So, here's my defense plan for Canada.
-
@evan While fighting on enemy territory may be the correct military strategy, I'm not convinced taking enemy territory will inevitably have a significant effect on enemy morale. Ukraine advancing into Russian territory doesn't seem to have crushed Russian morale; or, alternately, Russian morale is already shot and the war machine does not depend on the morale of Russian soldiers or civilians.
@skyfaller nothing's inevitable. Americans are daintier than Russians, though. Surviving occupation is the national sport in Russia, but Americans haven't had to do it for 250 years.
-
I'm sorry to say it, but there's no way to reconcile these objectives. In principle, you could evacuate the population ~250 km from the border, but there's no housing or anything there, so they'd have to live in tents, which is contraindicated by the existence of something called "winter". Constructing housing for that many people doesn't go quickly, even if you haven't abandoned all your industrial facilities (see below) ; and likewise, the heating fuel pipelines are mostly close to the US border, as are all the nuclear power plants.
Crucially, nearly all the industrial facilities bar some mines are located close to the US border, as are almost all the port facilities. So, even if you can divert all imports and exports to different markets (which is very difficult because of the close cross-border integration of many industries, such as cars), there's no good way to move all that stuff without the ports which empty to the Atlantic via the Gulf of St Lawrence.
Barring several independent and very large strokes of luck, your proposed solution would be more destructive than an all-out war.
Now, considering how stupid the people in Washington pushing this bizarre anti-Canada agenda are, threatening it might be believed. I have no way to predict that.
@tsukkitsune I'd love to hear a better plan! Some countries, when invaded, have left large parts of their populations to be occupied, which does lower cost and logistics issues, at the cost of morale. You're also leaving a big economic powerhouse in the hands of the enemy. An occupied GTA is not providing material or funds to the Canadian government; it's all going to Washington.
-
@TimFinnerty not an easy answer. The other option is sacrificing these populations and letting them get bombarded and/or occupied. I think evacuation is the better choice.
@TimFinnerty if your point is that American invasion would suck, I definitely concur. Not something to seek out.
-
@skyfaller nothing's inevitable. Americans are daintier than Russians, though. Surviving occupation is the national sport in Russia, but Americans haven't had to do it for 250 years.
@skyfaller I don't think military plans are about finding One Weird Trick to Avoid Invasion. It's about finding weaknesses and exploiting them the best you can. I think occupation is a real weakness, and keeping the fight in US soil is also important.
-
We have thousands of kilometers of borderland between the continental US and Canada, as well as Alaska and Canada. Even if the US makes headway into Canada, we can identify areas of the US to occupy. The psychological effect of having US territory occupied by a foreign country would be really devastating on its citizens.
Another principle is jumping before we are pushed. if we wait to let troops and ordnance move to the border, while we hope to preserve trade with some last-minute deal, we're done. We have to take the initiative in our own defense or we will be subject to the whims of Washington.
-
@evan While fighting on enemy territory may be the correct military strategy, I'm not convinced taking enemy territory will inevitably have a significant effect on enemy morale. Ukraine advancing into Russian territory doesn't seem to have crushed Russian morale; or, alternately, Russian morale is already shot and the war machine does not depend on the morale of Russian soldiers or civilians.
@skyfaller @evan Americans haven't had the enemy on our soil since 1942 and that was a remote island in Alaska. Tanks rolling down main St USA would make the consequences real for even the most cultish mouthbreathers
-
Another principle is jumping before we are pushed. if we wait to let troops and ordnance move to the border, while we hope to preserve trade with some last-minute deal, we're done. We have to take the initiative in our own defense or we will be subject to the whims of Washington.
@evan this is incredibly depressing that people have to think about things like this. I’m so sad my country is doing this to people.
-
We have thousands of kilometers of borderland between the continental US and Canada, as well as Alaska and Canada. Even if the US makes headway into Canada, we can identify areas of the US to occupy. The psychological effect of having US territory occupied by a foreign country would be really devastating on its citizens.
@evan I mean, I dig your enthusiasm and forward thinking, but...
Many American states in the north near the border wouldn't probably be too bothered by becoming Canada. You're unlikely to encounter resistance in say Maine or Minnesota.But your problem comes in considering this as a land war action. The US wouldn't move infantry in until after Shock and Awe...that's been their strategy for the last 3 engagements.
Also, Donald has fired all of the actual War College generals. There is nobody in charge of the US military who understands tactics. These are small, stupid men. And you know what happens if you back small stupid men into a corner? They do crazy shit.
Do you have faith that Donald's army wouldn't launch tactical bomb busters, white phosphorus and chemical weapons into Toronto just like they did in the Middle East?
Palestine was a test run to see what "democracies" could get away with when it comes to mass destruction. It's a lot.
-
Another principle is jumping before we are pushed. if we wait to let troops and ordnance move to the border, while we hope to preserve trade with some last-minute deal, we're done. We have to take the initiative in our own defense or we will be subject to the whims of Washington.
Last note: I am a software developer and standards enthusiast, not a military planner. I hope that PM Carney and his cabinet are having aides develop much, much better plans at this level of seriousness right now. I'm sure theirs will be a lot better than mine.
-
@evan I don’t think 300km from the border and keep the economy running is possible. That’s the entire Montreal to Windsor corridor, and half the country’s population.
preemptively abandoning territory esp your most valuable real estate is just plain nuts + we have long range missiles so it's surrendering in advance for naught
-
@skyfaller @evan Americans haven't had the enemy on our soil since 1942 and that was a remote island in Alaska. Tanks rolling down main St USA would make the consequences real for even the most cultish mouthbreathers
@fluffykittycat @evan I'd say that the US has had the enemy continuously on our soil since the Civil War, if not since its founding, but I understand your point. Not enough Americans know about events like the Tulsa race massacre, and don't recognize slavers and homegrown fascists as occupying forces.
-
@skyfaller I don't think military plans are about finding One Weird Trick to Avoid Invasion. It's about finding weaknesses and exploiting them the best you can. I think occupation is a real weakness, and keeping the fight in US soil is also important.
Military planning is to identify goals and accomplish them in ways most surprising to the enemy.
Ideally, with no one hurt.
I like the first part of your plan the most: address this through the already extant treaties of international law - WHICH ARE ALSO US LAW. (See US Constitution, Article III, section 2)
-
So, here's my defense plan for Canada. Basic philosophy: it is unsafe to wait for an attack.
1. Secure public confirmation from NATO that Article 5 applies even if the aggressor is also a NATO member.
2. Send an ultimatum to Washington demanding a public acknowledgement of Canadian sovereignty by the President and confirmation of non-aggression.
3. In the absence of that acknowledgement, sever diplomatic ties, close the borders, and embargo trade. Blow bridges, tear up roads and rail lines.I would like to think that if we tried to invade Canada, the northern states would rebel against the federal government and/or most of our troops would refuse to obey those orders.
I am, unfortunately, not as sure of this outcome as I would’ve been just a few years ago.
-
Military planning is to identify goals and accomplish them in ways most surprising to the enemy.
Ideally, with no one hurt.
I like the first part of your plan the most: address this through the already extant treaties of international law - WHICH ARE ALSO US LAW. (See US Constitution, Article III, section 2)
@Amgine How long do the USA last without Canadian oil?
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=62664
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Petroleum_Reserve_(United_States) -
4. Evacuate Canadian civilians from the border area; probably 300km or more. Yes, this is where most Canadians live.
5. Declare a security corridor of 300km on the other side of the border, in US territory. Any military activity in that area is a sign of imminent aggression and will prompt a defensive strike.
6. If anything occurs, surge forward and take territory. Keep any war on US soil, not in Canada.@evan evacuate all of Windsor? Vancouver? really?
-
The goal is to get Canadians out of harm's way for a shooting war with short-range missiles (500km-1000km); keep something like an economy running, although severely curtailed by the loss of US trade and any facilities near the border; and bring the maximum pain to the US economy, civilian morale, and government.
@evan as a resident of Michigan I find this idea reprehensible. We have a democrat run state, democrat senators etc. Why kill those who don't support DT?
-
So, here's my defense plan for Canada. Basic philosophy: it is unsafe to wait for an attack.
1. Secure public confirmation from NATO that Article 5 applies even if the aggressor is also a NATO member.
2. Send an ultimatum to Washington demanding a public acknowledgement of Canadian sovereignty by the President and confirmation of non-aggression.
3. In the absence of that acknowledgement, sever diplomatic ties, close the borders, and embargo trade. Blow bridges, tear up roads and rail lines.@evan You might want to delete "tear up ... rail lines" because Elon Musk it seems doesn't like our train systems (at a minimum, one of them) anyway. Why spend the effort if these bozos may do it for you?
https://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/editorials/article264451076.html
-
@evan evacuate all of Windsor? Vancouver? really?
@lakelady it could be partial; move non-essential people north or overseas in tranches. Pull back the final groups only when bombardment or attacks get too heavy (destroying infrastructure as they pull back).
-
@ch0ccyra1n there are 193 other countries on the planet, but I'm sure something could be worked out.
@evan @ch0ccyra1n If the US government declares martial law and flights are grounded, there are only two countries that was feasible escape routes.
-
@lakelady it could be partial; move non-essential people north or overseas in tranches. Pull back the final groups only when bombardment or attacks get too heavy (destroying infrastructure as they pull back).
@lakelady another option would be declaring the security corridor much further into US territory; 500-1000km south (again, if we are concerned about short-range missiles). That is down to Virginia, Nebraska, or Northern California, and almost all of Alaska. It's possible but I think it's a lot harder to cover and defend.
