Canada would not need to defeat the American Military in conventional warfare. Nor would they try to.

The strategy would be to make occupation politically, economically, and diplomatically impossible.

The CAF would not try to hold territory. Bring in your occupying force and see how welcome you are.

Hilarious that Canada’s threat is to treat invaders rudely.

You guys are the best, I love that we’ve kept you safe in your silly little bubble all these years.

Who you keeping us safe from?

U.S.A is the only country that has ever threatened us, only country who has ever attacked us directly.

Strange protection racket America is running. "

"Nice country you got there, be a shame if something were to happen to it."

Mob style protection.

Nobody. People just like to talk hyperbolically.

I just posted this in another thread, but since you’re asking-during world war 1 when Canada was a belligerent helping England, and before America entered the war, Canada was totally insulated from attacks at home by the American Navy.

Maybe you’ll think this is interesting, Wilfrid Laurier in no uncertain terms disagreed with you.

“As the policy of a great friendly nation, the Monroe Doctrine is a safeguard of our own." -Wilfrid Laurier

Lol Laurier wanted to suspend Canadian military spending entirely on account of the protection provided by the United States.




Yeah, maybe it’s hyperbole to say that other countries would have conquered parts of Canada if they were allowed to, or maybe that’s an unavoidable fact of human history.

The Germans had no way to launch an assault on North America. The Royal Navy controlled the Atlantic.

The U.S. Navy wasn't "defending Canada"

He didn't want to spend on their military because there was no risk of invasion.

Just like today.

Canadians don't want to spend into oblivion to be apart of the arms race. Defense should scale with realistic risk.

There was no risk of invasion because of the Monroe doctrine. That’s still true.

The developed world seems to be a very peaceful place. If you read a little history you’ll see that this is only the case because peace is enforced. Humans have always tended toward conquest. You must think it’s just an awful big coincidence that human nature suddenly changed exactly when America became the world’s only superpower.

“Defense spending should scale with realistic risk” is nonsense for the same reason. Your realistic risk is 0%. No one would dare attack Canada. Wilfrid Laurier was correct, you do not need a military because you have the greatest neighbor possible. But this goes for every NATO country. There’s no risk, because the threat of America looms over anyone considering an attack. Peace is enforced on these natural warmongers, who have themselves ALWAYS been their own biggest threat.

This is a great service. Paying your part is literally the least you can do. Showing a little gratitude once in a while instead of acting like spoiled children would be nice too.

Laurier assumed a predictable neighbour, but when WWI and WWII hit, Canada ramped up military production fast. Real security isn’t relying on favours. It’s being ready if history changes. Protection that demands “gratitude” is leverage, not security.

If someone holds the door open for me, I am grateful. I say something nice to show this, even though I am fully capable of opening the door myself. America defends dozens of countries that are entirely incapable of defending themselves, including Canada, and you guys can't even say something nice once in a while. You can't even fucking admit that it's happening lol. Terrible behavior.

The old world is dying, and the new world struggles to be born; now is the time of monsters.