this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2024
27 points (84.6% liked)

Canada

7187 readers
499 users here now

What's going on Canada?

Communities

🍁 Meta

πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories

πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities

πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer

πŸ’» Universities

πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping

πŸ—£οΈ Politics

🍁 Social and Culture

Rules

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

https://lemmy.ca

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
otter@lemmy.ca
27
Trudeau should expect criticism at NATO summit over defence spending: analysis (ottawacitizen.com)
submitted 4 months ago by NightOwl@lemmy.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca
15 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

At issue is the NATO two per cent doctrine. That calls for NATO nations to spend two per cent of their GDP on defence.

American politicians, along with retired Canadian generals and Ottawa think tanks who receive funding from the arms industry, have used that to hammer Canada as a failure on defence.

Defence Minister Bill Blair has recounted how hard it is to try to convince cabinet as well as Canadians about the need to meet the two per cent commitment because β€œnobody knows what that means.”

Add to that mix the current fiscal environment and ongoing concerns from Canadians who have been struggling financially. Directing tens of billions of tax dollars into more tanks, submarines and fighter jets isn’t a top priority among Canadian families.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Grant_M@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

We do. And, they will if given the opportunity.

[–] m0darn@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I agree that force is the only language fascists understand, But what would preparing Canada for a US invasion look like?

[–] Grant_M@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

No matter how much equipment we purchased, it wouldn't be enough. We would go down fighting. Half of the people here are so brainwashed, they'd be more likely to team up with the trump/putin alliance than defend Canada. It looks bad.

[–] m0darn@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

We need to build up in case of a trump win in the US. He may well order US military action against Canada.

...

No matter how much equipment we purchased, it wouldn't be enough.

So how much should we build up? Or did you mean build up international alliances?

[–] Grant_M@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Both. We can build up enough to fight back with allies.

[–] m0darn@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

We would not get state level military support from any ally. China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and Cuba might help us.

The type of build up that would be effective (if it could even be called that) against a US invasion would be sapping roads and bridges like Switzerland, and transforming our army into a resistance/insurgency force. Should we re allocate our spending towards these aims?

It seems a little premature.

Maybe we should actually invest in helping Canadians (and Americans) engage with and value democracy and human rights.

[–] Grant_M@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

China, Russia, North Korea are allied with rapist donald trump. If he were to order an attack on Canada, they will side with him.

[–] m0darn@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

They are allied with him because he weakens America. If America invaded Canada, China and Russia would probably support both sides to make America look bad.

[–] Grant_M@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago

Naa. They are with trump and he is with them.