Recent searches
Search options
So, here's my defense plan for Canada. Basic philosophy: it is unsafe to wait for an attack.
1. Get public confirmation from NATO that Article 5 applies even if the aggressor is also a NATO member.
2. Send an ultimatum to Washington demanding a public acknowledgement of Canadian sovereignty by the President and confirmation of non-aggression.
3. In the absence of that acknowledgement, sever diplomatic ties, close the borders, and embargo trade. Blow bridges, tear up roads and rail lines.
4. Evacuate Canadian civilians from the border area; probably 300km or more. Yes, this is where most Canadians live.
5. Declare a security corridor of 300km on the other side of the border, in US territory. Any military activity in that area is a sign of imminent aggression and will prompt a defensive strike.
6. If anything occurs, surge forward and take territory. Keep any war on US soil, not in Canada.
The goal is to get Canadians out of harm's way for a shooting war with short-range missiles (500km-1000km); keep something like an economy running, although severely curtailed by the loss of US trade and any facilities near the border; and bring the maximum pain to the US economy, civilian morale, and government.
We can't afford giving an aggressor the benefit of the doubt; too much of our population is within an hour's drive of the border.
If we wait until the US military moves into position to invade, we will have already lost.
We have thousands of kilometers of borderland between the continental US and Canada, as well as Alaska and Canada. Even if the US makes headway into Canada, we can identify areas of the US to occupy. The psychological effect of having US territory occupied by a foreign country would be really devastating on its citizens.
@evan While fighting on enemy territory may be the correct military strategy, I'm not convinced taking enemy territory will inevitably have a significant effect on enemy morale. Ukraine advancing into Russian territory doesn't seem to have crushed Russian morale; or, alternately, Russian morale is already shot and the war machine does not depend on the morale of Russian soldiers or civilians.
@skyfaller @evan Americans haven't had the enemy on our soil since 1942 and that was a remote island in Alaska. Tanks rolling down main St USA would make the consequences real for even the most cultish mouthbreathers
@fluffykittycat @evan I'd say that the US has had the enemy continuously on our soil since the Civil War, if not since its founding, but I understand your point. Not enough Americans know about events like the Tulsa race massacre, and don't recognize slavers and homegrown fascists as occupying forces.
@skyfaller @fluffykittycat I think with luck and initiative, Canada could take some low population areas with high emotional value deep in US territory, like Yellowstone or Mt. Rushmore. The goal would be to require the attention of the US military to keep the fight over there so we don't have to fight over here. I don't think having to deal with partisans in big cities would be efficient.
@evan @skyfaller @fluffykittycat Ennnh...there's 550+ km between the border and Rushmore (my OSM app was still loaded on this spot from yesterday 
), and 440 km or so between the border and Yellowstone, with probably less forgiving terrain.
In either case, you're liable to have armed Wyomingites(/local cults) to contend with, in addition to whatever organized military response would happen.
I get the symbolism, but I'm not sure those are the winning demoralizing targets. 
@evan @skyfaller @fluffykittycat (On the plus side, both North and South Dakota are pretty sparsely populated, particularly the western portions of both states, and neither are particularly renowned for a fixation on gun rights.)