made the MCUSA deal, which was very similar to NAFTA, but Trump declared some yuuuuuuge trade deal victory.
I don’t know what will satisfy him this time. But this is what I think the end goal is. Some sort of trade deal that’s slightly different than what we’re already doing.
And there might be something similar with Greenland and Panama…maybe something involving drilling/mining.
The issue with Greenland is that we’re attacking the territory of a NATO ally, Denmark…just like Canada is a NATO ally. Trump hates NATO. So, there’s a common thread here.
One of the benefits of Trump’s ignorance and that of most of his appointees is that the new trade agreement next year will likely benefit Canada more than the US. It’s like trade negotiators on one side of the table and a pack of monkeys on the other. The monkeys are only looking for the banana – publicity and grift.
Not far enough. The American people have spoken, and this is their chosen representative - not once but twice. Fuck the nation as a whole. America had made it extremely clear that it is no longer an ally or a friend. Where once we viewed America as a sleeping elephant, we now need to view it as a bull hippopotamus: territotial, myopic, dimwitted, unpredictable. The most important thing Canada can do in the next decade is build economic and political relationships with other countries, and distance itself as much as possible from the United States.
I take Trump seriously but not literally here. They would keep Canada as an unincorporated territory like American Samoa where residents are not citizens, but worse. Statehood is only being floated to reduce Canadian resistance.
Someone can correct me, but under the War Powers Act, Trump can go to war for 120 days without congressional authorization. Correct?
I know this sounds crazy today, but if Putin totally defeats Ukraine and at least one NATO country, the U.S. will be a different country.
We’re already a different country, unfortunately. We’re now allowing an autocrat to consolidate power. It’s hard to believe really. We used to be a force for good in the world. Now, we’re a country that can’t be depended upon. Honestly, if I’m NATO, I would be making contingency plans for a NATO that doesn’t include the US.
True. I think the real threat to Canada though is long-term. If the fascists consolidate power over decades, then I think Canada is ultimately a military target of the US. Not now. I think Trump is bluffing about making Canada a 51st state. But if we continue down the fascist path, I can see a point of no return, and at that point, Canadiens won’t be happy (neither will many millions of Americans who will have lost their voice).
Who said anything about winning? Invasion, followed by occupation, followed by guerilla warfare is a possibility. As is capitulation, since there aren’t many examples of first world nations going to war with one another.
Fascism, a characteristic of democracy, tends to burn itself out. So while steps 2, 3 and 4 could happen, it’s far from a certainty. Examples of flameout include Huey Long and Governor Sidney J Catts of Florida. The immediate threat is a transformation into something like Orban’s Hungary.
Canada gave up their nuclear weapons in 1984. I’m not a military guy, but I suspect Canada has a number of viable strategic options. It would be prudent to run a few red team / blue team exercises. Military planners must operate over multi-decade planning horizons, so it’s by no means too early for democratic nations to think in these terms.
Similarly, existing members of the US armed services need to think about lines they would and would not cross.