this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2025
115 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

9662 readers
1219 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 31 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

If I was Canadian I’d want my government to be handing out fpv drones like they were candy to train up my population to fight a modern conflict

Edit: also, ied building and placement training

[–] [email protected] 20 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Drones, yes.

Ieds, no.

I don't want a sizable population that knows how to blow shit up until the last possible minute before an invasion.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 weeks ago

I feel like by that time it is too late. It seems like a pretty dangerous skill to learn and learning under time constraints would be rough. But I can see the downsides.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 weeks ago

Honestly, that's my feeling too. The good news is that not every single person applying the munitions would need to know how to manufacture them, simply to deploy and arm them. The Russian's use of anti-tank mines against Thrid Reich railway lines comes to mind - the conscripts carrying the mines, locating the rail lines, and planting them to destroy trains and railway infrastructure weren't homebrewing them in a shed at home. They were supplied by the state and trained on how to use them, in a way that maybe similar to how modern army forces know how to use Stingers/MANPADS but not how to build them or the components.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I’m Canadian and I don’t trust 50% of people here to know how to operate a shopping cart competently.

You are delusional.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago
[–] [email protected] 20 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Plus thousands of kilometres of wilderness border, built in disguise, cultural mastery, and lootable weapons all over the place.

Don’t worry, America. We’ll come to you too.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 weeks ago

"How many times have the Jays won the Pennant?"

[–] [email protected] 18 points 3 weeks ago

Sure, sure, great ideas there. National security being of utmost importance, let's also burn down all the trees within 50km of the border, replace them with poison ivy, and pre-emptively nuke the tar sands to remove one incentive to invade and show we're not afraid to use the power of the bomb.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (3 children)

Here is the thing. Ukraine has, or could easily within weeks have, nuclear capability (they were actually instrumental in developing Russia's nuclear capability, and they still have the infrastructure, knowledge, and skills) and that is actually to their detriment. It only promotes a 'first strike' mentality in the Russians.

The land border between Canada and the US is just too long for either side to defend.

But here is the thing. The only way the American army could have the resources to do it would be through the National Guard. American forces are spread too thin throughout the world. The National Guard is under the control of the individual state.

The biggest states would be well prepared to sign non-aggression treaties with Canada, meaning their National Guard could not be used. The individual States can not directly sign a treaty, but they CAN prevent their National Guard from participating. If Trump tried to take charge of them, it would for sure lead to a Constitutional Crisis. Since the Commander-in-Chief of the National Guard Units is the governor of each state, not the President, the troops are only answerable to the chain of command that ends at the state level. The individual states would have all the reason they need to secede. It would be civil war second inning in America. And some National Guard units have their own fighter jets and air bases.

That chaos is Canada's best bet for defense.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Here you are still thinking that trump abides by rules.

The national guard is his, and he'll use it and if someone says no, he'll say "fuck you, yes" and that will be the end of I

Constitutional crisis? There have been multiple already in the past months and nothing happened

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The National Guard most definitely is NOT his. It is absolutely clear that the commander-in-chief of the national Guard is the State Governor. Trump is nowhere in the command chain. Under no circumstances does the National Guard have to obey Trump. Never has obeyed a President, never will.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I love your optimism here, but it's naive to believe that after everything that the president has done to date that is blatantly illegal and he has no authority to do that he will not somehow coopt the National Guard under some bullshit 200 year old law that was never meant to give him this power. Or fuck laws - he has shown his entire career a complete disregard for them and thinks he is completely unbound by the law - and he just does it anyways. Republicans in congress have proven over the last 3 months that they'll happily cede the power their constituents entrusted them with to their dictator. What makes you think he won't make the governors bend to his will? Republican first, then by force for the rest.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

it would for sure lead to a Constitutional Crisis.

News flash: America is already in-play with multiple constitutional crises. PoTUS ignoring direct court orders, abducting and sending US citizens and legal residents to foreign gulags, and so forth.

Now granted, this would be just another one on top of a rapidly-growing pile. But so far the Orange Cheeto has already “won” on a number of points. Right now, the constitution is such in name only. It’s pretty much window dressing at this point. What makes you think that another crisis will actually discourage him from just doing whatever he wants?

America is no longer a democratic country. It is plunging full force into “failed state” status in an epic swan dive of authoritarian destruction.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

America never was, really, a 'democratic' country in the sense that so many were always denied the right to vote. It was 'democratic' only in the sense that those who were enfranchised to vote, could exercise that franchise given that they met certain conditions.

The original Constitution only enfranchised white male landowners to vote. If you met that threshold, you had the 'democratic right to vote'. Oh, wait, you also had to meet a list of other requirements, as well. For instance, you could be any religion you wanted, as long as it had God at the top. It was imperative to swear an oath to God. The original Constitution made that clear. No atheists or non-God-fearing need even try to vote. THAT was what they originally meant by 'freedom of religion' - freedom to worship God any way you wanted. It did NOT allow for 'freedom to NOT have a religion'.

You are right in the sense that the Constitution is being ignored. That is all part of Vance and the 2025 Manifesto. Trump will go one step too far, Vance will lead the impeachment procedures against Trump for Treason to the Constitution, Vance becomes President, and gets a totally free hand to implement his own 2025 Manifesto agenda. Incidentally, the splitting up of America leaving only a pure Republican union, ensuring the Democratic states never interfere again, is all part and parcel of the 2025 plan. Vance would rather be President of a 'pure' Republican nation than have to contend with the turmoil and chaos the Democrats would cause. That is why America is as close to civil war as it was before the start of Civil War 1.0 back almost two centuries ago. The fact is, the more the Constitution loses relevance, the more likely succession by states becomes. At some point, the Constitution becomes so irrelevant that individual states will see absolutely no need to follow it in any shape or form. They will fall back on State constitutions for their governance.

I predict, that soon the Republicans will use the turmoil over the existing Constitution, seeing as the existing Constitution is failing so badly, as a reason to completely rewrite the Constitution as they feel it should have been written And every person who points out how badly the current constitution is failing, just feeds into that argument, and America comes all that closer to ensuring a Vance victory.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I don't like your Mike Pence interpretation of "You have no freedom from religion".

I predict, that soon the Republicans will use the turmoil over the existing Constitution, seeing as the existing Constitution is failing so badly, as a reason to completely rewrite the Constitution as they feel it should have been written

A constitutional convention (of states) is a helpful path to getting mass secession. Changing the constitution is harder than just ignoring it, and daring the courts to use their armies to do anything about it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago

Like it or not, that was how the original Constitution was written, and enforced. An Oath to God was required, and Human law was not to encroach upon God's law. What was Caesar's, was Caesar's, and what was God's, was God's.

The South had absolutely no initial problem with changing the 'Constitution' unilaterally. A new Federal union, a new Constitution. I am talking about the complete collapse of the existing Union and building a complete new one from scratch, not a constitutional convention. Like GM going bankrupt, and then restructuring, nothing about the governance carries over except the name and the physical plant. A complete change in ownership and governance.

Incidentally, that is how South Asia is turning America into a branch plant operation - they are buying up the asserts (including the name and branding) of the large (and small) American corporations, and restructuring them into Asian controlled corporations. Trump is just accelerating the process. An American corporation that manufactures all (or most) of their product in Asia and imports it, goes under because they can not bring their own product in from Asia cheaply, so they go bankrupt and Asia buys the assets. That's why China will not bother to negotiate trade with Trump. They now realize his tariffs are exactly what their long range plans need. The longer they go on for, the cheaper it will be for them to 'Buy America'. The GE Appliance Division, for example. Bought by Haier, product made in America, profits go back to China.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

During WWII the soviets moved all their important factories to Siberia.

Maybe move at least one or two of your strategic assets more than 50 miles from the border?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 weeks ago

Edmonton approves this message.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 weeks ago

Nukes? Canada needs to close the Eldritch horror gap.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

A very reasonable position. I for one supoort this wholeheartedly. Sensible civilian firearms laws support in a symbiotic way the Canadian military. A wider body of markmens who maintain profficiency after service. It also supports a domestic small arms industry that can switch to military small arms when needed and pivot back. Canadian jobs, serving Canadian defense, using Canadian materials. It's also an export market.

I love the idea of 2 years mandatory military or civil service. Around the end of high school. Engagement, development and readiness of a much wider spectrum of society in common service to each other. There are very very few downsides.

Edit: I'm also a strong proponent of nukes. Nothing outrageous. Just a minimum viable second strike capability like the UK. Just enough to tell hungry eyes to fuck off and look elsewhere.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

There are very, very many downsides to mandatory enlistment. Fuck that to hell and back. I will never use a gun in service of a state, nor perform any other function in support of the military of a state. Let alone fucking nukes??? What is the point in resisting a military state if we create our own at home anyway?? So that we hang a red and white flag over the bodies of dead 18 year olds who had literally no fucking choice in going to war and dying for nothing? I genuinely can't tell if you're joking or not.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I see you're trans. I'm trans too - and if a foreign power like a fascist America comes to bring us "freedom" I sure as hell am picking up gun if I'm fit to, or whatever else is needed. It doesn't have to be in service of a state, what about your community?? Pacifism is such a bullshit ideology.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

You seem to have missed the part where I'm an anarchist. Never said I was anti gun nor a pacifist. I am not having a gun pointed at my head and telling me to pick up a gun and march to the orders of a military. I would absolutely defend my community, i am also not being compelled by force into the service of a national military. Nobody should be obligated by force to participate in a war.

What happened to all the anti-authoritarians in the "fuck China" thread from the other day? I guess when it's Canadian authoritarianism it's good??

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Military OR CIVIL service. Reading isn't for everyone.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I will never use a gun in service of a state, nor perform any other function in support of the military of a state.

Wanna give it another read through?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 weeks ago (13 children)

Civil: /sĭv′əl/

adjective Of, relating to, or befitting a citizen or citizens. "civil duties." Of or relating to citizens and their interrelations with one another or with the state. "government agencies concerned with civil affairs." Of ordinary citizens or ordinary community life as distinguished from the military or the ecclesiastical. "married in a civil ceremony at city hall." The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition • More at Wordnik

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 weeks ago

When facing a fascist and authoritarian regime, it comes down to a very simple question:

Do you want to die on your knees, or do you want to die on your feet?

There really isn’t any kind of a third option, unless you want to turn traitor and become a collaborator. Which I don’t think you’re going to be given that option.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

They seem to be proposing the sort of normal military service that used to be fairly common, although exactly universal in peacetime. The sort of marksmaship that they're describing exists even in countries with strict gun control like South Korea, Germany and Britain. It pays off in spades in cases where war comes home and civilians must be relied upon to defend against invasion.

Some of the European countries phased their mandatory conscription programs out as recently as the 90's-00's, and it's maybe not the ones you might first assume who had them in the first place - the Danes, Swedes, Finns, the Swiss, etc. Others still have conscription in case of war, but that's not so unusual at all, and may not mean front-line posts for many who're unfit for the duty for one reason or the other.

Many roles in a nation's military are far from the front, everything from administrative, intelligence analysis, supplies and warehousing, medical roles - there's a pretty wide spread of tasks beyond holding a gun and firing it at your nation's enemies.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Yes, and I also think that it is wrong in all of those places, too. South Korea is one of the worst countries in the world in terms of the rights and equality of its citizens. It is also a turbo capitalist military state. Yes, I absolutely think it's wrong there, too.

I'm an anarchist. I'm anti involuntary servitude in all it's forms and I will never be a part of the military or perform duties in support of one. I would own a gun for my own sake, for the sake of my family and my community, but I will absolutely never be an agent of state violence. There is no room whatsoever for accommodation here. This would be a fucking nightmare scenario.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

It's a laudable philosophical stance, but if you're eligible for conscription in whatever country you call home, you'd better have a fallback plan, a cache of supplies, and place to hide out before fleeing the country in times of war. Armies don't fuck around with that shit, they'll either jail or execute able-bodied people refusing military service. Best of luck to you.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago

Good thing our country doesn't have a draft. And I will absolutely fight back with all that I have against one. If it comes to it they can shoot me. It's get shot by fascists or get shot by authoritarians. I'll live openly and proudly no matter who points a gun at me.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I am not advocating. However, we should all understand that there are many countries with mandatory military service that do not use them in war.

In addition to military preparedness and defence, it can be an opportunity for greater citizen engagement and to significantly invest in training and skills. This has social and economic benefits beyond war.

Sweden has mandatory military service. How many wars have they started in your lifetime.

Again, not taking a position. Just pointing out that mandatory military service does not have to translate into young men in body bags.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 weeks ago

I'm anti authoritarian, and that necessarily includes compulsory enlistment. We can also invest in training and skill development without forcing people under threat of state violence to join a military. I am also opposed to the draft no matter where it is still practiced. Anti-draft riots were some of the earliest workers rights movements.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 weeks ago

Actually, just nukes would already do

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I just see a lot of our military not being into invading Canada. There is a lot of gray space between aggressively applying 100% to a mission and outright desertion. As a person who's spent a career in the military - I don't really know about the infantry-based guys, but the people I served with are not simple order-following automatons - regardless of oathes to follow orders...doing the wrong thing is doing the wrong thing.

Maybe I'm out to lunch, but I'd bet there would suddenly be a lot of broken equipment, and a lot of injured personnel, along with a demand that the children of our political leadership, be among the first of the "cannon-fodder" and "bullet-cushions" to cross into "enemy" territory. I'd also bet that you could say goodbye to our all-volunteer military recruitment numbers. Logistics would likely be another nightmare, as our civilian population would likely have to be violently forced to allow the military use of the roads to transport themselves north. Unlike our previous military campaigns and wars, where Allied ports were made available to mass our troops and supplies, there would be no friendly ports outside our own borders.

I'm not saying it couldn't be done - our military is larger than the next 13 largest militaries combined, after all. I'm suggesting that between the troubles of invasions in themselves, we'd also be dealing with near civil war conditions within our own borders, massive resignations of key people, desertions & AWOLs, protests and civil disobedience, equipment sabotage, and voluntary military ascession falling off a cliff.

There are plenty of military members who would absolutely, with full faith and dedication, follow any order given to them. I'm sure that there are at least some members of our military who (for some reason) would love to invade Canada. But between the domestic troubles, the half-hearted effort of those who would appear to be participating, and the pain of going to war in the first place. Nah, trump is just sabre rattling....it won't happen.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I think the one thing you're missing is the American lies. The dehumanization of the opposition. The propaganda. I don't think that the whole country will fall for it like they did with Bush, and it's not like we have a MORE charismatic leader to sell it this time. But AI generated content and bots selling the lies are unfortunately going to convince a lot of people, we're already seeing it. With a leader that is trying to litigate what higher institutions teach and destroying the public education system, the longer that this wears on, the dumber and dumber the electorate becomes. Military leaders not kissing the leader's ring are already being removed from their posts to be replaced with sycophants.

I hope you're right that there would be rebellion from within the military, and without. Otherwise, we have no friends left and every country on the planet has is justified in rising to the challenge to crush our new axis powers.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

You make great points, but some of the dehumanizing advantages used in the Middle East would me much less affective here...Canadians are just north of us, and not on the other side of the world. Their customs, traditions, religions, and holidays are similar to ours, and they look just like us. I'd bet that a good number of Americans have Canadian relatives. I live in VA, and my neighbors wife has dual US/Canadian citizenship, as she's originally from Canada.

I'm originally from Erie, PA - going up to Niagara Falls was a regular day trip we'd do several times per year. Funny enough, I've never been to the American side of the falls. I've seen it grow from a destination where you could simply parallel park your car next to the railing looking over the falls, to the tourist trap destination it is today.

The good thing about the education system is that no matter how they try to defend and dumb it down, our people still have to compete with the global, population. We can't import all of our mental talent. Schoolmaster the only place where people gain an education. Kids are smart, resilient, and can often see past the ill-will of adults, no matter how many toys and candies they have.

The great thing about trump may be that he's so fucking terrible, that he may end up pushing people (voters) to make better, more sensible decisions at the voting booth, more than any other politician possibly can. What he's doing, is not only about values, ideas, and hate anymore. He's actually affecting the bank accounts and livelihood of the people who voted for him, and nothing about any of his policies will result in them not being damaged in at least some way. He is so fucking terrible that he may actually be the catalyst to snap the US out of this "conservative populist march towards fascism."

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›