Would everyday troops actually fire are Canadian resisters/protestors/unarmed civilians, if so ordered?
Were you in the forces?
Would you have fired if so ordered?
I think Canadians are curious how Americans would answer this question.
Oh, yes. Canadians have a reputation as “liberals”, which is practically a synonym for "Satan worshiping pedophiles to the Right; and the military is dominated by the Right. They’d drive though Canadian cities killing everyone they see with a clear conscience.
EDIT: I’ll also point out that they’ve shown no reluctance to fire on civilians elsewhere. No reason to assume Canadians are special.
Didn’t we already try to invade Canada once and failed?
How U.S. Forces Failed to Conquer Canada 200 Years Ago | HISTORY
Interestingly, about 200 militiamen from Ohio refused to enter Canadian territory with the American forces and stopped at the border.
A very long time ago under vastly different circumstances. In the modern era they’d be overwhelmed within days at most, their population and industry is concentrated too close to the border.
Considering that the US Army was prepared to flood California farms on an hour’s notice recently, why not?
Orders is orders.
Twice, actually.
Canada was the first foreign territory invaded by the United States, in 1775. Generals Montgomery and Arnold led an invasion that tried to capture Quebec. Montgomery was killed and the US forces defeated and retreated.
Then there were the Hunter Lodges who tried to invade after the 1837 Rebellions, with the US government initially turning a blind eye.
And the Fenian Raids into Canada in the 1860s.
We’re familiar with armed Americans coming north.
About 40% of the military are democrats. So they aren’t all shit for brain MAGA types.
Having said that, how is the US going to get funding for a war against Canada? The president needs congress to fund a war in Canada, and I doubt congress would fund that.
Which GOP senators and representatives have demonstrated that they will stand up to President Musk?
In the house, the GOP can only lose 1-2 votes and still pass a bill if all democrats vote against it.
So if all house democrats vote against funding a war against Canada, it only takes 1 or 2 GOP house representatives to vote against it for the funding to be denied.
I don’t feel skirmishes from centuries past have much bearing, and I’m not interested in funding issues.
I don’t think how they behaved in other locations and circumstances actually applies, to be honest. We have a very different relationship and history clearly.
If the advancing US forces encounter a large crowd of unarmed silent Canadians, blocking their way, refusing to move, if so ordered, do US troops fire on that crowd?
I’m sure some would and some wouldn’t. If the Canadian civilians were being insurgents, it might be easier. If they were peaceful, I would expect ever-higher ranks of mutiny or desertion/refusal of orders by the US troops.
Is this the right place to ask a to-me more important question:
Would Canadian troops fire on U.S. troops?
I have no military background, but I would hope so.
Their duty is to defend Canada.
In a troops-on-troops situation I’d expect the Canadians to have no qualms about shooting the invaders.
In a [US tries to invade Canada] scenario I’d hope, and I fully expect, that the DoD would be riven with ambivalence and outright mutiny from end to end. The US formations that made it to a front-line position would be regime loyalists and would fight just like they fight any other enemy.
OTOH …
Once enough of DoD isn’t going along with the White House, there will be intense intra-DoD combat to either win the anti-trump revolution or put down the anti-trump revolution. Once that’s going on, there won’t be much spare bandwidth anywhere among the US forces for messing with the Canadians. Or anyone else.
After American troops were blooded, some would be angry enough to go after civilians who disrespected their new masters. That answers the thread title question.
Before agreeing, I want to know Trump’s pretext.
If there’s no pretext, and he just orders the division at Fort Drum to get in their parkas and march on Ottawa, mutiny is possible. But there always is a pretext. If two years from now, Trump is blaming tariff-related U.S. unemployment on evil Canadian machinations, and Trump highly publicized an incident where a Canadian allegedly murdered an American, and Trump is making progress in shutting down critical internal media — no mutiny.
I would be utterly shocked if they didn’t. Repelling an unjustified invasion of our country is a very different scenario from that of being the people doing the invading. Canadians would have no choice in the matter, while every US soldier who crosses the border could have refused the order and gone to jail if they didn’t want to shoot/be shot at.
I think this is basically it. Any order to invade Canada would almost certainly trigger an outright refusal of the order by the military as a whole or a huge conflict within the military. If that didn’t happen and the brass tried to move forward with an invasion, then the grunts themselves would refuse en masse, IMO, and, concurrently, a revolution and/or civil war in the US would erupt. Any Americans who actually participated in attacking, much less shooting, Canadians would be treated as pariahs for the rest of their lives.
The general US reaction would be the Vietnam War on all the steroids. It’s unimaginable.
I would say inevitable. You’d at least have a ton of resignations by the brass and soldiers going AWOL.
You are right that there is always a pretext. For Kristallnacht in 1938, it was the killing of a German diplomat by a young Jew in France (which actually happened). For the start of the attack on Poland by Germany in 1939 (i.e., the start of WWII), it was a false flag attack on a German radio station.
But this isn’t 1939, and people don’t believe that kind of shit any more. Sure, the fascist morons of the US will be happen to pretend to believe in the propaganda, since they want to believe and see bad things happen, but the rest will not, and there will be all kinds of pushback, including perhaps a mutiny.
Also, the potential pretext you cite is pretty weak tea. I’m not saying your imagination is weak, since I can’t imagine anything better, but that’s my point: there is no believable pretext to invade Canada.
On a related note, I wonder how formal a US president’s order has to be for military action to happen. If Trump is just mumbling, with glazed eyes, “Go invade Canada right now,” I’d imagine the SecDef and other advisors would glance at each other and be like, “I guess dementia or something is setting in.”
Does he have to draft a document and sign it and make things really formal?
If ordered to do so, yes they would. They have to.