# Would US troops fire on Canadian civilians? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [February 8, 2025, 11:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046 "2025-02-08T11:58:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 26
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2025, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/502 "2025-03-08T01:42:44Z")
So today the NYT reporting Trump has openly threatened to redraw the border, or maybe take more of the border lakes and rivers. Among other things. But yup, no chance at all this’ll escalate, right? ---
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2025, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/503 "2025-03-08T15:51:23Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > So today the NYT reporting Trump has openly threatened to redraw the border, or maybe take more of the border lakes and rivers. Among other things. Got a link? I can’t find the article with this claim. ---
**Author:** ![orcenio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/orcenio/32/1036_2.png) [@orcenio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/orcenio)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2025, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/504 "2025-03-08T16:09:01Z")
# [How Trump’s ‘51st State’ Canada Talk Came to Be Seen as Deadly Serious](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/07/world/canada/trump-trudeau-canada-51st-state.html) > …On those calls, President Trump laid out a long list of grievances he had with the trade relationship between the two countries, including Canada’s protected dairy sector, the difficulty American banks face in doing business in Canada and Canadian consumption taxes that Mr. Trump deems unfair because they make American goods more expensive. > > He also brought up something much more fundamental. > > He told Mr. Trudeau that he did not believe that the treaty that demarcates the border between the two countries was valid and that he wants to revise the boundary. He offered no further explanation. > > The border treaty Mr. Trump referred to was established in 1908 and finalized the international boundary between Canada, then a British dominion, and the United States… I previously linked a Telegraph story about [this a week ago](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/418). There are others picking it up now. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2025, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/505 "2025-03-08T18:39:29Z")
I’m starting to think the refusal to admit this is possible comes from just not knowing what’s happening and being unwilling to read the news about it. It’s not just Trump, guys. It’s his senior advisors. Cabinet members. And can you name a single Republican who’s opposed? ---
**Author:** ![Horatius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/horatius/32/3572_2.png) [@Horatius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatius)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2025, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/506 "2025-03-08T22:26:50Z")
> [@orcenio](#): > > Canadian consumption taxes that Mr. Trump deems unfair because they make American goods more expensive Jebus Chris. Our sales taxes are applied uniformly on all products that are taxed. It has literally zero effect on US vs Canadian products. Lying or stupid? The World Wonders. ---
**Author:** ![BippityBoppityBoo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bippityboppityboo/32/5745_2.png) [@BippityBoppityBoo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BippityBoppityBoo)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2025, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/507 "2025-03-08T22:38:49Z")
> [@Horatius](#): > > Lying or stupid? With him it’s always **both**. ---
**Author:** ![Biffster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biffster/32/339_2.png) [@Biffster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biffster)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2025, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/508 "2025-03-09T14:12:50Z")
> [@Spoons](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > … [I]t is well known that some of the Asians [that] Canada has allowed to enter their country have set up fentanyl labs and have been smuggling the stuff into our country. Nearly 50 pounds was caught. Hundreds more likely have already gotten through. That is enough to kill millions of people. It has to be stopped. > > Who will it be next? Nearly 50 lbs. (43) or 20 kg out of nearly 10,000 kg, or one-fifth of 1% of all the illegal Fentanyl in 2024. And for that Canada is facing 25% tariffs, plus whatever the orange shitgibbon decides to tack on in reciprocal tariffs. Fuck that noise. ---
**Author:** ![Biffster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biffster/32/339_2.png) [@Biffster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biffster)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2025, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/509 "2025-03-09T14:15:14Z")
> [@psychonaut](#): > > > [@RickJay](#): > > > > So today the NYT reporting Trump has openly threatened to redraw the border, or maybe take more of the border lakes and rivers. Among other things. > > Got a link? I can’t find the article with this claim. All it takes is his magic sharpie, just like with that hurricane a few years ago. ---
**Author:** ![Dr\_Paprika](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr_paprika/32/3042_2.png) [@Dr\_Paprika](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr_Paprika)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2025, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/510 "2025-03-09T14:15:43Z")
Making a run for the border? (Limited gift link.) > **[Trump told Canadian officials he wanted changes to the Columbia River Treaty](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/gift/2c74378c75ce69f3bd05148883e9aa787edbcaa15de44e8517335ccc76bfb73e/4RUEVK6DNRBIPKVD6ALKVFSY5Q/)** > > The agreement, currently under renegotiation, co-ordinates hydroelectric power production and flood control along the Columbia River flowing from B.C. through the U.S. Pacific Northwest ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2025, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/511 "2025-03-09T17:30:27Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > And can you name a single Republican who’s opposed? Here’s perhaps the major “true” (as opposed to MAGA but still wishy-washy and shitty on Trump and the GOP in general) US “Conservative” website online: [https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/03/canada-is-not-the-enemy/](https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/03/canada-is-not-the-enemy/) I have heard Repubicans express doubts about the tariffs across the board, including a senator a couple days ago. Wrt a potential invasion, these guys are all cowards and do not speak out against Trump if they can at all help it. The tariff situation is actually a situation at this point, so some are just barely able to open their mouths about it. I’m sure the majority of them would just blow off any question about it as Trump’s usual “posturing” and “bluster.” That said, the more Trump fails to shut his own dumb fucking mouth, the more you guys have a case. I’d still put the chance at under 1%, however. Minuscule to vanishing. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2025, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/512 "2025-03-09T17:37:11Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > I’d still put the chance at under 1%, however. That’s _wildly_ optimistic. The present situation is exactly the sort that often leads to military expansionism; a militarily powerful nation with an emotionally insecure & amoral leader obsessed with “strength” and “winning” next to a militarily weak neighbor. Canada’s main defense is that he might pick Mexico _first,_ since it’s full of brown people to kill. ---
**Author:** ![elbows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b3f665/32.png) [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2025, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/513 "2025-03-09T17:43:11Z")
He wants to raid Canada’s social program funds, investment funds paying dividends that cover costs for pensions, disabilities, unemployment, healthcare. Big fat funds. He really needs the cash. And to his mind, it’s just sitting there waiting for him! The minerals and water are bonuses, I think. ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2025, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/514 "2025-03-09T17:46:50Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > That’s _wildly_ optimistic. The present situation is exactly the sort that often leads to military expansionism; a militarily powerful nation with an emotionally insecure & amoral leader obsessed with “strength” and “winning” next to a militarily weak neighbor. If it were all up to Trump, I would make the percentage much higher. But if he were to try anything, make any kind of real move in that direction, all hell would break loose. I don’t think the fundamentals of Trump’s position are strong at all, so I put the percentage that low. If I knew that Trump _definitely_ intended to invade, I would put the percentage of an actual invasion beginning at 10%. Even if Trump intended to invade, he would no doubt give Canada conditions by which they could prevent such. Canada could (and should) stall and maybe even capitulate so as to buy time. The negotiations would be leaked to the public, and Canada could see how the American military, government officials, and public would respond. There would be many moving parts to the thing and several stages of escalation. > [@](#): > > Canada’s main defense is that he might pick Mexico _first,_ since it’s full of brown people to kill. Or maybe Trump could just phone the Vogons, have them read their poetry over loudspeakers to the planet, and then obliterate Earth completely. I mean, might as well fear the worst thing possible, right?! ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2025, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/515 "2025-03-09T17:51:16Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > If it were all up to Trump, I would make the percentage much higher. But if he were to try anything, make any kind of real move in that direction, all hell would break loose. Ha, not a chance. The response would be mostly a mix of “don’t care”, “Go Trump” and “I bet I can make money from it”. ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2025, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/516 "2025-03-09T17:52:17Z")
We’ve argued this point ad infinitum. The only way to prove that pudding at this point is to taste it, though I think (and hope) we won’t get the chance. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2025, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/517 "2025-03-09T18:49:36Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > That’s _wildly_ optimistic. The present situation is exactly the sort that often leads to military expansionism I mean, it’s a textbook “twelve months or so away” example of manufacturing consent for war. Today we saw an official in the US government, on the news, saying Canada has a vast array of fentanyl factories that the Canadian government allows to operate, pumping fentanyl into the USA. He claims to have seen photos of the them in the Situation Room. We all know this is a lie, but it’s a lie you will hear again and again, like Iraqis WMDs (which Americans swallowed up hook, line and sinker) and Ukrainian “biolabs.” They’ll soon begin saying it’s a national security threat. > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Canada’s main defense is that he might pick Mexico _first,_ since it’s full of brown people to kill. On this you could not be more wrong. They have said NOTHING about annexing Mexico, or moving the border. Not word one. Hints at invasions just across the border have been made but full occupation is not in the cards at all. No effort at all to manufacture consent for that. Trump and at least some of his minions see Canada as a logical target for annexation because of access to resources, the Arctic, and the fact it’s sort of near Greenland, which they also plan on taking by force. None of that is true of Mexico, which doesn’t offer any of the strategic upsides. > [@elbows](#): > > He wants to raid Canada’s social program funds, investment funds paying dividends that cover costs for pensions, disabilities, unemployment, healthcare. This also is not the point, as there are no “social program funds.” The Canadian government doesn’t have much in the way of “funds.” It’s an entity in massive debt; there’s no savings. Such investment instruments as Canada holds are (by a fair margin) outweighed by its debt, and in any case, would largely cease to exist if the Canadian apparatus of state and sovereignty ceased to exist; Canadian money would be of no value. Canada holds US debt but it’s less than the invasion would cost in a super-best-case-totally-unrealistic scenario (and is a very tiny portion of US sovereign debt.) This is very simple; invading Canada would make the USA the biggest country in the world and would give it control over an almost uncountable treasure of resources and 40 million de facto slaves. That is the plan, end of story. It’s very straightforward. Ex-US-intelligence analyst Malcolm Nance straight up came out and said yesterday he’s now convinced the US is planning the invasion (of both Canada and Greenland) likely in 2026. I’m not sure what his record is though. ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2025, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/518 "2025-03-09T19:24:57Z")
Thanks for this interesting read. > [@RickJay](#): > > Ex-US-intelligence analyst Malcolm Nance straight up came out and said yesterday he’s now convinced the US is planning the invasion (of both Canada and Greenland) likely in 2026. I’m not sure what his record is though. Here is his substack post: > **[URGENT WARNING: Trump is Planning to Invade Canada & Greenland](https://malcolmnance.substack.com/p/urgent-warning-trump-is-planning)** > > The Regime’s Big Talk Indicates that the Decision Has Been Made; They Just Don’t Know How or When. Note that he says several things that I have posited above: **Any operation would most likely collapse the American economy and precipitate a violent Second American Civil War.** Also: **Despite America having strategic nuclear weapons and dominant armed forces, the political turmoil would not be limited to the civilian world. Members of the Armed Forces, 43% of whom are minorities, principally people of color, and a few remaining loyal officers and enlisted, would likely view orders to attack our neighbors without aggression as an unlawful order. As many as 60% of the American Armed Forces would refuse to execute any operation to attack Canada.** This. The question is one of timing. Could Trump get the whole thing rolling before internal conflict in the US boils over? I don’t think so. Here’s something the past month-plus has taught me: Trump, Musk, et al. are not _good enough_ to get their shit done. They are flailing and failing and will fail some more. Many here will disagree, which is fine. Time will tell. Rather soon, I think. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2025, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/519 "2025-03-09T20:03:12Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > Any operation would most likely collapse the American economy and precipitate a violent Second American Civil War. I believe this is very likely but don’t see how it makes the situation any better. If MY country is wrecked, I’ll sort of be glad the USA is too, but it won’t make Canada any less wrecked. The condition of Germany in 1945 did not make the condition of Poland in 1939 any less terrible. I think Nance’s estimate of 60% of US troops refusing this order to be absolutely preposterous. He knows his intel, but he is an American, and like many Americans he is blinded to reality by American exceptionalism. ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2025, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/520 "2025-03-09T20:13:22Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > I believe this is very likely but don’t see how it makes the situation any better. If MY country is wrecked, I’ll sort of be glad the USA is too, but it won’t make Canada any less wrecked. The condition of Germany in 1945 did not make the condition of Poland in 1939 any less terrible. He is not confident that an invasion could fully occur under such circumstances. The less an invasion’s progress, the less Canada gets wrecked. That’s why it’s better. I am saying I doubt the invasion would get anywhere in the first place, based on his same reasoning and a few points of my own. > [@](#): > > I think Nance’s estimate of 60% of US troops refusing this order to be absolutely preposterous. It sounds pretty high to me too, but do you have any evidence? At what percentage of refusal would the invasion fail? I am not an expert, but I don’t think it would have to be very high to cause failure. > [@](#): > > He knows his intel, but he is an American, and like many Americans he is blinded to reality by American exceptionalism. Cite? It would be like me saying because Canadians chug Molson and slurp poutine, they’re prone to catastrophizing. It’s a gratuitous assertion that borders on slander of a person you yourself cited as having a valuable opinion, and it’s a rock-bottom cheap method for invalidating someone’s perspective and trying to win an argument. ---
**Author:** ![This\_Just\_In\_2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@This\_Just\_In\_2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/This_Just_In_2)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2025, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046/521 "2025-03-09T20:14:00Z")
It likely won’t pass - but if enough Republicans grew a spine it could. This bill would withhold funding for invading Canada, Panama or Greenland. > **[U.S. Congress bill aims to prevent funding of invasion of Canada](https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/article/us-congress-bill-aims-to-prevent-funding-of-invasion-of-canada/)** > > A new bill introduced to the United States House of Representatives would withhold federal funding for any American "operations to invade or seize territory from" Canada, Panama or Greenland -- unless Congress agrees to it first, that is. But one... It is a sign of how serious it all is that this bill is even being put on the table. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046.md?page=25) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-us-troops-fire-on-canadian-civilians/1014046.md?page=27)