• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

CAN-USA Tariff Strife (split from various pol threads)

But 1.34% for FY25 is still nowhere near 2%, and Canada is absolutely nowhere near the 20% of DND Budget for Capital Equipment purchases.

While I do not agree with P47's Tariff approach, Canada is a Defense Freeloader, and has been for decades.
How would you deal with the decades of freeloading? Considering the history of platitudes and now all of the things going on (Russia, massive debt for US, etc), what would you do to compel a big jump in defence spending of your allies?
 
Over the life of the programs it will be 100s of billions, but at this rate, I’d trust the Europeans more not to screw us over, so I’d gladly transition from USD to EUR…
The goal should not be to transition from US to European kit but rather to switch to Canadian-produced kit where possible - either domestic industry or joint ventures with other countries (US, European, South Korean, Aussie, Japan, etc.).

Ideally we want a level of control over the production and use of our military gear. Everyone is in panic mode over the possibility of the US limiting our ability to use their kit, but do you recall in the earlier stages of the Ukraine War the European countries refusing to export certain weapons?

Let's not just trade one master for another but rather take this opportunity to gain as much independence as we can.
 
But 1.34% for FY25 is still nowhere near 2%, and Canada is absolutely nowhere near the 20% of DND Budget for Capital Equipment purchases.

While I do not agree with P47's Tariff approach, Canada is a Defense Freeloader, and has been for decades.
How would you deal with the decades of freeloading? Considering the history of platitudes and now all of the things going on (Russia, massive debt for US, etc), what would you do to compel a big jump in defence spending of your allies?
Freeloading? On what scale? 158 lives lost being one of the very first responders to USA after 9/11?

Canada paying in blood many, many, many times along side, or to support America aside, if the freeloading was so egregious then why didn’t America do anything substantial about it earlier…including POTUS 45…whose only action was to sign USMCA…so… 🤷🏻‍♂️
 
Freeloading? On what scale? 158 lives lost being one of the very first responders to USA after 9/11?

Canada paying in blood many, many, many times along side, or to support America aside, if the freeloading was so egregious then why didn’t America do anything substantial about it earlier…including POTUS 45…whose only action was to sign USMCA…so… 🤷🏻‍♂️

We weren’t able to arrange a medical exemption.
 
Freeloading? On what scale? 158 lives lost being one of the very first responders to USA after 9/11?

Canada paying in blood many, many, many times along side, or to support America aside, if the freeloading was so egregious then why didn’t America do anything substantial about it earlier…including POTUS 45…whose only action was to sign USMCA…so… 🤷🏻‍♂️

Bottom line Canada is not living up to it's commitments or it's potential. Are you saying there should have been something more substantial done to Canada sooner? Well that is kind of a dumb statement. The fact is something substantial is being done now and we need to react (we shouldn't be in a position to have to react, but here we are.)

Is our response to correct course or in a fit of emotion and ego bite back, take our ball, and go find another friend? I don't think the latter will work out like everyone thinks it will.
 
Bottom line Canada is not living up to it's commitments or it's potential. Are you saying there should have been something more substantial done to Canada sooner? Well that is kind of a dumb statement. The fact is something substantial is being done now and we need to react (we shouldn't be in a position to have to react, but here we are.)

Is our response to correct course or in a fit of emotion and ego bite back, take our ball, and go find another friend? I don't think the latter will work out like everyone thinks it will.


To make a case to go from no substantive action to stating an intention to financially force annexation is by no means a reasonable escalation.

Are you saying it is?
 
To make a case to go from no substantive action to stating an intention to financially force annexation is by no means a reasonable escalation.

Are you saying it is?

Of course not. But was anyone expecting anything less than a wrecking ball from Trump 2.0? And we know that is temporary. Why position ourselves for further harm? We can weather this and come out far better than before.
 
Actu
Freeloading? On what scale? 158 lives lost being one of the very first responders to USA after 9/11?

Canada paying in blood many, many, many times along side, or to support America aside, if the freeloading was so egregious then why didn’t America do anything substantial about it earlier…including POTUS 45…whose only action was to sign USMCA…so… 🤷🏻‍♂️
Actually the Americans have been trying for years to point this out for years but we've been joyfully ignoring them...... and reality.
 
Accuracy is important in these discussions, Canada's spending is 6th from the bottom in terms of percentage of GDP ahead of Iceland, Spain, Luxembourg, Slovenia and Belgium and is 6th in total spending behind the USA, Germany, the UK, France and Italy.

Obviously not good and we desperately need that moolah but it isn't true that we're at the bottom.

Let's amplify on that: Here are, in order, the GDP of all NATO members whose GDP exceed a trillion dollars: (1) USA, 29.2T (2) Ger 4.7T (3) UK 3.65T (4) FR 3.2T (5) ITA 2.4T (6) CAN 2.25T (7) SPA 1.72T (8) NED 1.25T and (9) TURK 1.2T.

Funny enough, we are both the sixth highest GDP and the 6th biggest spender even with what we currently spend. I would call that normal.

Also, I am getting sick and tired of people constantly saying we are freeloading, especially off the Americans. The Americans didn't go into NATO to defend Canada, they did it because it was in their defense interest. They didn't enter into NORAD agreement because they wanted to defend Canada, they did it because it was in their defense interest. And we are not freeloading on that one: name me a single time where we did not fulfill our obligations as negotiated from time to time with the US as regards NORAD. The US did not "join" the Permanent Joint Defense Board and resulting joint defense approach to North America to defend Canada (Ok, maybe a little on that one since the premise was FDR's speech sating the US would never accept another country's attack on Canada and would move to defend Canada - and the reciprocal undertaking by Canada to "do all in our power so that no other country would ever use Canadian territory to attack the USA"), but again they did it because it is in their own national defense interest.

Are we so badly defended then? IIRC the last time someone tried to invade us was in 1812-1814 - and it was the Americans! Other than that, we did participate in wars in foreign lands beside allies on a frequent basis and, after a fashion to get up to speed, in a more than satisfactory way. So again, what is wrong with the way we deal with national Defense?

So, we spend a little over 1.2% of our GDP on defense, while the US spends 3.4%. But here's a little secret: The US spends it all on the defense of its own defense interests, every last penny. The US decided after WWII that it would be unchallenged militarily by any other country, or even group of countries, and that is their approach to defense spending.

Here is another little secret - of US internal politics, this one - Trump will never reach his own new bright line of 5% of GDP spent on defense. That would require the USA to almost double its current pending on defense, already the single largest expenditure, with a right wing congress that will absolutely refuse to raise taxes and US annual deficits already considered by many congressmen / senators to be out of control.
 
So, we spend a little over 1.2% of our GDP on defense, while the US spends 3.4%. But here's a little secret: The US spends it all on the defense of its own defense interests, every last penny. The US decided after WWII that it would be unchallenged militarily by any other country, or even group of countries, and that is their approach to defense spending.
Here's a non-secret: US expenditures also benefit a lot of other countries, and they care about that.

If no-one cared, there would be no whinging when the US stops looking after "its own defence interests" and others have to fill a gap. They could just shut up about the US and get on with funding Ukraine's defence against Russia.
 
Here's a non-secret: US expenditures also benefit a lot of other countries, and they care about that.

If no-one cared, there would be no whinging when the US stops looking after "its own defence interests" and others have to fill a gap. They could just shut up about the US and get on with funding Ukraine's defence against Russia.
Another non-secret. The US beholds other nations it provides direct military support to (read most of the M.E., parts of Asia, etc.)

Of course, the US likes to suck and blow at the same time, so it portrays its support as ‘benevolent’ not ‘controlling’.

By the numbers, the US could probably mind its own business on 1.2-1.5% of GDP, but like the Scorpion said to the Frog, after having stung it halfway across the river on its back, “Sorry, it’s just in my nature…”
 
Another non-secret. The US beholds other nations it provides direct military support to (read most of the M.E., parts of Asia, etc.)

Of course, the US likes to suck and blow at the same time, so it portrays its support as ‘benevolent’ not ‘controlling’.

By the numbers, the US could probably mind its own business on 1.2-1.5% of GDP, but like the Scorpion said to the Frog, after having stung it halfway across the river on its back, “Sorry, it’s just in my nature…”
Sure. Would the world be a better place without it - Russia and China and whoever else doing more of what they please?

If the US is cold and calculating, likely so is everyone else - including calculations to free-ride instead of putting more money into defensive alliances, supporting small like-minded countries abroad in the face of aggression, anti-piracy, etc.
 
Sure. Would the world be a better place without it - Russia and China and whoever else doing more of what they please?

If the US is cold and calculating, likely so is everyone else - including calculations to free-ride instead of putting more money into defensive alliances, supporting small like-minded countries abroad in the face of aggression, anti-piracy, etc.
Yup, so they gotta pay to play the World Police game. Again, can’t suck and blow at the same time.
 
What makes all this even worse is that Eby looks like an indignant high school basketball coach when he's delivering his 'call to arms'.

 
Back
Top