If you look at a map, the opposite is more likely:
As you can plainly seen, Canadians are in fact massing on the US border and have been doing so for years.
What would you do if the US invaded?
- Thread starter RoseMartland
- Start date
If you look at a map, the opposite is more likely:
As you can plainly seen, Canadians are in fact massing on the US border and have been doing so for years.
He is still 15?
I was just puzzled by the "all the other 15 year olds". How many 15 years olds are there? Were there?
There used to be just 1?
Oh so he's embellishing yes?
"Nevertheless, the man in charge of Guantnamo's Joint Task Force says that the majority of the 176 held at Guantanamo are "highly compliant" and live in a communal environment at peace with their guards. They associate in communal conditions in camps four and six, collectively known as Camp Delta.
Here they live in open barracks freely mixing with each other. They enjoy up to 20 hours of free association where they can take part in a range of recreational activities including basketball and football.
Privileges include television (even Al Jazeera), art classes, access to the library and a wide range of meal options.
Admiral Harbeson says that one of the most popular privileges this year was the screening of the world cup in South Africa. For reasons of cultural sensitivity it was not shown live.
"It was extremely popular, we taped it and then showed it to them. We wanted to scrub it for anything offensive to any religions," the admiral explains.
"In camp four, we allowed them to play soccer between the two barracks in the soccer field. They were playing soccer themselves and that got a bit old, so we offered them a competition."
The horror!
Last edited:
How long are you going to keep these people locked up? Indefinitely? Thrown away the keys yet?
Locking up a 15 year old child soldier for life seems cruel.
Besides.... nobody attacks Canada, it's unheard of and anybody who ever tried to harm us cute widdle snowy people would instantly turn into villains in the eyes of the rest of the world :bunny:
Afterall, this is how the rest of the world sees us:
We wouldn't have to do anything.... we got our posse watch'n our backs.
And what's worse?
We can speak english...... which means as soon as a bunch of us innocent folk start getting on the internet or tv's around the world and explain what's going on without broken english.... toss a few teenagers being bombed in their high schools...... the US would have already lost.
Canada's defence has been a long term propaganda of identity to other countries for years, in that we're portrayed as slow, simple, friendly folk who'd let you stay in their log cabin if ever lost in the forest and wake you up with the smell of coffee, pancakes and maple syrup in the morning as you stretch out on the dock watching the sunrise over the lake as you listen to a couple of loons in the distance getting it on......
Nobody would ever win a war against a defence like that...... that's the equivalent of stomping on a bunny wearing a pink bonnet, in front of a bunch of little children. :lol:
That fly is annoying. Kept on trying to chase it away.
oh sure, lock people away for years with no charges and water board them, but hey! Sometimes they get to watch soccer!
No one cares if their human rights are being violated as long as they can shoot some hoops!
And obviously it's ok to lock up child soldiers, because by the time you get around to actually charging them with something they'll be adults. No biggie!
/sarcasm.
I did NOT say they were shooting hoops! They're playing soccer.
How many were there again?
A whole bunch have been released already. Some will go home. others will stay...for life. Only when they get their convictions they will leave the sunny Carribean for less exotic places like Kansas and Illinois.
Gosh...amazing how Khadr has not aged day in Cuba!
There is a 99.9% chance that the scenario you mentioned would never happen, but just in case it did happen the following would happen. "Nothing", maybe a small active Canadian independence movement would start up, some minor skirmishing by radicals on both sides then years of negotiation. Without outside help Canada as it is known today would cease to exist.
After a little more thought, Canada would cease to exist on the day the U.S. invaded. If someone steps in to help, Canada it is gone, if a country big enough to intervene like China or Russia, the Canada we know now would still be gone, just another satellite of who ever conquered or helped them. The only scenario worth thing of is that someone other than the U.S. invades Canada, the U.S, assists Canada and Canada as an independent country goes on.
Seriously what you propose is a ridiculous scenario.
Last edited:
False. The USA has NEVER attacked the nation-state of Canada.
In the War of 1812 the United States invaded the British colonies in North America that later became Canada. The Feenians also staged some incursions from the US into those same colonies (against the US gov't's will). If you're going to ignore some of the pre-Confederation conflicts, let's be consistent and ignore them all.
And who is to say the US conception of Manifest Destiny ISN'T exhausted? There is no evidence to suggest it still exists. Americans are outspoken and proud about their place in the world but aside from sarcastic comments from the fringe of their politics when we are at odds over some issue, there is never any mention of invading or annexing or becoming one nation with Canada. The opposite is actually more closer to the truth, when you consider the reactions when the subject of a "North American Union" is brought up: most Americans of all political stripes have no stomach for such a beast.
More or less true. The concept is extremely silly....
The Americans are family......a democratic nation in which the government answers to the people, who would simply not stand for an attack on Canada.....
There are only two situations that would allow for an American invasion of Canada....
1. Canada is subverted and becomes a terrorist-supporting state dedicated to the downfall of the legitimate American government.
Not likely.
2. The USA is subverted and becomes a lunatic tyranny bent on military world domination.
Not likely.
My reaction would depend on which situation prevailed.
All in all, a silly question.
We did actually, The War of 1812. We being:
Date June 18, 1812 – March 23, 1815 Location Eastern and Central North America, Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Oceans Result
Treaty of Ghent
Status quo ante bellum
Belligerents:
Choctaw
Cherokee
Creek allies
~~~~~~~~
British Empire:
United Kingdom
CanadaShawnee
Creek Red Sticks
Ojibway
Chickamauga
Fox
Iroquois Miami
Mingo
Ottawa
Kickapoo
Delaware (Lenape)
Mascouten
Potawatomi
Sauk
Wyandot
---------------
Commanders and leaders:
James Madison
Henry Dearborn
Jacob Brown
Winfield Scott
Andrew Jackson
William Henry Harrison
William Hull ~~~~~~~~~~~
Lord Liverpool
George Prévost
Isaac Brock †
Roger Hale Sheaffe
Gordon Drummond
Robert Ross †
Edward Pakenham †
Charles de SalaberryTecumseh †
-----------------
Strength:
United States•Regular Army:
— 7,000 (at start of war);
— 35,800 (at war's end)
•Rangers: 3,049
•Militia: 458,463 *
•United States Navy,
•United States Marines &
•Revenue Cutter Service (at start of war):
— Frigates: 6
— Other vessels: 14
Native allies:
125 Choctaw,
(unknown others) [2]
~~~~~~~~~~~~
British Empire•British Army:
— 5,200 (at start of war);
— 48,160 (at war's end)
•Prov. regulars: 10,000
•Provincial Militia: 4,000
•Royal Navy &
•Royal Marines:
— Ships of the Line: 11
— Frigates: 34
— Other vessels: 52
•Provincial Marine ‡ :
— Ships: 9 (at start of war)
Native allies:
10,000 Casualties and losses 2,260 killed in action. 4,505 wounded.
17,000 (est.) died from disease. 1,600 killed in action. 3,679 wounded.
3,321 died from disease. * Some militias only operated in their own regions.
† Killed in action
‡ A locally raised coastal protection and seminaval force on the Great Lakes.
Stats source: War of 1812 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I haven't read the novel, but the link you provided does mention it's a spoof. So I take it it might be intended as a humorous story mocking misunderstandings between countries caused by the media leading to war.
If it is in fact a tongue-in-cheek novel, then I can't fully imagine its full plot.
However, if it's intended as a more serious novel, many obstacles would stand in the way of a US invasion, which the author would need to break down before the audience could accept. Among the obstacles:
1. Language and culture. Most Canadians and Americans speak the same language, share the same Christian Faith, and share many other cultural similarities owing to the common British roots. This would thus make it extremely difficult for any US administration to demonize Canadians in the face of English-language news media fully comprehensible to the vast majority of Americans. Combine that with modern technology such as the internet, and this makes it extremely easy for Canadians and Americans to exchange ideas with one another at the grassroots level.
Looking at it that way, a civil war between English-Canadians and Quebecers, or a culture war between Anglo-Americans and Hispanics would be more likely than a war between the majority of Americans and Canadians.
2. Travel, trade and intermarriage. As a result of sharing this common language and culture between the majority of Canadians and Americans, travel, trade and intermarriage is much easier too. With so many Americans and Canadians traveling to each others' countries, trading with one another, and marrying one another, it would make it difficult for the US to attack Canada without causing many Americans to arise in Canada's defense.
Churchill said it well at Harvard in 1943 when he said:
"This gift of a common tongue is a priceless inheritance, and it may well some day become the foundation of a common citizenship. I like to think of British and Americans moving about freely over each other's wide estates with hardly a sense of being foreigners to one another."
It's no coincidence that English-speaking countries have much closer ties with one another than with other countries:we can actually understand each other.
I'm not saying a war between the US and Canada would not be possible, but it would require extreme circumstances, and any serious novel depicting a US invasion of Canada would need to develop such a circumstance to make it credible. Add to that that a US invasion of Canada would not only require a special reason for doing so, but it would also have to be accepted that, owing to the degree of interaction between our cultures, it would be likely that some Americans could end up supporting the Canadian side and vice versa depending on the reasons for the war, be they ideological or otherwise. This means any war between the US and Canada is likely to break out into civil war on both sides as each side takes its ideological stance. Likely the only places where the battle lines would be more clear, at least relatively speaking would be around the province of Quebec and perhaps certain parts of the US primarily very close to the US-Mexico border.
Our two cultures are just too integrated for any US invasion of Canada to be so clean-cut.
Now as to what I'd do if the US ever invaded Canada? Well, that would depend on which side is fighting for a just cause of course. A good example is Hasegawa Teru, a Japanese woman who'd helped the Chinese side against Japanese occupation owing to her strong sense of patriotism which did not allow her to tolerate such attrocities on the part of her countrymen. We could also take the example of those Chinese who'd welcomed her among their ranks as a friend, compatriot and comrade in spite of her being Japanese. They recognized she was a good Japanese, and so embraced her with open arms. She'd even helped to set up an organization of Japanese living n China who opposed Japanese aggression.
At the end of the day, a good man does not fight for hs country; he fights for justice. If that is compatible with fighting for his country, then on the surface it might appear that he's fighting for his country. But the second his country's no longer fighting for justice, that's when the distinction becomes clear. Those fighting for justice will immediately switch allegiances, whereas those fighting for country right or wrong will keep fighting blindly for the country.