# The 'What If Canada Gets Attacked' Superthread



## skater021 (30 May 2011)

It's Just a question, I don't need a political hack telling me it won't happen. Because of the rhetoric that were great neighbours in my opinion is BUNK! As far as I'm concerned the US is running out of resources and we are the closest shop and if means a invasion from the US so be it! Last 10 years all of the anti Canadian crap comming from the media in the states and if the Neo-Cons elect Sahra Palin we are on Her target list. so are you willing to fight for Canada or lay down like a lamb.


----------



## Brutus (30 May 2011)

This will be interesting...

op:


----------



## infantryian (30 May 2011)

skater021 said:
			
		

> Last 10 years all of the anti Canadian crap comming from the media in the states



Anti-Canadian crap like what NBC Senior Reporter Tom Brokaw said about Canada before the 2010 Olympics?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bV_041oYDjg


----------



## Sig_Des (30 May 2011)

You posted in the wrong forum. This is neither current affairs nor news.

You should have posted here:

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread675329/pg1


----------



## the 48th regulator (30 May 2011)

It would be cool to have a band of guys and gals running around the woods.  I always wanted to yell out "Wolverines".....

Can we make special uniforms and hats too?

dileas

tess


----------



## Jeremy360 (30 May 2011)

Why wouldn't I fight?  JTF2 ninjasnipers do what we're ordered to.

I'll Airsoft the hell out of them until they run on home.


----------



## jwtg (30 May 2011)

skater021 said:
			
		

> ...and if the Neo-Cons elect Sahra Palin we are on Her target list.



I didn't realize She had replaced God.   Also She is 1 'a' removed from being a desert.

EDIT: Corrected a typo in order to better reflect her new status as a deity.


----------



## Sig_Des (30 May 2011)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> It would be cool to have a band of guys and gals running around the woods.  I always wanted to yell out "Wolverines".....
> 
> Can we make special uniforms and hats too?
> 
> ...



The red dawn remake is supposed to be out this fall


----------



## The Bread Guy (30 May 2011)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> It would be cool to have a band of guys and gals running around the woods.  I always wanted to yell out "Wolverines".....
> 
> Can we make special uniforms and hats too?
> 
> ...


1)  I'll fight on whatever side Lea Thompson or Jennifer Grey is on.





2)  If I die, please remember to ....




AVENGE ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Fishbone Jones (30 May 2011)

Radio Free Canada Announcers: 

It's 11:59 on Radio Free Canada; this is Bob & Doug McKenzie, with music, and the truth until dawn. Right now we've got a few words for some of our brothers and sisters in the occupied zone: "the chair is against the wall, eh. the chair is against the wall, eh", "john has a long mustache, hoser. john has a long mustache, hoser". It's twelve o'clock, Hoser time, another day closer to victory. And for all of you out there, on, or behind the line, this is your song. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BFPt001PYU&feature=related



_apologies to Red Dawn_


----------



## a_majoor (30 May 2011)

Better dust off this


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (30 May 2011)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Radio Free Canada Announcers:
> 
> It's 11:59 on Radio Free Canada; this is Bob & Doug McKenzie, with music, and the truth until dawn. Right now we've got a few words for some of our brothers and sisters in the occupied zone: "the chair is against the wall, eh. the chair is against the wall, eh", "john has a long mustache, hoser. john has a long mustache, hoser". It's twelve o'clock, Hoser time, another day closer to victory. And for all of you out there, on, or behind the line, this is your song.
> 
> ...



Bruce has run out of Scotch......Bruce has run out of Scotch.


----------



## daftandbarmy (31 May 2011)

We should probably develop a CONPLAN to deal with a US invasion now that the Green party is in parliament and, Gawd help us all, has the remote possibility of forming a government  :crybaby:


----------



## Michael OLeary (31 May 2011)

So, we just need to blow the dust off that Staff College exercise one from the '30s that the media got their panties all twisted over a few years ago, right?

Didn't Old Sweat help write that one?    >


----------



## HavokFour (31 May 2011)

They'd probably succeed if they leave the hockey rinks/arenas and the Tim Horton's alone.

They should also avoid invading during the playoff season.

God help them if they mess with our Hockey!  :threat:


----------



## a_majoor (31 May 2011)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Better dust off this



Defense Scheme No 1 is the staff plan created in 1921 for the preemptive invasion of the United States in a series of spoiling attacks designed to sow confusion and buy time for the UK to come to our aid and American politicians to change their minds about invading.

It obviously didn't have the intended effect, since the United States produced "War Plan Red" in 1930 to cover the Canadian theater of operations for a much larger series of global warplans directed against the British Empire. The feindish plans worked, as there is no more British Empire today...... >


----------



## NavyHopeful (31 May 2011)

Who thinks these things up???   :

Any proper member of the CF will tell you that they don't care what their orders are, and that they will follow them.  But who honestly thinks this is an actual threat???  Doesn't the US have something more pressing to worry about???  Like, say, their economy???  Can they fund a war witth Canada???  I doubt Obama wants to try to take us to task...  This is right up there with the 2nd amendment, which states:  "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."  I'll ask this again...  Who actually thinks this is an issue???  If you do, well...      :facepalm:

'Nuff said.

Rev

   :yellow:


----------



## aesop081 (31 May 2011)

NavyHopeful said:
			
		

> Any proper member of the CF will tell you that they don't care what their orders are,



Says the guy with zero time in  :

I do care what my orders are. If i did not care, i would be unable to avoid the ones that are manifestly illegal. I care what my orders are because that is how i figure out how to best execute them. I quite assure you that i am a proper member of the CF.

Any proper member of the CF does indeed care about what his/her orders are.




> This is right up there with the 2nd amendment, which states:  "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."



Other that quoting for the heel of it, WTF does it have to do with the subject ?


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (31 May 2011)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> Bruce has run out of Scotch......Bruce has run out of Scotch.



I had to stop buying it after all the internet grief I got for mentioning that it's only worth drinking mixed with diet root beer.....


----------



## HavokFour (31 May 2011)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> I had to stop buying it after all the internet grief I got for mentioning that it's only worth drinking mixed with diet root beer.....



...


----------



## Dennis Ruhl (31 May 2011)

skater021 said:
			
		

> As far as I'm concerned the US is running out of resources and we are the closest shop and if means a invasion from the US so be it!



Skippy

Why would they have to take our resources?  They own them already, all of them.


----------



## Lowlander (31 May 2011)

I think this may of happend before what did they call it the war of 18something?


----------



## larry Strong (31 May 2011)

Lowlander said:
			
		

> I think this may of happend before what did they call it the war of 18something?



Wasn't that when the gator lost his mind?


----------



## jollyjacktar (31 May 2011)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> I had to stop buying it after all the internet grief I got for mentioning that it's only worth drinking mixed with diet root beer.....



You freak...... it's Sprite or 7 Up!


----------



## NavyHopeful (31 May 2011)

CDN Aviator, you are absolutely correct.  I apologize for veering out of my lane.

I was trying to say that that this is such a non-issue that I can't believe that someone would start a thread about it.  Why would the US attack us?  If it wasn't for us, America wouldn't have ANY real allies they could trust explicitly.

I apologize for making blanket comments regarding "proper CF members".  I did not mean to insult anyone, especially you.  I do, however, want to tthank you for the hours of endless information you have provided many people on this forum, and also the hours of endless entertainment with the @$$ reamings that you have partook in when someone has a total and complete brain fart (like I did earlier).

Please try to forgive this shiny new recruit... I will venture to stay the course from now on.

Rev


----------



## Fishbone Jones (31 May 2011)

NavyHopeful said:
			
		

> CDN Aviator, you are absolutely correct.  I apologize for veering out of my lane.
> 
> I was trying to say that that this is such a non-issue that I can't believe that someone would start a thread about it.  Why would the US attack us?  If it wasn't for us, America wouldn't have ANY real allies they could trust explicitly.
> 
> ...



Here, you forgot this  :-* :-*

j\k :rofl:


----------



## Mudshuvel (31 May 2011)

We have hundreds of inside informants and operatives within the US waiting to strike in the event this happens:

-85% of the NHL
-Mike Myers
-Jim Carrey
-Neo
-The Barenaked Ladies

No offence to anyone, but I refuse to add Celine Dion to this list.

In all fairness to the initial post, I _would_ pick up arms in defense of Canada regardless of the threat. After we win the battle, I'm replacing every face on Mount Rushmore with video game characters.


----------



## ArmyRick (31 May 2011)

Considering I have a Sarah Palin poster in my locker and I am still searching the internet for a Bikini picture of the most powerfull MILF in the world, if she did get elected in and invaded us, think about what I just said. Would I lay down like a lamb for her? If she personally ordered me to....never mind, its going too far.

Now, if the Maltese Military were to invade us, whoa, we would be in trouble!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_Forces_of_Malta 

Any other ridicolous scenarios we want to discuss?


----------



## aesop081 (31 May 2011)

ArmyRick said:
			
		

> Any other ridicolous scenarios we want to discuss?



I think the thought of you laying down with Sarah Palin was enough, thanks.

 ;D


----------



## HavokFour (31 May 2011)

I don't think any of you have realized yet that Justin Beiber is our first strike, by dumbing down America's youth. 

Who needs WMD's? ;D


----------



## GAP (31 May 2011)

ArmyRick said:
			
		

> Considering I have a Sarah Palin poster in my locker and I am still searching the internet for a Bikini picture of the most powerfull MILF in the world, if she did get elected in and invaded us, think about what I just said. Would I lay down like a lamb for her? If she personally ordered me to....never mind, its going too far.
> Any other ridicolous scenarios we want to discuss?



I can just hear the high squeaky voice asking about that "thingy"................. :nod:


----------



## Colin Parkinson (31 May 2011)

Odd did a post yesterday but it's not here.

I have sworn to defend this land from invasions of drunken Irishman.

To be fair we have already attacked the US with Celine Dion and Pamela Anderson, so they do have some justification. However lobbing Iggy back over the fence was uncalled for.


----------



## Scott (31 May 2011)

Colin P said:
			
		

> However lobbing Iggy back over the fence was uncalled for.



On May 2 he got driven back into the breech to be lobbed right back.


----------



## daftandbarmy (31 May 2011)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Odd did a post yesterday but it's not here.
> 
> I have sworn to defend this land from invasions of drunken Irishman.
> 
> To be fair we have already attacked the US with Celine Dion and Pamela Anderson, so they do have some justification. However lobbing Iggy back over the fence was uncalled for.



This is clearly why there are already malcontents in the US who are openly, and musically, pushing for invasion. Fortunately, CSIS has obtained covert imagery from one of their 'hate' rallies:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAYMJnO9LBQ


----------



## Fishbone Jones (31 May 2011)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Odd did a post yesterday but it's not here.
> 
> I have sworn to defend this land from invasions of drunken Irishman.
> 
> To be fair we have already attacked the US with Celine Dion and Pamela Anderson, so they do have some justification. However lobbing Iggy back over the fence was uncalled for.



Colin,

I checked the records and didn't find anything. Maybe you didn't hit 'Post' or another possibility was you posted when the server went unavailable (for a few minutes) and it went to cyberspace. Anyway, it's not showing anywhere.


----------



## skater021 (31 May 2011)

Well I see that went a well as a lead Ballon. So no one  here believe if we put our supply of raw matriel that the US would not respond in kind?


----------



## Strike (31 May 2011)

skater021 said:
			
		

> Well I see that went a well as a lead Ballon. _*So no one  here believe if we put our supply of raw matriel *_that the US would not respond in kind?



Huh?


----------



## Michael OLeary (31 May 2011)

skater021 said:
			
		

> Well I see that went a well as a lead Ballon. So no one  here believe if we put our supply of raw matriel that the US would not respond in kind?



skater, firstly, I think you missing something in that sentence.

Secondly, I don't know what you're looking for, but you're going to have to work harder at clearly defining your purpose and whatever threat you think exists or may exist under the circumstances that you seem curious about.  If you're looking to engage others in a discussion or debate, try starting with a more developed scenario. Keep in mind, however, that few here will be willing to wade off into a hypothetical fantasy without carefully examining the circumstances.

Lastly, the Mythbusters have demonstrated that a lead balloon is perfectly viable, unlike off-hand remarks about Canada being invaded by the US.


----------



## the 48th regulator (31 May 2011)

skater021 said:
			
		

> Well I see that went a well as a lead Ballon. So no one  here believe if we put our supply of raw matriel that the US would not respond in kind?



Raw materials??  Man, we cook our food.  Right there, those ravenous vegan tree huggin, Jesus loving Yanks will be discouraged.  It's been our plan of defence since Sir John A. MacDonald, and has worked ever since.  

Geez, what are you, New?

dileas

tess


----------



## skater021 (31 May 2011)

The bloody question is will you fight for Canada if the US attacked us. Yes or Bloody No aswer the f##in Question. thats all Folks!!!!!!!!!


----------



## aesop081 (31 May 2011)

skater021 said:
			
		

> The bloody question is will you fight for Canada if the US attacked us. Yes or Bloody No aswer the f##in Question. thats all Folks!!!!!!!!!



If you start this discussion at militaryphotos.net, you will get better results.


----------



## the 48th regulator (31 May 2011)

skater021 said:
			
		

> The bloody question is will you fight for Canada if the US attacked us. Yes or Bloody No aswer the f##in Question. thats all Folks!!!!!!!!!



Now that is an open question.  Do you mean a fist to cuffs kinda fight?  Is it a Debate, where we challenge them legally in front of courts?  Or are you talking about all out throwing stuff at each other, and burning down homes just to be repainted white?

You gotta be more clear, pumpkin!

dileas

tess


----------



## Michael OLeary (31 May 2011)

skater021 said:
			
		

> The bloody question is will you fight for Canada if the US attacked us. Yes or Bloody No aswer the f##in Question. thats all Folks!!!!!!!!!



The Canadian Forces has spent years, and a lot of money, training us to examine situations and understand them before making decisions. When you walk into this forum and pose a question, it gets read in OUR context, not yours. If you think we're not understanding the question, it's because you aren't asking it properly for the audience you chose.

If you think it's that simple, fine. My answer is this: it's a dumb question without context and not worth consideration.


----------



## Spanky (31 May 2011)

Psssst. Don't tell anyone, but the term CANADA is not derived from the Iroquois word for "peaceful village."  It actually an acronym; Central Annex for North American Dominion A (Eh?)
Yes, we have a plan.


----------



## GAP (31 May 2011)

Why would the US attack us.....they already own us.....they just pat the hicks on the head, encourage them to develop they own linguistic style (eh!), and continue to collect their share of all the $$ their companies generate......oh....by the way.....there's a new one coming to town.......Target?...... :nod:


----------



## Neill McKay (31 May 2011)

skater021 said:
			
		

> The bloody question is will you fight for Canada if the US attacked us. Yes or Bloody No aswer the f##in Question. thats all Folks!!!!!!!!!



I imagine it's safe to say that all, or virtually all, CF members would indeed fight in such a war.

If you enjoy fiction regarding this scenario you should see if you can get your hands on a few novels by Richard Rohmer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rohmer), in particular Ultimatum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimatum_%28novel%29) and those that follow it.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (31 May 2011)

You guys are ruining a perfectly good thread, with all this serious talk, you know. :blotto:


----------



## Kirkhill (1 Jun 2011)

I'm just wondering if, in the event of such an occurence, skater021 would put himself under discipline, join the CF and participate in assisting you fine gents in opposing the Yankee hordes (Tomahawk 6, Major Baker and others of Yankee brethren excepted of course).


----------



## mariomike (1 Jun 2011)

Hope this helps.
Topic: "What would happen if Canada was invaded by the US?" ( 2 pages ):
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/64084.0


----------



## daftandbarmy (1 Jun 2011)

skater021 said:
			
		

> The bloody question is will you fight for Canada if the US attacked us. Yes or Bloody No aswer the f##in Question. thats all Folks!!!!!!!!!



How aggressive. And non-Canadian.

You're not by any chance an Agent Provocateur, inserted into the fabric of Canadian society to create general disconent and brainwash us into making the first move, following which we will meet with Amerigeddon while saving the US harmless from prosecution at The Hague... are you?  :facepalm:


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jun 2011)

I originally wanted to say "The US invade us.....why ? Is Osama Bin Laden in Canada ?", but that ship has sailed so.............


----------



## skater021 (1 Jun 2011)

Ok I close this topic, and I admitt that it was not a well thought out Topic. And for that I aplogize.


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jun 2011)

skater021 said:
			
		

> Ok I close this topic,



Sorry but this is now way too much fun..........


----------



## medicineman (1 Jun 2011)

I think the idea itself was thoughtful, but what I don't think you thought out or anticipated was how those of us here were going to respond to it.  I've been laughing my arse off for the last day or two  :nod:.

MM


----------



## Nauticus (1 Jun 2011)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> We should probably develop a CONPLAN to deal with a US invasion now that the Green party is in parliament and, Gawd help us all, has the remote possibility of forming a government  :crybaby:


Oh, God help us all!


----------



## pitdroid (1 Jun 2011)

I'v found a petition to start a Canadian Marine Corp. Not sure if this is the right place to write this but check it out anyways.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/canadianmarinecorp I hope the link works.


----------



## Michael OLeary (1 Jun 2011)

> This petition is for the building of CMC or Canadian Marine Corp, we need a marine corp in Canada. Two good allies of ours have them, America and The United Kingdom. The corp could consist of any where from 100,000 soldiers to 500,000, it would have an air force, navy and army. please sign this petition and support your country, if you aren't from Canada sign it any ways we need as many signatures as we can get.



 :


----------



## pitdroid (1 Jun 2011)

yes i would fight if America invaded.


----------



## medicineman (1 Jun 2011)

...A half million troops eh?  Guess my taxes are going up again...

MM


----------



## medicineman (1 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> yes i would fight if America invaded.



But how do we really know that they haven't already? 

MM


----------



## Scott (1 Jun 2011)

Holy fuuuuuuuuuuck.

I've got a better idea, reinstate the SALH with 500,000 troops.


----------



## pitdroid (1 Jun 2011)

Well you never know, they invade everyone else and plus they have invaded Canada in the War Of 1812.


----------



## Scott (1 Jun 2011)

Surely they don't invade _everyone_?

Hark, a use for the half a million troops for your Marine Corps SALH. If they link arms we could have a human shield along the 49th paralell.

I know someone who would be a good candiate for Honorary Colonel..... >


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> they invade everyone else



Methinks "everyone" is a bit of a stretch.



> and plus they have invaded Canada in the War Of 1812.



And how did that work out ?


----------



## DCRabbit (1 Jun 2011)

Umm.. there's wishful thinking and then there's...


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jun 2011)

You "found" this petition.........

sure, sure.......


----------



## medicineman (1 Jun 2011)

DCRabbit said:
			
		

> Umm.. there's wishful thinking and then there's...



...smoking crack and not sharing it.

MM


----------



## pitdroid (1 Jun 2011)

Scott said:
			
		

> Surely they don't invade _everyone_?
> 
> Hark, a use for the half a million troops for your Marine Corps SALH. If they link arms we could have a human shield along the 49th paralell.
> 
> I know someone who would be a good candiate for Honorary Colonel..... >



Hey, I didn't start that petition, I just found it and wanted to see what people would think.


----------



## Scott (1 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> Hey, I didn't start that petition, I just found it and wanted to see what people would think.



And I believe you got your answer...


----------



## pitdroid (1 Jun 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> You "found" this petition.........
> 
> sure, sure.......



no seriously I found it. I was looking up on Google marines in Canada and found it.


----------



## medicineman (1 Jun 2011)

If you want to fight Americans, Boston is playing in Vancouver in a couple of days - drop in and do a couple in for the cause  :nod:.

MM


----------



## Scott (1 Jun 2011)

You must have been deep in google. Few pages and all I found was this: http://www.marinelandcanada.com/

This is why the States won't invade. Cuz we gots Walruses and Sea Lions ready to destroy those imperialist bastards


----------



## Scott (1 Jun 2011)

Better yet, get some tickets to the games in Boston and wear a Canucks shirt. You'll be welcomed with open arms


----------



## pitdroid (1 Jun 2011)

Well I didn't write it that exactly that way.


----------



## Scott (1 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> Well I didn't write it that exactly that way.



Oh. Hookay. But I think Marineland is a great place to train this force. They have camping, rides, and KILLER WHALES. What hearty Marine wouldn't benefit from this?

Now I have that fookin song stuck in my head, the ad for Marineland...


----------



## Michael OLeary (1 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> no seriously I found it. I was looking up on Google marines in Canada and found it.



Try this search for some background reading:

site:army.ca marines canadian


----------



## Colin Parkinson (1 Jun 2011)

History teaches us that it's far more profitable to lose the fight against the US then to win. Once you lose to the US, their guilt kicks in and they throw wads of money at anything to make up for it. Countries that "win" like Vietnam, Serbia general suffer economically for decades afterwards.


----------



## pitdroid (1 Jun 2011)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> Try this search for some background reading:
> 
> site:army.ca marines canadian



I was wondering if Canada has ever had a Marine Corp, like maybe during World War 2, but i seen it hasn't.


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jun 2011)

That petition was written by a 12 year old....it had to be.

Best argument : 2 of our main allies have them


 :rofl:


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> I was wondering if Canada has ever had a Marine *Corp*, like maybe during World War 2, but *i seen* it hasn't.



Are you sure you didn't start that petition ?


----------



## pitdroid (1 Jun 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Are you sure you didn't start that petition ?



No! seriously! I didn't start it.


----------



## the 48th regulator (1 Jun 2011)

I like American Pie.....is that treasonous?

dileas

tess


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> No! seriously! I didn't start it.



Weird............


----------



## Scott (1 Jun 2011)

Tess, will you take me to Marine Land?


----------



## dimsum (1 Jun 2011)

I'm tempted to check out that petition just to see how they plan on getting 100-500k people (willingly) into this Corps.   :facepalm:


----------



## Michael OLeary (1 Jun 2011)

What, you think it comes with a plan?


----------



## pitdroid (1 Jun 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Weird............



Why weird?


----------



## Scott (1 Jun 2011)

Conscript all Liberal voters!









...oh, wait...sorry.


----------



## Wolf117 (1 Jun 2011)

Clearly the person writing the petition doesn't realize that the United Kingdom has a larger military than Canada with more defence spending and the Royal Marines still are only 7,420 strong with 970 reserve.

I think that if Canada were to increase the combat force numbers then we should focus on rebuilding the airborne regiment before making up some fancy marine corps that has never existed in our history.


----------



## pitdroid (1 Jun 2011)

The military needs both more funding and needs to be bigger. I think most people well agree with that.


----------



## ModlrMike (1 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> The military needs both more funding and needs to be bigger. I think most people well agree with that.



I doubt "most" people would agree.


----------



## the 48th regulator (1 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> The military needs both more funding and needs to be bigger. I think most people well agree with that.



That is a bold statement, can you elaborate.

dileas

tess


----------



## pitdroid (1 Jun 2011)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> I doubt "most" people would agree.



Why is that?


----------



## the 48th regulator (1 Jun 2011)

Only if you sign the petition to get Willy to come back for a show.... :blotto:  Oh wait, is he free, or dead, I can never remember.  Remember, our other allies have 'em.

dileas

tess


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> Why is that?



Because more money is not going to fix our problems and having a larger military comes with its own set of problems.

Regardless, in order to have a larger military, you would have to NEED a larger military. So why dont you tell us why we need a larger military ?


----------



## dangerboy (1 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> Why is that?



To increase the funding would mean you have to most likely increase taxes, and not to many Canadians would be happy with that.


----------



## Wolf117 (1 Jun 2011)

I'm not sure about that Pitdroid.

I certainly felt that we needed to be larger and have more funding back when I was a private during the Chretien years.  But a lot has changed in between now and then.

We've gotten a lot more funding and every year we're getting bigger.

If our nation had the money to spend then fine.  But we need to consider the other things the government has to pay for.  Like healthcare, national infrastructure, policing etc.  I think we have a pretty good balance now.  But let's not look at the US as an example to follow.

Sure they have a 480 000 strong regular army, a 150 000 strong marine corps and all the rest of the active and reserve forces.  Not to mention some of the most advanced weapons on the planet.  But they're also trillions of dollars in debt.


----------



## Wolf117 (1 Jun 2011)

dangerboy said:
			
		

> To increase the funding would mean you have to most likely increase taxes, and not to many Canadians would be happy with that.



Or decrease the salary and benefits of every servicemember to offset the cost of more of us.

The US military is cool and all, but when I as a Cpl. make more per year than my buddy who is a US Army Captain then you have to wonder what is up.

The US may have a larger force but our troops can lead better lives in terms of supporting a family and such.  It makes a career with Canada's military a lot more appealing in the long run.


----------



## pitdroid (1 Jun 2011)

Well i suppose there getting enough funding now, and yes i agree that during the Chretien years funding wasn't that good, I guess i'm still thinking back in the 90's.


----------



## pitdroid (1 Jun 2011)

[/quote] It makes a career with Canada's military a lot more appealing in the long run.
[/quote]

Yes, but i know a lot of people who can't get in the military because there not recruiting many people.


----------



## Wolf117 (1 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> Yes, but i know a lot of people who can't get in the military because there not recruiting many people.



I hear ya, I've met quite a few who either can't get into the military or who aren't able to transfer from the reserves into the regular forces.

I feel lucky to have this job considering the status of recruiting today.

I know we in the infantry are in fact overstaffed by quota standards.  But really in the infantry, what in the hell is overstaffed?
If there were ever a trade you wanted to be huge it would be the infantry.

Maybe to justify us needing a larger military (85 000 regulars instead of 70 000 for example) we could say that we need it to sustain more missions overseas.  I mean it's all well and good that we are able to sustain the tempo in Afghanistan.  But what if we needed to do something similar like that elsewhere.  Or even just go for humanitarian relief or peace enforcement missions.  I think Canada should realize that our military can be a very good asset in a lot of places around the world at once.  For that we may need more troops.


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jun 2011)

Wolf117 said:
			
		

> But really in the infantry, what in the hell is overstaffed?



Unfortunately, its the same as any other trade : More people than the government has said we could have.




> If there were ever a trade you wanted to be huge it would be the infantry.



I'm not sure what the current CF tooth-to-tail ratio is but if you increase the size of the infantry, you have to increase the means to support them by a larger number. No point having a huge infantry corps if we don't have the corresponding people to supply and support them. Furthermore, you then need to increase the number of engineers, artillery, etc... 

I dont think i would say that "If there were ever a trade you wanted to be huge it would be the infantry"..........



> Or even just go for humanitarian relief or peace enforcement missions.



We have indeed done humanitarian missions while Afghanistan was going on. We have also decided to fight another shooting war while Afghanistan is still going on. We even took our turn at policing the skies in Iceland while Afghanistan *AND* Libya was going on.





> I think Canada should realize that our military can be a very good asset in a lot of places around the world at once.



I think Canadians realize that. I don't think Canadians are willing to pay for it.


----------



## pitdroid (1 Jun 2011)

Wolf117 said:
			
		

> I hear ya, I've met quite a few who either can't get into the military or who aren't able to transfer from the reserves into the regular forces.
> 
> I feel lucky to have this job considering the status of recruiting today.
> 
> ...



Yes, I think even an extra 15,000 to 20,000 soldiers would be good and more peacekeeping missions would prove why we need them.


----------



## dangerboy (1 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> Yes, I think even an extra 15,000 to 20,000 soldiers would be good and more peacekeeping missions would prove why we need them.



How did you come up with these numbers?


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jun 2011)

dangerboy said:
			
		

> How did you come up with these numbers?



Rear orifice extraction ?


----------



## pitdroid (1 Jun 2011)

dangerboy said:
			
		

> How did you come up with these numbers?



Because in Wolf117's post he said that 85,000 instead of 70,000, that works out to 15,000.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (1 Jun 2011)

Alright pitroid,

Before you go any further, start fleshing out your opinions. Where is the money coming from? How many do we need? How do we finance the equipment? How long before the unit is up to full line strength? Where do we base this force?

Quit throwing out figures that have no bearing and start making an argument for your idea.

We don't make a habit of locking threads in Radio Chatter, but there's always an exception.

Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## NavyShooter (1 Jun 2011)

Freeing Willy has a whole different meaning when you've been at sea for 3 months.....


----------



## pitdroid (1 Jun 2011)

this thread was only supposed to be talking about the petition that i found, everyone just started getting of the subject i guess. And i just want Infantry to open up again because me and a lot of people i know want to join.


----------



## Bacon (1 Jun 2011)

Hi everyone, today I will be voicing my opinion on the military in Ottawa.

Disclaimer: I am only a highschool student whom has no military experience. This is my thoughts and opinions. IE. Please don't get angry if you disagree.

When I started researching military in our nations capital; Ottawa, I found it quite weird that there is not more units than there is. 
If you visit this webpage, you will find all the army units in Ottawa.
http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/land-terre/units-unites/index-eng.asp?action=City&id=50

I would think there is at least one large regular forces combat arms unit in Ottawa. 

The reason I suspect why there is not is: 

Back when Canada was founded, Ottawa, was chosen as the location of the capital (this is only one of the reasons) for seceruity reasons. At the time the main enemy was the Americans (Fenian raids) and Ottawa is close to the US border, but there is lots of room to stop them.

Ottawa being the capital has a large target on it's back if we were ever involved in a large scale war (IE WW3). If a conflict like this did arise, the distance away from sea would not matter as they could gain access into the city Via other methods IE. parachuting. Or in a NBC warfare situation Ottawa would need tremendous help (as would any other city) yet Ottawa I suspect is one of the main targets in a situation like this. 


So now why isn't there a greater military presence in Ottawa?
I would love to hear your opinions. 

Thanks!


----------



## wildman0101 (1 Jun 2011)

If I remember my history we were invaded 3 time's.. The first we chased em across 
the border all the way back to the Capital and burned something down,,,the other
2 time's we just kicked butt and sent then home....Vancouver in 6....
Scoty B


----------



## the 48th regulator (1 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> this thread was only supposed to be talking about the petition that i found, everyone just started getting of the subject i guess. And i just want Infantry to open up again because me and a lot of people i know want to join.




Wouldn't the Marines fall under the Naval command?

dileas

tess


----------



## the 48th regulator (1 Jun 2011)

Crikey,

What's with all the the invasion of Canada threads?  The humidity must be affecting many....

dileas

tess


----------



## Bacon (1 Jun 2011)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> Crikey,
> 
> What's with all the the invasion of Canada threads?  The humidity must be affecting many....
> 
> ...




Yes, there has been a lot lately


----------



## MJP (1 Jun 2011)

Bacon said:
			
		

> Hi everyone, today I will be voicing my opinion on the military in Ottawa.
> 
> Disclaimer: I am only a highschool student whom has no military experience. This is my thoughts and opinions. IE. Please don't get angry if you disagree.
> 
> ...



Dude a huge portion of the CF works in and around the NCR.

I think you should post less and read more...just saying is all you know as an opinion and all.


----------



## Occam (1 Jun 2011)

Lots of Army stuff down the road in Petawawa.

In the meantime, you may want to look up:

CEFCOM
CANADACOM
CANOSCOM
76 Comm Group
CMS
CLS
CAS
VCDS Gp
SJS
CFHSC(O)
CFCMU
CFSU(O)

I'm sure I forgot lots.

Are you expecting an airborne assault on the NCR anytime soon?  I'm overseeding my lawn this weekend and I hate it when it gets trampled on by the Spetsnaz.


----------



## dangerboy (1 Jun 2011)

Not if they were Space Marines, then they would fall under the Air Force.


----------



## Bacon (1 Jun 2011)

Occam said:
			
		

> Are you expecting an airborne assault on the NCR anytime soon?  I'm overseeding my lawn this weekend and I hate it when it gets trampled on by the Spetsnaz.



It was hypothetical, but who likes a trampled lawn?


----------



## Wolf117 (1 Jun 2011)

I hear you Pitdroid, I would love to have a larger military capable of carrying on more than just one major operation at a time.  (To our airforce friends I am not trying to diminish the gravity of Operation Mobile, rather I simply mean that it would be nice to carry out multiple complex ground operations at once.  Libya is important, but it is not Afghanistan style in that it does not require large numbers of ground forces massed and supported over a long period of time.  Still you fly boys are doing a bang up job giving it to Ghaddafi, so is the navy btw.)

Seeing as you aren't military pitdroid and it can be hard making a argument based on experiences, especially first hand ones, let me lend my support the to premise you are stating.  That having a slightly larger military could be a good thing for Canada and the world.

Firsly let me say this, there seems to be no shortage of young Canadians willing to sign up and serve.  Especially when it comes to the infantry and combat arms.  At present we are over our quota for personnel.  So to think it would be hard to recruit enough people to increase our size would be wrong.  Where the problem lies is in the economy and the budget.  The elected government of Canada states how much we can spend to do this.  Not only that but they state how many people can be allocated to a given mission.  Take Afghanistan for example, the Task Force has a certain number of positions in it.  Regardless of how many infantry soldiers want to go there, the reality is there are only so many spots for us.  I know of quite a few troops who were lucky enough to get in and get trained, but were unable to find a spot on the mission.
I'll state my reasons for increasing the size of the military in another post.  This forum program starts jumping around after you reach a certain number of lines.


----------



## the 48th regulator (1 Jun 2011)

Bacon said:
			
		

> Yes, there has been a lot lately



You think?

Man, I logged into militaryphotos.net, so they are not down.  Just wondering why all the "Invasion" threads are sprouting here...

dileas

tess


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> . And i just want Infantry to open up again because me and a lot of people i know want to join.



I'm sorry but giving you a job is not in the CF's mandate. We could hang up a sign at CFRC's that reads "fuck off we're full !" but that would be rude.


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jun 2011)

Bacon said:
			
		

> So now why isn't there a greater military presence in Ottawa?



What is the threat to Ottawa ? I mean a threat other than common sense taking over ..........


----------



## Mudshuvel (1 Jun 2011)

I'm approving of this thread just by CDN Av's posts.

/popcorn


----------



## pitdroid (1 Jun 2011)

Wow i'm confused, i hate it when the threads get tangled together.


----------



## the 48th regulator (1 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> Wow i'm confused, i hate it when the threads get tangled together.




Funny,

It makes more sense now.  What confuses you?

dileas

tess


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> Wow i'm confused, i hate it when the threads get tangled together.



I quoted your post so your name appears, that should be simple enough.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (1 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> Wow i'm confused, i hate it when the threads get tangled together.



They're not tangled, they are a _merge _  of like subject matter. This makes it easier for people that, properly, use the search function to get their information more directly. We do it because noobs come here and scatter threads all over the place, asking the same questions, while frustrating Staff and members alike.

....and while you're being educated to the ways of Milnet, start paying attention to your grammar, punctuation and, most of all, your capitalization, as per the Site Guidelines.

Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## pitdroid (1 Jun 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I quoted your post so your name appears, that should be simple enough.



I know that but its just kinda confusing having more than one thread all together.


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> I know that but its just kinda confusing having more than one thread all together.



I hear that reading can help with that. Try it.


----------



## GAP (1 Jun 2011)

I think certain twits who have nothing better to do than drag up this drivel need to go and enjoy some summer......somewhere else.... :


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jun 2011)

GAP said:
			
		

> I think certain twits who have nothing better to do than drag up this drivel need to go and enjoy some summer......somewhere else.... :



Dont talk about me like i'm not in the room. Besides, it's raining here.


----------



## Dennis Ruhl (1 Jun 2011)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> Wouldn't the Marines fall under the Naval command?



My turn - we don't have a navy, we have the Canadian Armed Forces.

I don't believe the US Marines are subordinate to the Navy anymore, just highly cooperative.


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jun 2011)

Dennis Ruhl said:
			
		

> I don't believe the Marines are subordinate to the Navy anymore, just highly cooperative.



The USMC is still administered by the Department of the Navy.


----------



## the 48th regulator (1 Jun 2011)

Dennis Ruhl said:
			
		

> My turn - we don't have a navy, we have the Canadian Armed Forces.
> 
> I don't believe the US Marines are subordinate to the Navy anymore, just highly cooperative.




Oh great, this thread has brought out all the finest....Chris, have you done all of your Mercing, I need some help here...

dileas

tess


----------



## Dennis Ruhl (1 Jun 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> The USMC is still administered by the Department of the Navy.



Yes but - co-equals.

Pardon the Wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FileON-org-sec.png


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jun 2011)

Dennis Ruhl said:
			
		

> Yes but - co-equals.



No. They are subordinate to the secretary of the Navy. They are at the same level as the CNO, who is also subordinate to the secretary of the Navy.


----------



## wildman0101 (1 Jun 2011)

skater021,
In answer to your question: Invaded by the US Yes I would defend Canada.
The US and Canada are not wholly subsistent on Oil resources. We can supply 
our own. Having said that and due to treaty's and other agreement's we as a
consumer buy oil and other commoditie's from said nation's due above said.
Sarah Palan can try and appropriate our oil as you stated. We will just politely
escort her back to her border and tell her not to come back... Well unless she 
want's to as an immigrant,,,ish... Or a Pin-up..
Tony--- I'm goin with Lea---Much more perkier.
Pitdroid- The dark age's were the 70's-80's when the Fibby-Libby's more or 
less castrated our Armed Forces.. General Rick Hillier (Armoured) tried his damn
est to restore all our to an appropriate level as best he could,,,be it army,,navy
airforce,,equipment,,,,,, right so where did skater021 disapear to,and pitdroid 
your rebuttal please.
Scoty B


----------



## pitdroid (2 Jun 2011)

wildman0101 said:
			
		

> and pitdroid
> your rebuttal please.
> Scoty B



 Rebuttal for what?


----------



## HavokFour (2 Jun 2011)

Bacon said:
			
		

> Hi everyone, today I will be voicing my opinion on the military in Ottawa.
> 
> Disclaimer: I am only a highschool student whom has no military experience. This is my thoughts and opinions. IE. Please don't get angry if you disagree.
> 
> ...



Have you ever been to Ottawa? I see hundreds of military personnel every day, my bus into the downtown area every morning is filled with men and women in uniform (I'm sometimes the only non-member every couple days!).

I feel very safe, thank you. And I wouldn't even mind seeing even more CADPAT around O town.


----------



## Dennis Ruhl (2 Jun 2011)

HavokFour said:
			
		

> I feel very safe, thank you. And I wouldn't even mind seeing even more CADPAT around O town.



20 years ago you might have had your wish.  Wearing of uniforms in Ottawa was rationed to 1 day a week or so I'm told, so as not to scare the straights.  I assume that's been changed.


----------



## medicineman (2 Jun 2011)

Dennis Ruhl said:
			
		

> 20 years ago you might have had your wish.  Wearing of uniforms in Ottawa was rationed to 1 day a week or so I'm told, so as not to scare the straights.  I assume that's been changed.



Interesting - I did my 5's in Ottawa in '92 and my 3's there in 89... I seem to recall we had to wear 3B minimum to and from work, except when I worked at Uplands, when I got to wear garrison dress in, as it was my dress of the day...I call BS.  Incidentally, I used public transport frequently and noticed alot of uniformed service people daily.

MM


----------



## Journeyman (2 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> I know that but its just kinda confusing having more than one thread all together.


Just as well that those pesky geopolitical, social, and economic ramifications of a conventional military attack on Canada are so simplisitic and straight-forward.   

         op:


----------



## Scott (2 Jun 2011)

medicineman said:
			
		

> Interesting - I did my 5's in Ottawa in '92 and my 3's there in 89... I seem to recall we had to wear 3B minimum to and from work, except when I worked at Uplands, when I got to wear garrison dress in, as it was my dress of the day...I call BS.  Incidentally, I used public transport frequently and noticed alot of uniformed service people daily.
> 
> MM



No surprise to me. Dennis likes to do his quiet trolling like that. He knows better but he doesn't stop. But since he's ignored by the very large part of the membership I just leave him alone.


----------



## Neill McKay (2 Jun 2011)

Scott said:
			
		

> Now I have that fookin song stuck in my head, the ad for Marineland...



What are you complaining about?  *Everyone *loves Marineland.


----------



## Old Sweat (2 Jun 2011)

Way back when there was a policy of uniform one day a week. General Dextraze ended it when he became CDS in about 1971. He had a couple of reasons. First, he wanted to know the rank and classification of people he was dealing with, and second, he had a hunch that a number of service members did not have uniforms. (The CF were changing from old pre-unification uniforms to the CF uniform, and a number of members had not bothered.) I also suspect Jadex was not amused by the military civil servant attitude that was rampant at the time.


----------



## Neill McKay (2 Jun 2011)

Bacon said:
			
		

> When I started researching military in our nations capital; Ottawa, I found it quite weird that there is not more units than there is.



As others have said, there's a large military presence in Ottawa in the form of National Defence Headquarters -- although that's not a "pointy-end" entity.

Military bases aren't the same thing as old-fashioned forts so are not necessarily located with a view to defending the surrounding area.  If I had to take a guess, I'd say that the two biggest factors are history and logistics, with politics as a close third.

Military bases (and smaller establishments like local armouries) are often located on land that's been used for military purposes for ages.  (And sometimes that dates from a time when it *was* to defend the local area -- like the armoury in Saint John [NB], which is on a point of land opposite the mouth of the harbour.  But by no means is the Saint John armoury looked at today as a harbour defence establishment.)

Some air force bases were built during the Second World War as training bases for the British Commonwealth Air Training Plan.  They would have been located on terrain that is suitable for an airfield, i.e. lots of flat ground and perhaps decent weather to maximize flying days.  Once you've built an airfield, you're likely going to keep using it as long as you need an air force base anywhere in that area, so several of those were kept open after the war.

CFB Gagetown is a large base in New Brunswick.  Its location was chosen because it provided almost endless miles of forested terrain that could be used to simulate European battlefields, it is an hour away from an ice-free harbour, and it has a good connection to the railway system.  These were all considerations during the cold war when we were preparing to fight the Soviet Union for Europe.

Politics can affect base locations through the usual government practice of putting (or not removing) infrastructure in locations where there is some political advantage to doing so.


----------



## kratz (2 Jun 2011)

N. McKay said:
			
		

> What are you complaining about?  *Everyone *loves Marineland.



Driving that theme song home: Everyone Loves Marineland

The park could be considered the training base for our Canadian Marines too. We've already got the killer whales and other mammals trained, so we are good to go.  ;D


----------



## Scott (2 Jun 2011)

I'm going to ban the pair of you yardbirds


----------



## aesop081 (2 Jun 2011)

N. McKay said:
			
		

> As others have said, there's a large military presence in Ottawa in the form of National Defence Headquarters -- although that's not a "pointy-end" entity.



There's more to the military in Ottawa than just NDHQ.


----------



## daftandbarmy (2 Jun 2011)

We've already been invaded by China. The director of CSIS said so on TV. What are we doing about that?

Not much overtly, but I'm sure the covert actions are ongoing. That's the area where we'll need to make the biggest investments for increased national security in the future IMHO.


----------



## Danjanou (2 Jun 2011)

kratz said:
			
		

> Driving that theme song home: Everyone Loves Marineland
> 
> The park could be considered the training base for our Canadian Marines too. We've already got the killer whales and other mammals trained, so we are good to go.  ;D



Can the whales have lazers on their heads just like sharks?  :nod:


----------



## medicineman (2 Jun 2011)

Danjanou said:
			
		

> Can the whales have lazers on their heads just like sharks?  :nod:



That's supposed to be "lazers" - the quotes are important.

MM


----------



## infantryian (2 Jun 2011)

medicineman said:
			
		

> That's supposed to be "lazers" - the quotes are important.



That's supposed to be "lasers" - the spelling is important.


----------



## Danjanou (2 Jun 2011)

Sapperian said:
			
		

> That's supposed to be "lasers" - the spelling is important.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (2 Jun 2011)

Having some fun with the original post, so if the US threatened to invade Canada in the 80’s, what orders do think the  UK and German forces stationed in Suffield and Shilo would get? Support Canada, hunker down on their bases? The UN would be in a difficult spot being based in the US, I would what other countries could do to pressure the US in backing down? Like the war in 1812, support for an invasion of Canada would vary across the states, some advocating and some opposed. I suspect the trigger would be something around Trudeau and the NEP, coupled with increased alignment with the Soviets, China, Cuba. (yes the whole thing is a stretch, but I think Trudeau might have taken to kicking the US more if he could) let say he blocked all exports of resource to the South.

The US President would have to act fast before internal dissent paralyzed them. An invasion would be aimed at temporarily crippling us and capturing the PM and cabinet on the pretense that they have being working with the Soviets, likely the US would have quiet support from Elements in the West who would quickly stand up to call for the “freeing of Canada from foreign influences”. Most areas would not be occupied just key components to prevent a counterstrike. Damage to infrastructure and combat with our forces would kept to a minimum. The long term plan would be to hand over the government to a provisional body to prepare for a new round of elections which the current leaders would be barred from.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (2 Jun 2011)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> Way back when there was a policy of uniform one day a week. General Dextraze ended it when he became CDS in about 1971. He had a couple of reasons. First, he wanted to know the rank and classification of people he was dealing with, and second, he had a hunch that a number of service members did not have uniforms. (The CF were changing from old pre-unification uniforms to the CF uniform, and a number of members had not bothered.) I also suspect Jadex was not amused by the military civil servant attitude that was rampant at the time.



There was additional reason for the change according to a Colonel for whom I worked at NDHQ in the 80s (I think he was only being partially sarcastic).  When it was uniform one day a week, that day was usually Friday.  Supposedly, it was common to see pers in uniform in the market area "strip joints" beginning at Friday lunch time.  When the uniform practice changed and Friday became the day that wearing civvies became optional, the number of pers who partook of the reasonably priced lunch buffets at the peeler bars (yes, that was the reason we all those guys went there) didn't decrease, they just weren't visible as military.


----------



## helpup (2 Jun 2011)

Ok, I just read the merged threads and that was time,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, well ,,,,,,,,,,,, spent. 

Luckily it is a slow day here.

If Canada gets attacked, by anyone or in this case by the US.  Of course I would try to fight.  It is my job.  But for the original poster, I have to ask before you form an opinion do you actually think about it, or do some research?  You know come up with valid hypothesis and such.  Or do you take a narrow outlook of the world and only listen to things that support that narrow vision. 

To the 150 000 Marine partition.  We as a country have looked at incorporating amphibious ability or at least keeping some base level skills somewhat refreshed.  I believe in my career we have done it a few times so call it a once in a decade type of thing.   But come on man what your espousing is more then our total CF numbers have been in over 40 years.  The money to start and maintain another "specialized branch" or unit(s) could be better spent and as many have pointed out not necessarily on the CF.  Good luck in trying to join the CF but realize it is a bigger world out there then what your limited knowledge or wishes make it to be. 

And to the school report about lack of military in the capitol..................... C- for research on the subject and hope you take some of the answers here to read more about it.  Ask yourself this though.  Is there really much of a difference in distance to Ottawa from say Northern NY compared to CFB Petawawa and the Brigade we have there.  ..... Coincidence I think not !! >  and considering the tactically sound principal of 3 to 1 odds for any attacker our Brigade could tie up one whole US division, errr I hope they don't bring all of their force multipliers with them though or we may be shocked and awed into a Red Dawn scenario.  But hey I am just trying to point out defence of Ottawa we have covered  :nod:

Now back to spending my time well......


----------



## Journeyman (2 Jun 2011)

helpup said:
			
		

> Is there really much of a difference in distance to Ottawa from say Northern NY compared to CFB Petawawa and the Brigade we have there.  ..... Coincidence I think not !! >  and considering the tactically sound principal of 3 to 1 odds for any attacker our Brigade could tie up one whole US division, errr I hope they don't bring all of their force multipliers with them though or we may be shocked and awed into a Red Dawn scenario.


OK, if the scenario is now a Div from upstate NY (that would make it the 10th Mountain Div) heading for Ottawa, they'd have to fight their way past Kingston first. 

In buying time for 2CMBG to mobilze and deploy to blocking positions south of Ottawa, I'd be willing to do my part....basing a defensive position on the Kingston Brewing Company and the Tir Nan Og, with the Pilot House and the Toucan as the secondary prepared positions.

Defending Kingston's taverns to the last pint!  

"WOLVERINES!"  "MORE WINGS!"  :cheers:   :warstory:


----------



## Old Sweat (2 Jun 2011)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> There was additional reason for the change according to a Colonel for whom I worked at NDHQ in the 80s (I think he was only being partially sarcastic).  When it was uniform one day a week, that day was usually Friday.  Supposedly, it was common to see pers in uniform in the market area "strip joints" beginning at Friday lunch time.  When the uniform practice changed and Friday became the day that wearing civvies became optional, the number of pers who partook of the reasonably priced lunch buffets at the peeler bars (yes, that was the reason we all those guys went there) didn't decrease, they just weren't visible as military.


Actually the different staff branches wore uniforms on different days. In VCDS Branch we wore uniforms on Monday, for example, and everybody wore civvies on Friday. The people who did not have uniforms arranged often arranged a meeting at another government department, which they usually would attend in mufti. At that time Ottawa had not gone through much of the massive new construction we see now, and I am not even sure there were strip joints downtown.


----------



## medicineman (2 Jun 2011)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> OK, if the scenario is now a Div from upstate NY (that would make it the 10th Mountain Div) heading for Ottawa, they'd have to fight their way past Kingston first.
> 
> In buying time for 2CMBG to mobilze and deploy to blocking positions south of Ottawa, I'd be willing to do my part....basing a defensive position on the Kingston Brewing Company and the Tir Nan Og, with the Pilot House and the Toucan as the secondary prepared positions.
> 
> ...



That remind's me of something that I let out at a mess dinner in Ft Drum...A US major and his really snooty wife were sitting beside me and he'd just got posted to the 10th Mtn Div and was asking about Kingston (I was based there then).  I told him there were museums, Queen's and RMC - I explained what RMC's role was in American terms - and a host other things to see.  His wife was interrupting with very sarcastic statements and I was getting a little annoyed.  I then casually mentioned Ft Henry being there...when the inevitable question came of "Oh what's that?" I just blurted out "It's a place that was built to keep you people out of my country".  The meal was only saved by a Capt who remembered me from a previous occasion and brought up some mess shennanigans that had occured.  

I have to add this in - I was only a Cpl then and someone with a very perverse sense of humour put my girl friend and I at a table where the lowest rank besides me was a Capt.

MM


----------



## Old Sweat (2 Jun 2011)

The belief that 10 Mountain Division is at Fort Drum in case an attack on Ottawa is required is a paranoid delusion that periodically erupts out of certain academics at Queens. I was stationed at HQ Tradoc in Fort Monroe, VA when the decision to activate the formation was made. There was widespread consternation when its home was announced as the army had wanted it stationed in the Sun Belt. The NY Congressional Delegation lobbied long and hard to get it put in Drum for the economic benefit to the area, which was not prosperous at all.


----------



## a_majoor (2 Jun 2011)

This thread is *still* better: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/45142.255.html


----------



## GAP (2 Jun 2011)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> This thread is *still* better: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/45142.255.html



Hey! Hey! Science was ADVANCED in that thread.............. :nod:


----------



## PMedMoe (2 Jun 2011)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> OK, if the scenario is now a Div from upstate NY (that would make it the 10th Mountain Div) heading for Ottawa, they'd have to fight their way past Kingston first.
> 
> In buying time for 2CMBG to mobilze and deploy to blocking positions south of Ottawa, I'd be willing to do my part....basing a defensive position on the Kingston Brewing Company and the Tir Nan Og, with the Pilot House and the Toucan as the secondary prepared positions.
> 
> ...



I'm with ya!!   :nod:   :threat:


----------



## vonGarvin (2 Jun 2011)

I'll guard the Eastern approaches, you know, allowing the one unit in 2 CMBG that isn't in Ontario time to deploy to help with the actions north of Kingston.  I'll start at Dolans, and then there's the Garrison, and, if necessary, Griffons.....


 :warstory:


----------



## helpup (2 Jun 2011)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> The belief that 10 Mountain Division is at Fort Drum in case an attack on Ottawa is required is a paranoid delusion that periodically erupts out of certain academics at Queens. I was stationed at HQ Tradoc in Fort Monroe, VA when the decision to activate the formation was made. There was widespread consternation when its home was announced as the army had wanted it stationed in the Sun Belt. The NY Congressional Delegation lobbied long and hard to get it put in Drum for the economic benefit to the area, which was not prosperous at all.


Umm OS, you do know it was a joke about the proximity of Pet to Ottawa to defend Ottawa from the Evil Empire right????? :  The English speaking one.

Hey that was another joke on one of the rhumours as to Pet's location 

Defend the Tap's boys and lets beat them on the ice!!!


----------



## cphansen (2 Jun 2011)

I got very interested in this thread. While the concept of the USA invading Canada is far fetched, so was the concept of Germany invading Denmark.

I think there are some parallels, Germany and Denmark had been at peace since the Schleswig Holstein war in 1849. Denmark was neutral during WWI. This was almost 100 years of peace before Nazi Germany invaded Denmark.

I suspect a US invasion of Canada might follow the same pattern.

A surprise invasion, catching the Danish troops in their barracks, The Danes responded and set up roadblocks and started fighting the Germans. They did receive and imposed many casualties holding the Germans back at some positions. Meanwhile the German ambassador delivered an ultimatum to the Danish cabinet to immediately surrender or Copenhagen would be levelled by the German air force.

The politicans capitulated and surrendered before they  had even declared war on Germany, and ordered the troops to cease fighting. The Danish troops fought skillfully and well and imposed more casualties than they took. They were doing a good job and there are some very interesting stories like the story of how an entire company of the Danish Army commandeered a ferry boat and sailed to Sweden where they became the first element of the Danish Brigade in Sweden, this eventually grew to a trained, fully equiped, divisional force.

I can see Canada getting invaded, the Forces fighting and dying true to their oath, only to have the polticians let them down


----------



## skater021 (3 Jun 2011)

SherH2A said:
			
		

> I got very interested in this thread. While the concept of the USA invading Canada is far fetched, so was the concept of Germany invading Denmark.
> 
> I think there are some parallels, Germany and Denmark had been at peace since the Schleswig Holstein war in 1849. Denmark was neutral during WWI. This was almost 100 years of peace before Nazi Germany invaded Denmark.
> 
> ...


 Well spoken!


----------



## Dennis Ruhl (3 Jun 2011)

SherH2A said:
			
		

> I think there are some parallels, Germany and Denmark had been at peace since the Schleswig Holstein war in 1849.



2nd Schleswig War - 1864


----------



## vonGarvin (3 Jun 2011)

SherH2A said:
			
		

> I think there are some parallels, Germany and Denmark had been at peace since the Schleswig Holstein war in 1849.


Actually, when the German Reich invaded Denmark in 1940, it was the first time that those two nations had been at war.  Remember, prior to 1870, there was no "Germany".


----------



## helpup (3 Jun 2011)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> Actually, when the German Reich invaded Denmark in 1940, it was the first time that those two nations had been at war.  Remember, prior to 1870, there was no "Germany".


Untill Bismark got his hands into the politics of the time.


----------



## vonGarvin (3 Jun 2011)

helpup said:
			
		

> Untill Bismark got his hands into the politics of the time.


I'm well aware of Bismarck _et al_ and the history of the German-speaking lands of Central Europe.


----------



## cphansen (3 Jun 2011)

Dennis Ruhl said:
			
		

> 2nd Schleswig War - 1864



You're right. I made a mistake, my point that I was trying to make, is they were good neighbours and had peace for a long time. The Danes did not have a series of border fortifications.

I must admit the Germans put on a good well coordinated invasion. The Navy, Air force and Army were well coordinated and had an interesting plan. Think of PEI being invaded by the eastern USA, overwhelming force triumphing over gallantry.


----------



## GR66 (3 Jun 2011)

I've been content to sit back and chuckle up till now but the big question that keeps coming to my mind when I see people seriously thinking about this is why the heck would the US WANT to invade us?  

I don't think that there is any real question that the US COULD invade us and pretty quickly put an end to any major conventional military resistance if they really wanted to, but the question is WHY?  The probable cost (in blood and treasure) of seizing control of Canada might be pretty low, the cost of actually trying to hold on to, and control a country of this size would be economically crippling.  Look how difficult and expensive it has been to try and occupy Iraq and Afghanistan which are tiny in comparison to Canada.  What possible huge benefit could the US get out of invading and trying to hold on to Canada that would offset that expense?

Some people will suggest oil, or water, or food as possible reasons, but seriously we are two capitalist states with integrated and interdependant economies.  It would be far, far cheaper for the US to simply BUY what they need from us rather than try and take it from us unwillingly by force.  And can anyone seriously forsee a situation where Canada would not willingly sell the United States what they need in order to fuel our own economy?  Refusing to do so would be economic suicide for this country since we'd not only lose a huge potential source of revenue from the sales of our valuable resources but also face possibly being shut out of the US market by an angry US government.  I don't think any Canadian government that followed such a policy would have a hope in hell of getting re-elected after putting the country back into another Great Depression.

If things were to go so horribly wrong in the world that food, fuel and/or water were in such short global supply that the US was physically incapable of buying what they need then the whole question of the "United States" invading "Canada" would be out the window anyway.  By that point we'll be living in a "Mad Max" scenario and the total societal collapse would have us more worried about fighting with the town down the road than having the militaries of two nation states waging a conventional war of conquest.

But hey...what do I know?


----------



## cphansen (3 Jun 2011)

GR66 said:
			
		

> I've been content to sit back and chuckle up till now but the big question that keeps coming to my mind when I see people seriously thinking about this is why the heck would the US WANT to invade us?



Good question.

Let me try to answer it by using the German Invasion of Denmark as an example in WWII.

First Denmark and Germany were at peace, no German minority stirring up trouble in Denmark, Denmark was a small agricultrul country which was cooperating with Germany, basically favored nation status. Denmark's is basically a sand spit, a big one, but basically a sand spit without major national resources.

Germany had no reason to invade and stood to lose by the invasion.

However Norway had substancial resources of minerals needed for German war production. Denmark and Norway are not the same at all, although Norway was governed by Denmark, until the Norwegians won their independence.

The German planning for Norway included the invasion of northern Denmark to provide an airbase for the protection of the invasion fleet. The Danes had just built an airport in Aalborg, which would have been perfect, so Aalborg was a target but not the rest of Denmark. The German High Command planned accordingly until the plans were discussed with Hitler and he made the decision to occupy the entire country.

No one knows why he decided this, but he did, and thus Denmark was invaded because of one man's decision, against the advise of his advisors and basically the best interest of his country.

My point is an invasion can be triggered by unforeseen events and by irrational decisions by a single person.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (3 Jun 2011)

I can't believe I just read 8 pages of Radio Chatter........oh well, once ya get sucked in I guess you have to heap more excrement on the pile.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ety2FEHQgwM


----------



## GR66 (3 Jun 2011)

SherH2A said:
			
		

> Let me try to answer it by using the German Invasion of Denmark as an example in WWII.



Apples and Oranges.  Denmark was in an important strategic position to both support the invasion of Norway and to control access to the Baltic.

Denmark is also was (is) a small country which was fairly easy to occupy.  Canada on the other hand is the 2nd largest nation on earth with widely separated population centres, resource bases, lines of communication, etc.  A nightmare to try and occupy by a force of any size.

What big strategic advantage would occupying Canada give the US vis-a-vis other countries?  Would seizing our military infrastructure give the US any huge advantages vs. China or Russia over their own existing facilities in Iceland, Greenland and Alaska?  

For that matter if China and/or Russia were posing a serious direct threat to the United States through Canada would not Canada willingly side with the US rather than obstucting the US by choosing neutrality and refusing to support the Americans thus forcing the US to occupy us?

While I guess that nothing is "impossible" I'd place the probability of the United States invading Canada pretty low on the list of things I'm worried about.  Certainly not high enough to waste any time or treasure preparing against such an eventuality when they can certainly be spent on a billion other things that are much, much, MUCH more likely to be a problem for us.

I think I'll go back to quietly watching and chuckling now.


----------



## helpup (3 Jun 2011)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> I'm well aware of Bismarck _et al_ and the history of the German-speaking lands of Central Europe.



That was more for the others TV, I figured you knew it as you pointed out the Germanies were not a unified country at that time.


----------



## QORvanweert (4 Jun 2011)

SherH2A said:
			
		

> Good question.
> 
> Let me try to answer it by using the German Invasion of Denmark as an example in WWII.
> 
> ...



To summarize, the conclusion you arrived at was that the States would invade us to get to Russia. Or Hans Island as a staging ground for their eventual invasion of Greenland(which is also administered by those pesky Danes!) Perhaps their interests are more focused on St. Pierre et Miquelon? They would have to battle their way through an island filled with screech drinking newfies first BUT it could happen  

The original poster raised a question that I find far more interesting for its speculative qualities rather than its likelihood of happening. I believe that the US would be able to defeat the CF in conventional warfare. I doubt anyone on these forums would argue to the contrary. They wouldn't need to attack us with ground forces, they could obliterate our entire country with nuclear weapons. The fallout from that(pun intended) would be disastrous and would not be in their own interest in any conceivable manner. However, it could indeed happen. 

In my opinion the scenario would play out more along the lines of this: War is declared against us/declaration appears imminent. The US' opposition party would immediately seize the opportunity to create a constitutional crisis. Public opinion would immediately polarize along partisan lines. The 'war' would result in the secession of several states (Northern Democrat states like Maine etc...) and lend important intellectual weight to vocal advocates of restructuring their union. In the end I doubt troops would ever cross the border in either direction and America would divide along idealogical lines. This is sheer speculation of course and for all I know some Canadian will do their country such great harm that we become the continental bogeyman. My experiences in the States have led me to believe that most Americans live in ignorant bliss about us and view us a quiet backwater completely removed from their lives. I disagree with that sentiment but perception and truth are two very different beasts. We are incredibly fortunate to live in the friendly shadow of their military giant and any conflict between us would bring death and misery on a global scale. I shudder to think of the cost in lives that would be paid without any justifiable cause.


----------



## cphansen (4 Jun 2011)

You (I, Citizen) said
To summarize, the conclusion you arrived at was that the States would invade us to get to Russia. Or Hans Island as a staging ground for their eventual invasion of Greenland(which is also administered by those pesky Danes!) Perhaps their interests are more focused on St. Pierre et Miquelon? They would have to battle their way through an island filled with screech drinking newfies first BUT it could happen  


Nope, my conclusion was
No one knows why he decided this, but he did, and thus Denmark was invaded because of one man's decision, against the advise of his advisors and basically the best interest of his country.

My point is an invasion can be triggered by unforeseen events and by irrational decisions by a single person.


I say
And the USA does have a history of invasions. In the US war is not to be declared without the approval of Congress, but Presidents have launched invasions without Congress. IMHO, the USA has had some strange Presidents, who would be capable of launching an invasion of Canada. Oh wait they already did that.

I agree with you about how fortunate we are to be in the shadow of the US, but Mexico has not fared so well, it has lost much territory to the US. eg California, Texas and much of the American west


----------



## pitdroid (4 Jun 2011)

I think if the US invaded that they would defeat the majority of are forces quickly, 
but I think there would be pockets of CF resistance kinda like guerrillas and they would knock out the Americans supply's and disrupt communications.
    I think that the guerrilla warfare would go on for years maybe and eventually cost the Americans to much in money in lives.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (4 Jun 2011)

Enough with serious discussion!!! This is Radio Chatter!!! (as he kicks something down the well)



			
				pitdroid said:
			
		

> I think if the US invaded that they would defeat the majority of are forces quickly,
> but I think there would be pockets of CF resistance kinda like guerrillas and they would knock out the Americans supply's and disrupt communications.
> I think that the guerrilla warfare would go on for years maybe and eventually cost the Americans to much in money in lives.



At the risk of coming full circle and turning this into Groundhog Day ( the movie), I again offer:



> Radio Free Canada Announcers:
> 
> It's 11:59 on Radio Free Canada; this is Bob & Doug McKenzie, with music, and the truth until dawn. Right now we've got a few words for some of our brothers and sisters in the occupied zone: "the chair is against the wall, eh. the chair is against the wall, eh", "john has a long mustache, hoser. john has a long mustache, hoser". It's twelve o'clock, Hoser time, another day closer to victory. And for all of you out there, on, or behind the line, this is your song.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BFPt001PYU&feature=related


----------



## the 48th regulator (4 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> I think if the US invaded that they would defeat the majority of are forces quickly,
> but I think there would be pockets of CF resistance kinda like guerrillas and they would knock out the Americans supply's and disrupt communications.
> I think that the guerrilla warfare would go on for years maybe and eventually cost the Americans to much in money in lives.



Hasta la victoria siempre. ¡Patria o Muerte!

Te abraza con todo fervor revolucionario !!

dileas

tess


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Jun 2011)

I'd counter-attack Washington D.C. with a battalion of angry squirrels hidden in a cement mixer.   :nod:


----------



## Fishbone Jones (4 Jun 2011)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> I'd counter-attack Washington D.C. with a battalion of angry squirrels hidden in a cement mixer.   :nod:



.........and have them especially pissed off by running the drum for the last five miles before the objective


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Jun 2011)

recceguy said:
			
		

> .........and have them especially pissed off by running the drum for the last five miles before the objective



Well that's actually an SOP, so it went without saying, but good point to add for those unfamiliar with Sciuridae-based Operations (SBOs).


----------



## Fishbone Jones (4 Jun 2011)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Well that's actually an SOP, so it went without saying, but good point to add for those unfamiliar with Sciuridae-based Operations (SBOs).



Oh no!  Did I breech SBO OPSEC?  

I'm on their shit list now for sure. Matter of fact, as we speak, I can see a couple of covert ones pacing off my yard and digging in at various spots on the property. I'm hesitant about going outside now. :-\


----------



## pitdroid (4 Jun 2011)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> Hasta la victoria siempre. ¡Patria o Muerte!
> 
> Te abraza con todo fervor revolucionario !!
> 
> ...


 :nod: ;D


----------



## the 48th regulator (4 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> :nod: ;D




Hasta Siempre - Boikot 

dileas

tess


----------



## NavyHopeful (4 Jun 2011)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Well that's actually an SOP, so it went without saying, but good point to add for those unfamiliar with Sciuridae-based Operations (SBOs).



OK, I want a couple of these to look after my wife while I'm at BMQ this summer...

Rev


----------



## pitdroid (4 Jun 2011)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> Hasta Siempre - Boikot
> 
> dileas
> 
> tess



Hey, not sure what that last word means. ???


----------



## the 48th regulator (4 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> Hey, not sure what that last word means. ???



It's the band's name.....

dileas

tess


----------



## pitdroid (4 Jun 2011)

Oh. okay.  8)


----------



## cphansen (4 Jun 2011)

But what would our SOF (Sea Lions, Orcas and Ferrets) do.

I think if we were to send a battalion of Moose down through New England to overrun Boston, we could then RV with our Orcas to launch a seaborne invasion of Washington DC, while we could also send beavers through the Adirondacks ie, upper New York state, to plug up the aqueducts which supply New York with water.

With Boston Neutraized, we would have a port for resupply and reinforcements. With New York out of water, the US forces would need to mount a rescue operation which would tie up a good portion of their forces.

By invading Washington we could really bring the war home to the US politicians and get peace negotiations started


----------



## Fishbone Jones (4 Jun 2011)

SherH2A said:
			
		

> But what would our SOF (Sea Lions, Orcas and Ferrets) do.



They could be the 50,000 member Marine Force that certain individuals think we need.


----------



## the 48th regulator (4 Jun 2011)

recceguy said:
			
		

> They could be the 50,000 member Marine Force that certain individuals think we need.



Correction,

You mean 500,000 troops

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/101076/post-1049343.html#msg1049343

dileas

tess


----------



## Fishbone Jones (4 Jun 2011)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> Correction,
> 
> You mean 500,000 troops
> 
> ...



Either, or. They are both complete fantasy (and not the good, first person shooter, game type   )


----------



## the 48th regulator (4 Jun 2011)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Either, or. They are both complete fantasy (and not the good, first person shooter, game type   )



Yes yes,

but 50,000 is but a mere blip, in the grandiose plans of some great thinkers on the internet.  You do a disservice by misquoting them.

That would be akin to saying that Ignatief ran a phenomenal campaign, and deserves the Majority win he and the Liberals achieved in the last election.  :-*

Hasta Siempre

tess


----------



## helpup (5 Jun 2011)

op:

This has gotten good again, I love sarcasm


----------



## Dennis Ruhl (5 Jun 2011)

SherH2A said:
			
		

> I think if we were to send a battalion of Moose down through New England to overrun Boston,



Apparently moose have a fair body count in Newfoundland.  It might work.

Do they arm those damned squirrels nowadays?  They caused a lot of low scores some years back at the ranges at Shilo.  And now they could shoot back!


----------



## a_majoor (5 Jun 2011)

The only real life scenario which might prompt US military action on the border would be the PQ actually succeeding in declaring a referendum win and doing a UDI, followed by chaos as every part of Quebec that isn't part of former "New France" began separating from Quebec.

The Americans would certainly work to secure the St Lawrence Seaway (an joint property, hence their interest), and they might be inclined to secure the power corridors that bring electricity from the James Bay projects to the United States. Note these actions would not, strictly speaking, take place in Canada at all at that point, but the new "nation" of Quebec. Quibblers might point out James Bay is/will be in the Territory of Ungava and therefor part of Canada, but we should wait for the dust to settle first.


----------



## cphansen (5 Jun 2011)

Dennis Ruhl said:
			
		

> Apparently moose have a fair body count in Newfoundland.  It might work.
> 
> Do they arm those damned squirrels nowadays?  They caused a lot of low scores some years back at the ranges at Shilo.  And now they could shoot back!



Normal squirrels are bad enough, could you imagine what those evil alien squirrels that our dogs and cats keep protecting us from.

I figure the moose could follow the same route that Bendict Arnold followed when he attacked Quebec City during the American Rebellion. After all who's going to argue with a battalion of moose unless they have a company of Abrams, and the route Arnold followed was originally using flatboats and involved a lot of marshes and swamps, not suitable terrain for MBTS. They could also have a detachment of beavers to create water obstacles, moose are good almost nimble in the water.

Can you imagine a battalion of angry moose overrunning the small towns in New England culminating in the assault on Boston?

Then the moose headung south to Washington along the shoreline while escorted by Orcas, probably armed with snout lasers, to protect them from seaborn forces.

The beavers invading New York on a sabotage mission could easily cross the St Lawrence at Prescot, Ogdensburg just like 1812 when American Dragons charged across the frozen river to attack Prescott. I figure turnabout is fair play


----------



## PPCLI Guy (5 Jun 2011)

Nothing at all to worry about - why do you think we have Canadian Deputy Div and Corps Comds on secondment to the US?


----------



## Antoine (5 Jun 2011)

what I don`t like with having squirrels bazooka, as pictured earlier, is that they are ready to work for peanuts, good for taxpayers but not soldiers.  ;D


----------



## vonGarvin (5 Jun 2011)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Nothing at all to worry about - why do you think we have Canadian Deputy Div and Corps Comds on secondment to the US?


That's the beauty of the Kanadian Konspiracy.  We will invade them.  Not militarily, but through subversion.  I'm thinking more "Body Snatchers" and less "Red Dawn".  ;D


----------



## Journeyman (5 Jun 2011)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> That's the beauty of the Kanadian Konspiracy.  We will invade them.  Not militarily, but through subversion.


We started with their entertainment industry  :nod:


----------



## Good2Golf (5 Jun 2011)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> We started with their entertainment industry  :nod:



...although I think they're on to Celine Dion.  :nod:


----------



## Journeyman (5 Jun 2011)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> ...although I think they're on to Celine Dion.  :nod:


Bait and switch; we were just a little too blatant.
 We've countered with Shania Twain being heartbroken.....but now available. ***




*** Based solely upon reading magazine covers while waiting to pay for groceries.


----------



## pitdroid (5 Jun 2011)

I think if America is going to invade anyone it would be Mexico with the drug wars going on, its spreading to America and Canada. American civilians are getting caught in the middle of it too. It doesn't make sense for Canada and America to send troops half way around the world on peacekeeping missions, when theres wars going on just below us in North America.


----------



## aesop081 (5 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> It doesn't make sense for Canada and America to send troops half way around the world on peacekeeping missions, when theres wars going on just below us in North America.


"
Canada, along with the US, Mexico and other countries, is already fighting a "war" of sorts against drug cartels in the Central America/ Caraibean Sea theatre of operations. In the CF this is OP CARIBBE.


----------



## pitdroid (5 Jun 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> "
> Canada, along with the US, Mexico and other countries, is already fighting a "war" of sorts against drug cartels in the Central America/ Caraibean Sea theatre of operations. In the CF this is OP CARIBBE.



But what about the 35,000 to 40,000 people who die every year in Mexico from these wars, its also spreading to places like Vancouver.


----------



## aesop081 (5 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> But what about the 35,000 to 40,000 people who die every year in Mexico from these wars, its also spreading to places like Vancouver.



You implied that Canada should do something about the drug problem in Mexico. The CF already are, as directed by the government. You can always write the PM and your local MP and ask that more be done.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (5 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> But what about the 35,000 to 40,000 people who die every year in Mexico from these wars, its also spreading to places like Vancouver.





			
				pitdroid said:
			
		

> I think if America is going to invade anyone it would be Mexico with the drug wars going on, its spreading to America and Canada. American civilians are getting caught in the middle of it too. It doesn't make sense for Canada and America to send troops half way around the world on peacekeeping missions, when theres wars going on just below us in North America.



OK. This may get ugly.

pitroid,

If you're going to toss out statements like this, why don't YOU tell us what should be done. You're the one that seems so very concerned, tell us how YOU would handle it. Or are you content to point us at something YOU perceive as a problem and say "Go fix this for me (us\ Canadians)"? I suppose you've figured out how we'll make deals with these soveriegn nations that will allow us to put boots on the ground and shoot bad guys in the face without trials? Where does the money come from for your drug operations? Who's going to be in charge? RCMP, CSIS, the CF?

Once more, we ask you to flesh out your ideas with reasonable arguement before trying to launch us into a crusade against someone you think is our problem.


----------



## Good2Golf (5 Jun 2011)

Help for the google-challenged who might otherwise want to investigate the reference that CDN Aviator mentioned earlier:

OP CARIBBE



> Protecting the security of Canadians doesn’t start and end at Canada’s borders. In the waters of the Caribbean Basin and the Eastern Pacific Ocean, Canada Command is part of a six-nation force aimed at eliminating the flow of illicit drugs.
> 
> Operation Caribbe was launched in November 2006, adding *Canadian Air Force and Navy resources to a U.S.-led force that includes the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Spain and France. Canada’s commitment has included warships, submarines and long-range patrol aircraft, and has helped keep drugs off North American streets*. In 2007 and 2008, the multi-national force, known as Joint Interagency Task Force (JIATF) South, seized 200 tonnes of cocaine.
> 
> ...


----------



## NavyHopeful (5 Jun 2011)

recceguy said:
			
		

> OK. This may get ugly.
> 
> pitroid,
> 
> ...



 :+1:

I wonder if pitdroid would have someone fill out his CF application for him too???

Recce is dead on, dude.  Give us YOUR suggestions... or quit asking about theoretical situations that are either being looked after now, or will probably never be an issue.   :brickwall:

I'm pretty sure that most Americans think we're a bunch of idiots anyways, and the only thing we're good for is hockey, donuts, and the word "eh".

As for the Mexican drug situation...  Most of the drugs are SHIPPED through places like Mexico...  you would likely want to drop people into places like Columbia, where the actual drugs are made.  (And yes, I know you can make drugs anywhere, but whenever you hear of a cartel, it's usually from South America or the Carribean area)

As for the rest of this thread...  I agree with the sarcasm...  :stirpot: 

Continue please, some of these comments are very refreshing!!!

   op:

Rev


----------



## a_majoor (5 Jun 2011)

Damned mission creep, first Canada, then Mexico and now the Caribbean and South America.

Or is this how we justify the 500,000 man Marine force?

Things become clearer......


----------



## NavyHopeful (6 Jun 2011)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Damned mission creep, first Canada, then Mexico and now the Caribbean and South America.
> 
> Or is this how we justify the 500,000 man Marine force?
> 
> Things become clearer......



I say we invade Turkey and rename it Chicken.  Then we can have a serious discussion about invading anywhere else...

As for a Marinew Force...  Our Reg Force Army makes the USMC look like a bunch of Boy Scouts IMHO.  The only reason USMC is so popular is because of the fact that they have people from all of the elements of the US Armed Forces.

However, I am of the opinion that sometimes tact means quality over quantity.  And if we are arguing that... It is my opinion that we have it in the bag.

Ok, that's my opinion...  Have at 'er...

Rev


----------



## aesop081 (6 Jun 2011)

NavyHopeful said:
			
		

> is because of the fact that they have people from all of the elements of the US Armed Forces.



No, they just have Marines. Their medics are Navy corpmen but that's it.


----------



## Journeyman (6 Jun 2011)

NavyHopeful said:
			
		

> Our Reg Force Army makes the USMC look like a bunch of Boy Scouts IMHO.  The only reason USMC is so popular is because of the fact that they have people from all of the elements of the US Armed Forces.


As has been mentioned, other than their USN Corpsmen, all Marines are....Marines.

As for judging abilities, perhaps once you've been in long enough to not look at your watch when anyone mentions "time in," you'll have an informed opinion.

 :


----------



## NavyHopeful (6 Jun 2011)

CDN Aviator:  Thank you for correcting me.  I was only stating that which I THOUGHT I knew...

Journeyman:  While it may be true that my time in amounts to the three days since I have sworn in, it has been and always will be my honest opinion that the CF has more honour , loyalty, and tradition that that of the US Armed Forces.  I do not mean them any disrespect when I say this, it is just what I believe.

And, for the record, the last time I checked, we were ALL on the SAME side...

Rev


----------



## helpup (6 Jun 2011)

You are still talking about a Unit you have no personal experience with ( US Marines) and comparing them to others that you have little to no experience with.  It is Radio Chatter and more open but a good rule of thumb is to talk about what you know.  

I have worked with Marines and they are up there in their abilities.  More often then not they are used as  a yardstick to compare yourself to. 

and to add; They are one of THE most perfessional branches of any military I have worked with.


----------



## aesop081 (6 Jun 2011)

NavyHopeful said:
			
		

> it is just what I believe.



This belief is based on what ? How much have you worked with US military forces ?



> And, for the record, the last time I checked, we were ALL on the SAME side...



Irrelevant. This is not a "Us against you" thing. This is a "NavyHopeful stuck his foot in his mouth" thing.


----------



## Strike (6 Jun 2011)

NavyHopeful said:
			
		

> The only reason USMC is so popular is because of _*the fact *_that they have people from all of the elements of the US Armed Forces.





			
				NavyHopeful said:
			
		

> CDN Aviator:  Thank you for correcting me. _* I was only stating that which I THOUGHT I knew...*_



It's one or the other, not both.


----------



## NavyHopeful (6 Jun 2011)

Well, seeing as I'm up to my knee now, with no hope of recovery, I for one welcome our new US overlords, and hope that they will be able to inform us if we require the services of an added Marine Corps...

I give myself a BIG  :facepalm:

I gotta learn to stay in my lane and not post when I'm half asleep and my brain isn't working properly...

Sorry guys.

Rev


----------



## NavyHopeful (6 Jun 2011)

Oh, and to the three people who deducted 300 milpoints from me earlier, I thank you.  Proper punishment for a bonehead move...

Thanks for keeping me honest, guys.   I hereby retract any statement I made in this thread.  I now have no opinion regarding this topic.

***Edited for Spelling***


----------



## Fishbone Jones (6 Jun 2011)

Stop grovelling.  :blotto:

Unless your practicing prostrating yourself in front of your new conquerors when they take over ;D


----------



## NavyHopeful (6 Jun 2011)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Stop grovelling.  :blotto:
> 
> Unless your practicing prostrating yourself in front of your new conquerors when they take over ;D



I can't help it... My wife has my man-card...

 ;D


----------



## Old Sweat (6 Jun 2011)

NavyHopeful said:
			
		

> I can't help it... My wife has my man-card...
> 
> ;D


You may make it yet, but the jury is still out.


----------



## zander1976 (6 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> I think if America is going to invade anyone it would be Mexico with the drug wars going on, its spreading to America and Canada. American civilians are getting caught in the middle of it too. It doesn't make sense for Canada and America to send troops half way around the world on peacekeeping missions, when theres wars going on just below us in North America.



I could be completely wrong but I would say that it's just about impossible to stop the drug trade and the drug problem is all over the world. Providing we have people around the world just trying to survive then we will have people that will grow drugs, move drugs or whatever else with drugs. A person with nothing to loose is a scary force. Add greed and a willingness to exploit the poor then you have a real problem.  

From a strategic point of view how do you try to stop it?

Plan 1: Go after the bottom guys.
Staving, needy or greedy people can be found everywhere so their will always be pawns to exploit. 

Plan 2: Go after the heads of cartels.
Taking out the leaders will just make smaller groups or gangs. It might not be as organizes on a global level but they will still get the job done. In the end greed will make these people fight for control everything putting us back to square one.

Plan 3: Put something in the water to cure greed.
This could work  

Plan 4: Cure the drug problem so there is no longer a demand. 
I don't have any facts on this but I would guess that drug usage isn't going down so we can safely say its not going to work itself out. 

Plan 5: Create a world war.
Perhaps if everybody is fighting for their lives then they wouldn't be worried about getting high? 

Plan 6: Legalize all drugs and tax them.
The drug police could be reassigned instead of being laid off and you could build tons of drug clinics with the tax money. You could potentially make a big difference in unemployment by doing this and save lots of money in retirement funds since people may not live as long. 

Anyway, goodluck with your fight on drugs. 
Ben


----------



## pitdroid (6 Jun 2011)

Okay, I have no plan for how to stop the drug wars nor do I care about them and whats going on down there, I'm just stating to the original post that I think America would invade Mexico before they would invade Canada. There is a way better possibility of them invading Mexico than Canada, and I only picked Mexico because its Americas only other neighbor.


----------



## medicineman (6 Jun 2011)

Maybe we should invade Mexico so we can have some other warm places to visit that belong to us...of course, because it'll be considered part of Canada, Air Canada will charge you through the arse for a ticket...


----------



## NavyHopeful (7 Jun 2011)

medicineman said:
			
		

> Maybe we should invade Mexico so we can have some other warm places to visit that belong to us...of course, because it'll be considered part of Canada, Air Canada will charge you through the arse for a ticket...



And if the ticket prices don't go through the arse, the food and water will... ;D


----------



## pitdroid (7 Jun 2011)

Does everything have to be a joke on here?


----------



## medicineman (7 Jun 2011)

We were wondering that ourselves with the "Canadian Marine Petition".

MM


----------



## Gimpy (7 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> Does everything have to be a joke on here?



If you post an absurd topic expect to get absurd (read: intentionally absurd) responses.


----------



## aesop081 (7 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> Does everything have to be a joke on here?



Just this kind of threads.............honest !!


----------



## NavyHopeful (7 Jun 2011)

medicineman said:
			
		

> We were wondering that ourselves with the "Canadian Marine Petition".
> 
> MM



 :rofl:


Now this is starting to get funny again...

op:


----------



## pitdroid (7 Jun 2011)

Well, I thought i would see what you guys thought about the petition. The idea isn't bad, but i think maybe 10,000 people is more realistic.


----------



## Gimpy (7 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> Well, I thought i would see what you guys thought about the petition. The idea isn't bad, but i think maybe 10,000 people is more realistic.



Whoosh.


----------



## medicineman (7 Jun 2011)

I think getting a couple of ships to resupply our frigates would be more realistic...though at the speed the procurement process is going, about as likely as the government deciding to hire 10,000 extra soldiers to plunk on these multipurpose vessels.

MM


----------



## NavyHopeful (7 Jun 2011)

Gimpy said:
			
		

> Whoosh.



Does the term "jet-burn" apply here???   ;D



			
				pitdroid said:
			
		

> Well, I thought i would see what you guys thought about the petition. The idea isn't bad, but i think maybe 10,000 people is more realistic.



All I have to say is this:

 :deadhorse:



			
				medicineman said:
			
		

> I think getting a couple of ships to resupply our frigates would be more realistic...though at the speed the procurement process is going, about as likely as the government deciding to hire 10,000 extra soldiers to plunk on these multipurpose vessels.



'Nuff said.

Rev


----------



## pitdroid (7 Jun 2011)

I think an amphibious unit similar to the Marines would be good, I had heard that they were thinking of building an amphibious unit.


----------



## medicineman (7 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> I think an amphibious unit similar to the Marines would be good, I had heard that they were thinking of building an amphibious unit.



They were, but they have no lift capability...we barely have a Navy, much less one that can force project a seaborne infantry battlegroup or larger.  The ships we have cannot fulfill that role and some of them are having a hard enough time fulfilling the ones they were built for.  Besides as LCF, how would they be used or where would we deploy them?  How would we get them there?  What sort of role were you looking at them as having  - shock troops for opposed beach landings, coming ashore when all was convenient and happy or showing up with little blue targets on their heads saying "don't shoot us, we're here to help"?  Where would the budget for these guys come from and what about command and control - are they a naval asset or land one or both?  Alot of this was wargamed and then shelved simply because we have no way of supporting the organization under the current constraints nor will we at the rate things are going.  As it stands, most of our force projection for infantry seems to be in landlocked areas of the world and our navy couldn't get us there in a hurry in any great numbers right now if it were somewhere like Korea or Libya - we'd have to piggy back with the Brits or the US or France.  Besides - do we really need them...IMO, no.  Do we need a navy that can project some of our land forces to places we might not easily get into by air...yeah and in the same vein, do we need a navy capable of projecting  itself to areas of conflict in a hurry and reliably (ie not breaking down along the way) - yeah, we really do.  The latter I feel is most important.

 :2c: from some army guy.

MM


----------



## pitdroid (7 Jun 2011)

Well what about these new ships that Stephen Harper has proposed well they fit all the needs? I'm not sure, I haven't heard anymore than when they were first announced.


----------



## George Wallace (7 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> I think an amphibious unit similar to the Marines would be good, I had heard that they were thinking of building an amphibious unit.



Would that come in handy for assaulting places like Afghanistan or Chechnya?


----------



## Journeyman (7 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> I think ....


Ah, the problem is becoming clear  op:


----------



## helpup (7 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> Well, I thought i would see what you guys thought about the petition. The idea isn't bad, but i think maybe 10,000 people is more realistic.



We told you what we thought about the petition.  And in telling you that we brought up that you were not thinking about this problem other then saying along the lines of what a great idea.  You then started to banter around numbers in the tens of thousands ( or was that hundred and a half thousand?)  There was a dog pile on you about that one and you didn't take away that you idea had no chance in heck of being realistic, supportable, sustainable,............ the list goes on.  
For the record 10,000 people is more than what our Infantry regiments can deploy.  And you feel 10,000 is more realistic????!!!  

On average,
How many people are in a Inf Coy?
How many Coy's are in a Inf Bn?, 
How many other Cbt arms units or sub units are going to need to support say two or three Bn's ( in other words Arty, Engineers, Armoured if so desired the US Marines have them)
How many support trades numbers are going to be required to support them?
(Do you have a number yet?  We will call this non existant Canadian marine unit a Brigade.  how many brigades are needed to make the 10,000?)

Now to get more in depth, this Brigade needs a base and places to work out of, barracks for a large portion of the troops.  Quarters available or housing for married personnel.  They will need a means of Tn on the water, that shiny new ship you were talking about will not hold them all.  How will we get them from that ship to the shore, it will not been needed every time but as marines they will need at least that.  Oh and helicopter life will be required as well.  We don't have enough Chinooks in the pipe to wear that hat as well.  

Lets say on average with your Brigade the pay is about 57 000 dollars, now multiply that with your total numbers (do not put in anything like sea pay or LDA but really they should have something along those lines if not both) Do you think that is a high figure??

Try finding out how much two or three of those amphibious assault ships will cost.  Then add to it another squadron of Chinooks.  Oh and new buildings, land and all the other little things that come with running a base say the size of CFB Petawawa,  either in one spot or split up on each coast.  

Have you done any of these numbers pitdroid?  Most of us have not mainly as we do not need to we can include allot of it at first glance of your original post of hey lets sign a petition for 150 000 marines :brickwall:


----------



## medicineman (7 Jun 2011)

pitdroid said:
			
		

> Well what about these new ships that Stephen Harper has proposed well they fit all the needs? I'm not sure, I haven't heard anymore than when they were first announced.



Read what I wrote before this - since you apparently missed it, those ships were shelved.  We don't even have something to replace our tankers, which I might add is an alleged a very real priority, not an amphibious capability whereas an amphibious capability isn't.

Edited with strike throughs.

MM


----------



## helpup (7 Jun 2011)

They are going to have to get back to the table on those replenishment ships.  After the cancelation of the orriginal concept I lost track of where they were now.


----------



## pitdroid (7 Jun 2011)

medicineman said:
			
		

> Read what I wrote before this - since you apparently missed it, those ships were shelved.  We don't even have something to replace our tankers, which I might add is an alleged a very real priority, not an amphibious capability whereas an amphibious capability isn't.
> 
> Edited with strike throughs.
> 
> MM



So you mean the new ships idea that they just announced a couple months ago has been scrapped?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (7 Jun 2011)

SEARCH!!!

Google National Shipbuilding Procurement Startegy and educate yourself!!!


Milnet.Ca Staff

:


----------



## pitdroid (7 Jun 2011)

Are those the same ships that they just announced? It says 2010, And it never said that it was scrapped.
I have been looking that up on Google but most of what I found was from 2008.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (7 Jun 2011)

You guys just can't think outside the box, what we need for our Marines are these

http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Drop_Pods


----------



## pitdroid (7 Jun 2011)

Colin P said:
			
		

> You guys just can't think outside the box, what we need for our Marines are these
> 
> http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Drop_Pods



They have similar things like those on Halo and section 8.


----------



## aesop081 (7 Jun 2011)

I wonder what the shipbuilding program looks like for the United Federation of Planets ?


----------



## pitdroid (7 Jun 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I wonder what the shipbuilding program looks like for the United Federation of Planets ?



In halo they have United Nations Space Command, or UNSC.


----------



## OldSolduer (7 Jun 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I wonder what the shipbuilding program looks like for the United Federation of Planets ?


 :facepalm:
Its the Federation of United Planets....get with it!!


----------



## aesop081 (7 Jun 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> :facepalm:
> Its the Federation of United Planets....get with it!!



Thanks for correcting what i THOUGHT i knew.......wont happen again, sorry.


----------



## OldSolduer (7 Jun 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Thanks for correcting what i THOUGHT i knew.......wont happen again, sorry.



or is it the United Planets Federation? Judean Peoples' League?


----------



## aesop081 (7 Jun 2011)

A petition to start an actual "Justice League" ?


----------



## Journeyman (7 Jun 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> A petition to start an actual "Justice League" ?


Just tack it on as an additional clause to the Canadian Marines petition...

...because given the blazing intellect backing that sucker, it's goin' places!  :nod:


----------



## OldSolduer (7 Jun 2011)

If there is a Canadian Marines petition I want the following:

1. A petition to reinstate the Spanish Inquisition; and

2. The GoC to establish the Ministry of Silly Walks.


----------



## helpup (7 Jun 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I wonder what the shipbuilding program looks like for the United Federation of Planets  ?



"It doesnt matter as he wont speak english any waaaaaa,aaaaaay"  sung to a certain tune......................... :dileas:


----------



## Teflon (7 Jun 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> If there is a Canadian Marines petition I want the following:
> 
> 1. A petition to reinstate the Spanish Inquisition; and
> 
> 2. The GoC to establish the Ministry of Silly Walks.



As much as I am always up for a good Inquisition, can we hold this in english though, the quality of my extracted confessions is so much higher if I don't have to work through a terp!


----------



## masterchief (9 Jun 2011)

The Americans are already planning there invasion.
 They have Bob Barker coming up and taking all of are animals so they can't fight for us. ;D



Bill


----------



## aesop081 (9 Jun 2011)

masterchief said:
			
		

> The Americans are already planning (1) *there* invasion.
> They have Bob Barker coming up and taking all of (2) *are* animals so they can't fight for us. ;D
> 
> 
> ...



(1) their
(2) our


----------



## masterchief (9 Jun 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> (1) their
> (2) our



Oops sorry.
 I always get there and their mixed up.
And I forgot about changing the are to our.


Bill


----------



## a_majoor (9 Jun 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I wonder what the shipbuilding program looks like for the United Federation of Planets ?



Here you go.....


----------



## QORvanweert (12 Jun 2011)

http://www.montrealgazette.com/could+North+American+this+century+expert/4934541/story.html

Here is an article that alludes to many of the points mentioned in this thread.

"OTTAWA — The 21st century could see war on North American soil, says the author of Canada’s national security policy.

Driven by technology and by shifting geopolitics, the good fortune that exempted Canada and the United States from military battles on the home front in the 20th century could be dramatically shattered over the next 90 years, Irvin Studin predicts in an essay in this week’s international affairs magazine Global Brief.

What’s more, the U.S., “might very well raise the threshold beyond which it would be willing to directly defend or intervene to defend Canada in the event of attack. The U.S. of this new century — for better or worse — will let many sleeping dogs lie.”

Studin is with the University of Toronto’s School of Public Policy and Governance and a former Privy Council Office staffer who co-authored Canada’s 2004 national security policy. He also is founding editor-in-chief and publisher of Global Brief and globalbrief.ca.

He believes failure to strengthen Canada’s demographic, economic, military and diplomatic capabilities in the coming years “could well result over the course of this less ‘lucky’ century, in a Canada that is a strategic cripple,” unable to advance its own interests, assert sovereignty or determine its own destiny.

Such reforms, however, now seem remote. North America’s leaders “do not even conceive of conflict at home because they do not and cannot believe it to be part of the realm of reasonable strategic futures.”

His 2,800-word commentary cites three key drivers that will jinx North America’s 20th-century fortunes. Technology will be first, he says.

It “will not permit the prospect of a serious country going to war with a North American power without having the means to attack it with some effect on its own soil,” he says.

Even secondary or regional powers such as Iran, Turkey, North Korea, Brazil, Pakistan and Venezuela will possess the technical means to directly and even regularly strike North America by intercontinental missile, air power, offshore bombardment or infantry by the middle of this century, he believes.

Second, foreign ships, private and military alike, will begin sailing through the Northwest Passage and Arctic waters within a decade or two.

“The new-century ‘great game’ — right at the continent’s edge — will, over time, assuredly introduce a new strategic consciousness into the decision-making of North America’s political class; a consciousness — and, before long, a new strategic culture — enabled by a popular paranoia about foreign interests promiscuously penetrating the continent’s theretofore near-perfect territorial sovereignty.”

Third, while the U.S. will remain the pre-eminent strategic power until about 2050, “the return of reasonable strategic parity of effective capabilities among other non-American, historic great powers — China, Russia and even Europe — poses both psychic and very practical consequences for North American strategic culture and doctrine.”

For the U.S., “a more acute sense of susceptibility to material retaliation on the home front from a serious foe might lower the inclination — or increase the threshold — for certain types of military adventure or extroversion.”

For Canada, diminished American power and increased American vulnerability to attack should “destabilize the long-held, implicit strategic assumption that the American superpower — theretofore unrivalled — will almost certainly defend the northern part of the continent should Canada come under attack.

“A U.S. more preoccupied with serious retaliation or even pre-emption by an enemy on the home front will demand far greater seriousness of performance from Canada in respect of investments in strategic capabilities. It will threaten to ‘do the job’ for Canada if such investments are not made.

“However, because of diminished relative power, and given countless competing strategic imperatives and seductions, such American threats will not always be credible or carried out.”

Ottawa Citizen

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen


Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/could+North+American+soil+this+century+expert/4934541/story.html#ixzz1P74BF3Mp"


----------



## a_majoor (13 Jun 2011)

Not war; more like colonization.

Canada has a sub replacement birthrate, and can expect to follow Russia and Europe down the demographic rabbit hole starting in the late 2020's. The United States still has replacement level birth rates, but will probably be suffering from the economic effects of the massive deficit, debts and economic slowdown for decades to come.

Canada will be seeing a huge labour shortage in the late 2020's and early 2030's, and the price of labour will be bid up to very high levels (i.e. high wages and benefits). Americans seeking to restore their fortunes will flock to Canada to take the high wage jobs, and import their own values and norms. By the 2040's, there should be enough American expats living and working in Canada to exert political influence, changing the composition and platforms of political parties, and even agitating for the creation of a Canadian Republic. The Boomers will be dying off, and Gen "X" and "Y" will not have the numeric strength to contest elections against pro American parties and their expat voting clients (If there were enough of them, there would be no problem). Even if there are not enough actual Americans claiming Canadian citizenship to vote, they will still have a huge influence through their economic power, and pressure politicians to change existing laws and institutions to reflect their preferences.


----------



## skater021 (13 Jun 2011)

OK OK I get it can someone tell me how to remove this thread! If I knew that I would be treated like a total dick I wouldn't have asked it. But I'm in such well educated company that tells me how fibel minded I am, and says basically  I don't belong in this forum. I have attacked by all angles  from my spelling breaking down every sentence and told how much of an arsehole I am to suggest that the US may one day well I won't say attack we'll say move in? are you all saying you just better vet thatn I? oh yeah that's already been said. TO TELL THE TRUTH I WISH THIS THREAD WOULD JUST DIE! i'M AT MINUS 3000 MPS FOR THIS SHIT? I won't bother you Generals anymore! thanks fellas skater the dummy out!


----------



## Journeyman (13 Jun 2011)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> By the 2040's, there should be enough American expats living and working in Canada  to exert political influence, changing the composition and platforms of political parties.....


- 2042, Redeye slices his wrists in political horror. 
- 2044, (2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th) Skynet becomes self-aware....

 ;D


----------



## aesop081 (13 Jun 2011)

skater021 said:
			
		

> OK OK I get it can someone tell me how to remove this thread!



You can't. Only moderators can do that.


----------



## Journeyman (13 Jun 2011)

skater021 said:
			
		

> OK OK I get it can someone tell me how to remove this thread! If I knew that I would be treated like a total dick I wouldn't have asked it.


A quick scan of your MilPoints indicates that a fair number of minus points are for your F-35 JSF posts; it's not solely this one. 

Perhaps this is another of those "stay in your lane" moments 
(that people penalize me for, for bringing to your attention....so harshly  ;D  ...er, I mean,  :'( )


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (13 Jun 2011)

skater021 said:
			
		

> OK OK I get it can someone tell me how to remove this thread! If I knew that I would be treated like a total dick I wouldn't have asked it. But I'm in such well educated company that tells me how fibel minded I am, and says basically  I don't belong in this forum. I have attacked by all angles  from my spelling breaking down every sentence and told how much of an arsehole I am to suggest that the US may one day well I won't say attack we'll say move in? are you all saying you just better vet thatn I? oh yeah that's already been said. TO TELL THE TRUTH I WISH THIS THREAD WOULD JUST DIE! i'M AT MINUS 3000 MPS FOR THIS crap? I won't bother you Generals anymore! thanks fellas skater the dummy out!



What are you 12? Dude...you pretty much begged for this melt down to occur. Go back and read your opening statements in this thread and what you put about the F35? You are dealing with people who do this kind of thing everyday and when you come down and feel your statements are fact and yet you don't back them up with any sort of facts, then this is the type of feedback you will get. The members here gladly help out new members but learn how to ask the questions, learn how to search and read a lot. You will see what threads get the membership's teeth gnashing. You will see why we always tell someone to stay in their lanes. Again its ok to ask but learn how to ask a question and learn to search before then.

Milnet.Ca Staff


----------



## Fishbone Jones (13 Jun 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> You can't. Only moderators can do that.



I'm not going to. Too much comic relief for those cool rainy afternoons.

I could put it in the Grave and still read it, but that would be abusing my powers and depriving the rest of the members their due.

 :dontfeedmods:


----------



## HavokFour (13 Jun 2011)

I remember a time when the internet was still an unknown. I go back to some of the forums I posted on when I was 11-12 and read some of the things I said, sometimes punching myself in the face over how stupid I was.

Let this thread be preserved for the future skater021. ;D


----------



## NavyHopeful (13 Jun 2011)

And the future NavyHopeful for his complete lack of intelligence when he was 29...

I honestly do NOT know where my senses went with THIS thread...

Ah well...  we all have our moments...

Rev


----------



## skater021 (17 Jun 2011)

Gang first I want to apologize  for my Rant  behavior about the US attacking us I should know better. But the question I still wonder if the scenario plays out like I think it will. Let me back up when I was 15 I read two books called the Ultimatum and exoneration They were writtin in 1974 by a Air force General I can't remember his Name. I think he wrote in response to the FLQ crisis four years prior.

In Oct 1970 I was 12 one day I saw (while living in Verdun a bedroom comunity of Greater Montreal)  3/4 tons deuces and M113s' Patrolling the city with check points at all choke points of the city roads, overhead Twin Hueys' flying low troops everywhere. But at that time a little known fact the US military was ready to cross the border with or without our request for help! 

Yes those books are a work of  fiction  But still it was writtin by a Highly decorated   Airforce General? just think we have water a safe supply of oil, uranium all the metals. The US has stated in past administrations that Canada is getting a free ride militarily. I'm not a Fan of PM Harper But I agree 100% on Arctic bases to be manned year round, also with climate change the North west passage will soon be cleared of ice and the US won't recognize it as "Canadian waters" they call it International waters.

Well that doesn't ring well to me and I'm mostly talking about FOX NEWS since we didn't go to Iraq with the US their so call "news contributors" had these comments Ann Coulter "we allow them (Canada) to exist on the same Continent" "Canada better watch their step or we will rollover and crush them" Check it out anti Canadian comment by US politicions and others mostly FOX NEWS casters. They say Fox represents the feelings of 50% of the US people...... Well once again I hope you accept my apology to all and especially CDN aviator and Scott.  Gary,


----------



## QORvanweert (17 Jun 2011)

skater021 said:
			
		

> Yes those books are a work of  fiction  But still it was writtin by a Highly decorated   Airforce General? just think we have water a safe supply of oil, uranium all the metals. The US has stated in past administrations that Canada is getting a free ride militarily. I'm not a Fan of PM Harper But I agree 100% on Arctic bases to be manned year round, also with climate change the North west passage will soon be cleared of ice and the US won't recognize it as "Canadian waters" they call it International waters.



 I agree with you that our natural resources would be one of the few goals we could be invaded for. Rest assured though that the Americans would much rather have a happy cooperative ally selling them the resources than extracting those same resources itself from a hostile country.


----------



## Neill McKay (17 Jun 2011)

skater021 said:
			
		

> Gang first I want to apologize  for my Rant  behavior about the US attacking us I should know better. But the question I still wonder if the scenario plays out like I think it will. Let me back up when I was 15 I read two books called the Ultimatum and exoneration They were writtin in 1974 by a Air force General I can't remember his Name.



It was Richard Rohmer.


----------



## skater021 (17 Jun 2011)

I,citizen what you said is true at the moment. But I am looking at the future what if the US Government sees us as not so friendly. I don't know but what I see a ever changing of the Canadian demographic and may elect a non pro Canadian Government.... I'm not saying this will happen soon a few things has to happen 

a. The collapse of the U.N many people in the US see as weak and useless ( I may agree with the constant nepotism collusion and all out corruption)

b. the US economy crashes

c. Dry states like Arizona new Mexico will demand more fresh water as their reserves dry up...... Just a thought.


----------



## Romanmaz (17 Jun 2011)

skater021 said:
			
		

> I,citizen what you said is true at the moment. But I am looking at the future what if the US Government sees us as not so friendly. I don't know but what I see a ever changing of the Canadian demographic and may elect a non pro Canadian Government.... I'm not saying this will happen soon a few things has to happen
> 
> a. The collapse of the U.N many people in the US see as weak and useless ( I may agree with the constant nepotism collusion and all out corruption)
> 
> ...


Do you look at what you write before you post it, or are you just smoking a big fatty right now?  :facepalm: What party would this anti-Canadian government in Canada consist of?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (17 Jun 2011)

This thread has gotten boring again.

Just sayin'


----------



## the 48th regulator (17 Jun 2011)

recceguy said:
			
		

> This thread has gotten boring again.
> 
> Just sayin'




Well then let's bring this back on track!

http://youtu.be/j8diwaBKeo4

dileas

tess


----------



## a_majoor (17 Jun 2011)

skater021 said:
			
		

> I,citizen what you said is true at the moment. But I am looking at the future what if the US Government sees us as not so friendly. I don't know but what I see a ever changing of the Canadian demographic and may elect a non pro Canadian Government.... I'm not saying this will happen soon a few things has to happen
> 
> a. The collapse of the U.N many people in the US see as weak and useless ( I may agree with the constant nepotism collusion and all out corruption)
> 
> ...



Point A can be pretty much ignored. Really, if the UN were to dissapear tomorrow would you even notice?

Point B is discussed Here, with various similar threads in that part of the board discussing American Grand Strategy, the 2012 election and so on.

Point C is discussed Here  ;D.

Enjoy!


----------



## cphansen (18 Jun 2011)

Romanmaz said:
			
		

> What party would this anti-Canadian government in Canada consist of?




Bloc Quebecois sound familiar to you? I agree with you, at first glance, it does seem like a nonsensical statement, but just looking back at recent history it does make a certain sense.

History is the best tool we have to use to extrapolate possible futures, but don't underestimate sheer human stupidity's ability to mess us up


----------



## Romanmaz (18 Jun 2011)

SherH2A said:
			
		

> Bloc Quebecois sound familiar to you? I agree with you, at first glance, it does seem like a nonsensical statement, but just looking back at recent history it does make a certain sense.
> 
> History is the best tool we have to use to extrapolate possible futures, but don't underestimate sheer human stupidity's ability to mess us up


I understand your point, however, the Bloc Quebecois has lost official party status and most people are predicting they will be almost completely obsolete in the coming years. Correct me if I'm wrong, but, aren't the Bloc Quebecois also not truly considered a national party because they don't want/have any voters outside of Quebec? It's like saying the national Marijuana Party of Canada will take over  ;D


----------



## cphansen (18 Jun 2011)

Actually my fear is the various separatist parties unite, like Quebec, Alberta, BC, the Maritimes. There are people in each province who really do believe that their individual province could go it alone and successfully.


----------



## a_majoor (18 Jun 2011)

Separatist parties uniting......

Stop and think about that statement in detail for a moment

Thank you


----------



## cphansen (18 Jun 2011)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Separatist parties uniting......
> 
> Stop and think about that statement in detail for a moment
> 
> Thank you



About as likely as the Nazis and Communists uniting, oh wait they did that when they invaded Poland.

You are relying upon common sense instead of looking back into history and seeing some of the unbelievable alliances that have existed. If you think Nazis and Communists are too far fetched then how about the British Empire and Russia. There have been some strange alliances struck to achieve a common goal.

History is full of examples of downright enemies uniting in the pursuite of a common goal


----------



## Fishbone Jones (18 Jun 2011)

SherH2A said:
			
		

> About as likely as the Nazis and Communists uniting, oh wait they did that when they invaded Poland.
> 
> You are relying upon common sense instead of looking back into history and seeing some of the unbelievable alliances that have existed. If you think Nazis and Communists are too far fetched then how about the British Empire and Russia. There have been some strange alliances struck to achieve a common goal.
> 
> History is full of examples of downright enemies uniting in the pursuite of a common goal



These were national alliances, between complete countries. I doubt that regional separatist factions, some pretty obscure, could unite and gain that sort of compelling drive within Canada to where they became a threat to our sovereignty.

But that's just my uneducated, non researched  :2c: and the only serious post I expect to make from here on out in this thread.


----------



## cphansen (18 Jun 2011)

Thank you for raising that point. I did use them as examples because I thought it would be easier for people to be reminded of how people even national countries will unite in the pursuit of a common objective. 

But in WWII in almost every occupied country, there were two resistances, one a political, usually the communists and a national resistance. Usually they didn't get along so well they were united in a common aim, getting rid of the Germans


----------



## a_majoor (20 Jun 2011)

SherH2A said:
			
		

> Thank you for raising that point. I did use them as examples because I thought it would be easier for people to be reminded of how people even national countries will unite in the pursuit of a common objective.
> 
> But in WWII in almost every occupied country, there were two resistances, one a political, usually the communists and a national resistance. Usually they didn't get along so well they were united in a common aim, getting rid of the Germans



That was the national mythology post war. During the war, most resistance parities spent inordinate amounts of time and effort fighting each other, or sucking up to the British or Americans to get supplies and political support for their vision of the nation post war.


----------



## cphansen (20 Jun 2011)

Somehow we can't ignore the effects of human stupidity. I have been trying to think of an example where the resistance forced the Germans out of a country without Germany being defeated by the Allies.

I think the most important job the resistances had was to be the upholders of the nation's conscience and soul. Some of the resistance members were very young and some of them were basically gang members and criminals but most of them were just good men who shared a common dream of their country strong and free.

My personal knowledge of this is limited to readings and the stories shared by the members of my father's cell. My father never spoke of his wartime experiences with his sons.Several time though he had members of his cell visit him in Canada and that's when the stories and pain came out in all night long sessions with his cell mates.

The costs that some of these members paid was tremendous, their lives were forever altered by what they had done. The lucky ones got out and healed. For example, my father's cell was destroyed by the Gestapo, a member had been shot in a piece of personal sabotage at the railway station. The Germans tracked him down by following the trail of his blood in the snow to an apartment building lobby.

The Germans took him to a Danish hospital, where they wouldn't let the doctors operate without him giving them information. Fortunately one of the medical staff, was a resistance member, who managed to duck the German security sealing the hospital, and get out a warning, the man had been captured.

Once the warning had been dispatched, the casualty was able to give the Germans the nom de guerres of his cell mates, who by that time were already notified and going into hiding.

I was always amazed at the speed that all this took place. To illustrate the speed, my father contacted his girlfriend, later my mother, to try to pick up some clothes from the members' homes. As she approached the first home, she saw the SS coming out with the member's belongings. By the time she got to the second home, she saw the SS again so she stopped.

I was amazed at the organization behind the Resistance, less than four hours to warn the members and for them to drop from sight. My father, stayed in Denmark instead of going to Sweden, because the general feeling was the end of the war was very near, and he had a good place to hide and work in a dairy. My father was one of the very lucky ones


----------



## mariomike (20 Jun 2011)

SherH2A said:
			
		

> The costs that some of these members paid was tremendous, their lives were forever altered by what they had done. The lucky ones got out and healed. For example, my father's cell was destroyed by the Gestapo, a member had been shot in a piece of personal sabotage at the railway station. The Germans tracked him down by following the trail of his blood in the snow to an apartment building lobby.



In the book _Rendez-vous 127, The Diary of Anne Brusselmanns_, ACM Sir Basil Embry wrote:
"It is perhaps difficult for anyone who has not lived under the oppression of German occupation and witnessed first-hand the frightful evil of Gestapo police methods to appreciate fully what it meant to work in direct opposition to them...
The married man or woman caught harbouring an Allied airman brought reprisals on the whole family - even small children were put to death. This was the price for patriotism, and as the Gestapo held most of the cards, the odds were strongly in their favour...
Their peril was far greater than that of the airman whom they helped, because if the evader was caught, he would merely become a prisoner of war, but if they were found helping or sheltering him they were tortured and shot."

Edit for spelling.


----------



## cphansen (20 Jun 2011)

Thank you for the info.

I would love to pay homage to the courage of the resistance, but this is not the thread to do that.  We should try to find one already existing or start a thread.

Sorry about the highjacking, it just seemed to morph


----------



## dh101 (20 Jun 2011)

I think that the American's have bigger fish to fry then planning or even considering an attack on Canada.
I ought to say that it's more likely to be attacked by China, or possibly Russia, then the US.
Not the mention, that an invasion between two of the most powerful countries in the world would cause such devastation, it would almost not be worth it. Two nuclear powers, put against one another, the American's would spend more money supporting an invasion then they would get in return from any land they may possibly obtain, let alone backlash from our allied countries.


----------



## Delaney1986 (20 Jun 2011)

"Actually my fear is the various separatist parties unite, like Quebec, Alberta, BC, the Maritimes. There are people in each province who really do believe that their individual province could go it alone and successfully."

First of all, I hope you know that the "Maritimes" is not a province, but three provinces.....

Secondly, what is this separatist movement you speak of in the Maritimes? I have lived in NB my whole life...did I miss something?

Thirdly, that just sounds right out of er...


----------



## cphansen (21 Jun 2011)

Delaney1986 said:
			
		

> "Actually my fear is the various separatist parties unite, like Quebec, Alberta, BC, the Maritimes. There are people in each province who really do believe that their individual province could go it alone and successfully."
> 
> First of all, I hope you know that the "Maritimes" is not a province, but three provinces.....
> 
> ...



Thanks for the reply Delany.

First I consider the Maritimes as being 4 provinces, Newfoundland, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island. Historically, back in the days of wooden ships and iron men, this area was an industrial and agricultural power house, of course the industrial sector was not in car manufacturing. It was part of the wealthier part of Canada at Confederation, unfortunately after confederation there wasn't the same demand for their products.

Now after the discovery of offshore oil, things are beginning to improve in those provinces and they are becoming have and not have not provinces. With prosperty, I believe,  people have more faith in the ability of their region to stand on their own.

Second you said you have no knowledge of any separitist feelings in New Brunswick. I think there is still a French English gap in New Brunswick and there are French Speaking people who would prefer to be associated with Quebec rather than Canada. I also believe there are also Newfoundlanders who still believe Joey Smallwood made a huge mistake by entering Confederation and Newfoundland would be better off without Canada, especially  now that they're becoming have provinces.

Third as you said  that just sounds right out of er...
I certainly hope so, I think internal dissent is more likely to cause fighting in Canada, than the USA invading us although they have already invaded Canada twice already during the War of 1812 and during the American Revolution, plus allowing the Fenian raids after the American Civil war. The Americans have a national prehency to resort to violence to support their national policy.

Just to make things clear, let me tell you my view of Canada. I love this country, during my work career I have been lucky enough to see a lot of this country, like a lot of members on this forum. The only province I haven't visited is Newfoundland, plus the farthest north I've gotten has been Prince Albert.

This country is magnificient and is certainly worth keeping together. I've spoken with Canadians in all parts, I've visited, of this country, unfortunately I find that we are more geared towards being proud of our local regions and not proud of this great country, Canada, until it's Olympics time. We need to be proud of Canada more times than once every four years.


----------



## vonGarvin (21 Jun 2011)

SherH2A said:
			
		

> Thanks for the reply Delany.
> 
> First I consider the Maritimes as being 4 provinces, Newfoundland, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island.



You are mistaking Atlantic Canada with the Maritimes. Your four provinces collectively make up Atlantic Canada.  The Maritimes include only those three provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island.  At one point, all three provinces were one colony, that of Nova Scotia (1763 until 1769), when Saint John's Island became a separate colony.  New Brunswick became a separate colony in 1784.  Saint John's Island (aka the Island of Saint John's) was renamed Prince Edward Island in 1798.

Newfoundland, of course, was a separate colony, and remained such until 1949.  Though from afar they may seem like a single entity, this isn't the case.


----------



## NavyHopeful (21 Jun 2011)

I ws not under the impression that any provinces other than Quebec wanted to separate...  and that hasn't been since the referendum in the 1990s...  Am I misled?

Rev


----------



## George Wallace (21 Jun 2011)

NavyHopeful said:
			
		

> I ws not under the impression that any provinces other than Quebec wanted to separate...  and that hasn't been since the referendum in the 1990s...  Am I misled?
> 
> Rev



Have you heard of the movement to create Cascadia?  B.C., Washington and Oregon?


----------



## George Wallace (21 Jun 2011)

Go to Alberta and notice the number of cars with "Republic of Alberta" on their bumpers.  Some of those people are deadly serious.


----------



## Tollis (21 Jun 2011)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Go to Alberta and notice the number of cars with "Republic of Alberta" on their bumpers.  Some of those people are deadly serious.



I've actually seen quite a few of these when I visited Calgary last year.  Didn't quite know what it was until later on when I looked it up.  Kind of scary the things some people are attempting to accomplish but I don't think anything will be accomplished without some massive event or a very influential person to come in to change everyones mind.  Canada doesn't seem like the revolutionary/separatist (except Quebec but I have heard the amount of separatist supporters has gone down considerable) type of country to me and I'm not sure the GOC or the U.S. would stand for it if it happened.


----------



## helpup (21 Jun 2011)

Mess with the West GAS/ Oil  like Trudeau did and I think it could very easily happen.  There are many Westerners who to this day feel that was(is) a great injustice.

Also I seem to recall something about the Maritime Provence's or the entire Atlantic Canada looking at merging into a Mega province.  I don't believe it ever got past the "hmm what happens if we did this" stage


----------



## mariomike (21 Jun 2011)

helpup said:
			
		

> Also I seem to recall something about the Maritime Provence's or the entire Atlantic Canada looking at merging into a Mega province.



Or, secession of a Mega-city ( created in 1998 ), with, or without, the four surrounding regional GTA municipalities, to create a Mega-province:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposal_for_the_Province_of_Toronto#By_the_numbers

SUN 2010:
"Lorrie Goldstein sounds off from an urban point of view and Michael Den Tandt tackles the issue from a rural perspective":
http://www.torontosun.com/comment/2010/03/16/13252231.html


----------



## Mudshuvel (21 Jun 2011)

helpup said:
			
		

> ... Atlantic Canada looking at merging into a Mega province.



With talks at one point of merging NB Power with whatever the other maritime provinces have in addition to hydro, if ever the infrastracture is merged with money going into the same collective pocket, the province of 'Acadia' or simply 'Prince Nova Brunswick' could be created.

In all seriousness, the only way I could see the maritimes uniting under one flag is if all hell broke loose and we were turned into a State.


----------



## Scott (21 Jun 2011)

Jesus Christ, this thread went fromthe 'Mericans invading to provinces combining...

Next someone will talk about Cape Breton separating and blowing up the Causeway. iper:


----------



## Fishbone Jones (21 Jun 2011)

Scott said:
			
		

> Jesus Christ, this thread went fromthe 'Mericans invading to provinces combining...
> 
> Next someone will talk about Cape Breton separating and blowing up the Causeway. iper:



Separating from what? Just ask any Cape Bretoner and they'll tell you that's their own island and not part of Nova Scotia already.


----------



## a_majoor (21 Jun 2011)

Merging the Maritime provinces (and adding Newfoundland and Labrador if desired) would make a certain amount of sense form a efficiency standpoint, collapsing four sets of bureaucracies, legislatures, crown corporations ext into one. Of course, if the example of the GTA is any indication, the largest, most expensive and inefficient bureaucracies and public service unions would survive....

Despite the meanderings of "post national" theorists, I don't see that micro nations or distributed republics have any great advantages over conventional States, the modern nation state has been around since 1648 indicating it has a very solid foundation and has been able to displace all potential alternative models for centuries. Small nations formed out of the wreakage of larger failed states may or may not succeed, but I believe that is more a matter of the sort of culture the people living in that state practice and share.

If the Canadian west were to hypothetically separate, they would probably do well; they have an entrepreneurial culture and are busy taking the idea of small "c" conservatism to heart (look at the Saskatchewan Party's turnaround of that province, and the emergence of the Wild Rose Alliance in Alberta). Quebec, blessed with a treasure trove of natural resources, would likely fail if they separated, since they have a very Statist culture. Sadly, the Maritimes has also fallen for the Statist meme, and may end up living off oil and gas in much the same way the Gulf States do (although we might not see extravagant construction booms such as in Dubai).

Regardless of their internal cultures, I suspect that if Confederation were to split along these lines, the United States would simply not choose to deal with the remnants of former Quebec or the Maritimes except as providers of raw materials (to avoid having to assume the debts and obligations of these polities), while being much more receptive of an economically dynamic West as either a client or allied nation.

Now you could have roving bands of fur trappers trying to sneak past the customs posts and border fences between Quebec and the United States, or maybe the Irvings deciding to take the term "oil  baron" literally in a fractured post confederation Canada, but that is about as realistic as the Space Patrol delivering ice from Saturn to Earth or the United States invading Canada....


----------



## Teflon (21 Jun 2011)

That's it! We hear in Wainwright are tired of this and are going head out on our own! I highly doubt any of yous will try to stop us!!!!! ;D


----------



## OldSolduer (21 Jun 2011)

Teflon said:
			
		

> That's it! We hear in Wainwright are tired of this and are going head out on our own! I highly doubt any of yous will try to stop us!!!!! ;D



I'm gonna join you...... >


----------



## Teflon (21 Jun 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> I'm gonna join you...... >



Republic of Wainwright or Wainwrightistan? What sounds more powerful?


----------



## OldSolduer (21 Jun 2011)

Teflon said:
			
		

> Republic of Wainwright or Wainwrightistan? What sounds more powerful?



Republic of Wainwright!! Does this include the town or just the base?


----------



## SoldierInAYear (21 Jun 2011)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> You think?
> 
> Man, I logged into militaryphotos.net, so they are not down.  Just wondering why all the "Invasion" threads are sprouting here...
> 
> ...



Video games.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (21 Jun 2011)

NavyHopeful said:
			
		

> I ws not under the impression that any provinces other than Quebec wanted to separate...  and that hasn't been since the referendum in the 1990s...  Am I misled?
> 
> Rev



Time to derail this puppy again.


----------



## NavyHopeful (21 Jun 2011)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Time to derail this puppy again.



 :rofl:

Hey wait a minute...  they third guy from the left looks like my old neighbour...  Where was this picture taken again???

Rev


----------



## George Wallace (22 Jun 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Republic of Wainwright!! Does this include the town or just the base?



It covers at least two map sheets.    ;D


----------



## Teflon (23 Jun 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Republic of Wainwright!! Does this include the town or just the base?



Well we will see if the town wants to come along but either way we are annexing the Walmart!


----------



## Scott (23 Jun 2011)

Teflon said:
			
		

> Well we will see if the town wants to come along but either way we are annexing the Walmart!



WainMart!

But you'll never, ever, have the Oak Room or The Camelot. (did I get the color scheme right? Don't throw me an executive curl if I didn't, I'm new here)


----------



## a_majoor (23 Jun 2011)

Scott said:
			
		

> WainMart!
> 
> But you'll never, ever, have the Oak Room or The Camelot. (did I get the color scheme right? Don't throw me an executive curl if I didn't, I'm new here)



If the Republic of Wainwright starts a war over the local watering holes we will send the 10,000 marines from upthread to sort things out!  :rage:


----------



## Fishbone Jones (24 Jun 2011)

And they'll get stopped by these guys! Canada's Prairie Maritime Defence Force Arrrrgggghhh.


----------



## George Wallace (24 Jun 2011)

Scott said:
			
		

> WainMart!
> 
> But you'll never, ever, have the Oak Room or The Camelot. (did I get the color scheme right? Don't throw me an executive curl if I didn't, I'm new here)



Ah!  But then there are the Park and Wainwright Hotels, and of course we can't forget Bridget the Midget.


----------



## Danjanou (24 Jun 2011)

Wait Wainwright has a Walmart now? Still not enough to get me to return to the enema insertion point for NATO. Besides I'm probably still banned for life from the Park Hotel. 8)


----------



## Colin Parkinson (24 Jun 2011)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Ah!  But then there are the Park and Wainwright Hotels, and of course we can't forget Bridget the Midget.



Well somebody needs to be PM of the country, not sure if she would do well as a royal figuehead.


----------



## a_majoor (25 Jun 2011)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Well somebody needs to be PM of the country, not sure if she would do well as a royal figuehead.



Just the figurehead on those Saskatchewan pirate ships.....


----------

