6 ms·

Seems like a generally good idea for creating a large reserve force. It definitely beats general conscription. I don't see why Canada in particular needs such

by jjk166 1y ago

Seems like a generally good idea for creating a large reserve force. It definitely beats general conscription. I don't see why Canada in particular needs such a large reserve force. This would jump Canada from number 127 to number 52 in terms of percentage of population in reserves, and bump it up to 17th in terms of absolute reserves size. For a nation with basically zero chance of invasion of its home soil and an extremely low risk of internal conflict, it's hard to imagine a scenario where anywhere near this many reservists would be required.

gpm 1y ago
The US has been consistently signalling that it is considering annexing us since Donald Trump was re-elected in November of last year... the politicians are unlikely to say it outright but I think this is pretty clearly aimed at the US and making it too costly to do so.
- electric_mayhem 1y ago
  Canada would be insane to not beef up its military at this point. Mexico should, too.
  - swader999 1y ago
    I'm ok with you guys taking over. You probably don't want us though.
    - nxm 1y ago
      No one is stopping you from moving to Mexico, and millions would take your spot in a heartbeat. The amount of privilege is astonishing by some of the posters here
  - TulliusCicero 1y ago
    That Mexico has zero tanks or infantry fighting vehicles or real self propelled artillery might tell you how they've felt about the odds of the US actually invading again. (IMO they should get some of these things even if there's no chance of the US invading, given how much firepower some of the cartels have.)
  - mikkupikku 1y ago
    If Mexico wants to deter America, their best bet by far is to pose a credible insurgency threat. And in that regard, between the number of Mexican nationals and sympathizers in America, the number of guns in Mexico, the national pride of the Mexican people, and their established proficiency with asymmetric warfare (at least from their cartel elements)... I think they've got their bases well covered. Mexicans have the capacity to make an invasion of Mexico be extremely painful to the American public. But Mexico using conventional military force to deter America? That's completely absurd.
    - mrguyorama 1y ago
      Except America has shown that it would rather chew through all it's resources and capability than accept that "The public here doesn't want you, that wont change, go home and save the effort" How many people in the middle east did we blow up or kill? For 20 years. For a supposed outcome we had no chance of ever getting. Multiple presidents even. The deterrence effect of an occupation didn't stop Russia, did not stop the USA, does not stop someone who believes you can just bomb the occupied lands harder until all resistance is "quiet", and doesn't seem to be stopping China from preparing itself for the occupation of Taiwan.
      - mikkupikku 1y ago
        Deterrence not existing because sometimes it doesn't work is certainly... a take.
      - AngryData 1y ago
        The Middle East doesn't have easy access to the US or its infrastructure though either. If the US started shit with Mexico, the insurgency isn't going to be operating just inside Mexico, and support for occupying Mexico will drop to almost nothing when people in the US are regularly going without power, water, telecomms, or perhaps even food.
        mikkupikku 1y ago
        As soon as US baby boomers go one week without their lawns getting mowed, that war would be over.
  - edm0nd 1y ago
    That's not really something Mexico can reasonably do. They are narco-terrorist state and everything there is heavily intertwined with the cartels. They would not want such a thing to happen. War with the US would be bad for their multi billion dollar business.
- tick_tock_tick 1y ago
  > the politicians are unlikely to say it outright but I think this is pretty clearly aimed at the US and making it too costly to do so. lol this makes zero impact on that. The Canadian government doesn't even think it's own solder would fight the USA or sadly even run an insurgency. It's the consequence of trying to minimize nationalism and being cultural dominated by the USA for decades. If the USA wants Canada it gets Canada.
  - k12sosse 1y ago
    You also get Canadians so enjoy being ruled by your so-called dominated peoples.
- jjk166 1y ago
  The US invading Canada isn't a realistic possibility. Any attempt to do so would trigger a civil war within the US, to say nothing of obliterating the geopolitical system. Attempting to annex in any way shape or form is currently nothing more than the musings of an old man, the only way any territorial changes could happen are through peaceful, mutually agreed upon transfer. If the US were to seriously entertain the notion of invading its neighbor, 300,000 poorly trained reservists aren't going to seriously change the calculus. Canada is strong per capita but it has a fraction of the absolute population, military strength, and economy of the US. Nearly all of its major population centers are within extremely close proximity with the US border. It's military and economy are both heavily intertwined with the US, regardless of what rhetoric is being thrown around. A reserve force is for freeing up the active military to be used most effectively, defending key chokepoints, launching offensives, and operating complicated equipment, with the reservists doing things like preparing defensive lines, manning low risk areas, and supporting logistics. In a war between the US and Canada, the US would be able to launch large assaults with professional soldiers in multiple places with no natural obstacles over the short distance between their origin and objectives. There would be little for reservists to do to help - there would be no low risk areas to man, no defenses to prepare, very little in the ways of logistics to be concerned with. If Canada had serious concerns about the US invading, its money would be better spent on disentangling its armed forces from the US, acquiring counters to US systems, and establishing defensible positions between its border and major population centers.
  - silisili 1y ago
    > Any attempt to do so would trigger a civil war within the US What makes you say that? I could see heavy protests, even violent protests, as it's not something Americans want. I'm not sure I could envision any semblance of an actual civil war, though, but perhaps I'm underestimating things.
    - carlosjobim 1y ago
      > What makes you say that? Because the group of men fit to fight such a war would rather rebel against the government than fight a brother war. From lowest recruit to highest general.
qball 1y ago
>For a nation with basically zero chance of invasion of its home soil and an extremely low risk of internal conflict Clearly the Canadian government doesn't feel the same way. If they tried to conscript they'd quickly find themselves in a civil war (for the same reasons the US would), and one the Canadian capital clearly doesn't believe it'd win given how well it fared defending itself in 2022. Of course, bureaucrats aren't exactly known for their fighting prowess either. This is mostly a statement that "Toronto/Ottawa doesn't need the rest of the country, it can see to its own defense", and to try and retain/engage the Elbows Up crowd (which, being the only reason the sitting government is in power, is completely understandable).
- nick_ 1y ago
  Are you referring to the "Freedom Convoy"?
  - BigGreenJorts 1y ago
    If so, the capital did perfectly fine breaking it up, they were just politically hamstrung. But otherwise, it took all of an afternoon and a couple horses to break up that nonsense.
    - nick_ 1y ago
      Yes, agreed. At this point I have seen many fantastical interpretations of what happened there. I assume popular US media coverage of it was a contributor there.
    - stackedinserter 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - nick_ 1y ago
        What?
      - k12sosse 1y ago
hotep99 1y ago
They are likely being pressured to meet minimum obligations as part of NATO membership. Canada's military realistically isn't going to be called on for defense of the homeland but as part of a support force for NATO.
- Tiktaalik 1y ago
  The new NATO funding requirements are so suddenly incredibly high that the government will probably have trouble actually finding the money to spend something on. So things like this are yeah probably a bit of a money sink to meet obligations.

by jjk166 1y ago

gpm 1y ago

The US has been consistently signalling that it is considering annexing us since Donald Trump was re-elected in November of last year... the politicians are unlikely to say it outright but I think this is pretty clearly aimed at the US and making it too costly to do so.

electric_mayhem 1y ago
Canada would be insane to not beef up its military at this point. Mexico should, too.
- swader999 1y ago
  I'm ok with you guys taking over. You probably don't want us though.
  - nxm 1y ago
    No one is stopping you from moving to Mexico, and millions would take your spot in a heartbeat. The amount of privilege is astonishing by some of the posters here
- TulliusCicero 1y ago
  That Mexico has zero tanks or infantry fighting vehicles or real self propelled artillery might tell you how they've felt about the odds of the US actually invading again. (IMO they should get some of these things even if there's no chance of the US invading, given how much firepower some of the cartels have.)
- mikkupikku 1y ago
  If Mexico wants to deter America, their best bet by far is to pose a credible insurgency threat. And in that regard, between the number of Mexican nationals and sympathizers in America, the number of guns in Mexico, the national pride of the Mexican people, and their established proficiency with asymmetric warfare (at least from their cartel elements)... I think they've got their bases well covered. Mexicans have the capacity to make an invasion of Mexico be extremely painful to the American public. But Mexico using conventional military force to deter America? That's completely absurd.
  - mrguyorama 1y ago
    Except America has shown that it would rather chew through all it's resources and capability than accept that "The public here doesn't want you, that wont change, go home and save the effort" How many people in the middle east did we blow up or kill? For 20 years. For a supposed outcome we had no chance of ever getting. Multiple presidents even. The deterrence effect of an occupation didn't stop Russia, did not stop the USA, does not stop someone who believes you can just bomb the occupied lands harder until all resistance is "quiet", and doesn't seem to be stopping China from preparing itself for the occupation of Taiwan.
    - mikkupikku 1y ago
      Deterrence not existing because sometimes it doesn't work is certainly... a take.
    - AngryData 1y ago
      The Middle East doesn't have easy access to the US or its infrastructure though either. If the US started shit with Mexico, the insurgency isn't going to be operating just inside Mexico, and support for occupying Mexico will drop to almost nothing when people in the US are regularly going without power, water, telecomms, or perhaps even food.
      - mikkupikku 1y ago
        As soon as US baby boomers go one week without their lawns getting mowed, that war would be over.
- edm0nd 1y ago
  That's not really something Mexico can reasonably do. They are narco-terrorist state and everything there is heavily intertwined with the cartels. They would not want such a thing to happen. War with the US would be bad for their multi billion dollar business.
tick_tock_tick 1y ago
> the politicians are unlikely to say it outright but I think this is pretty clearly aimed at the US and making it too costly to do so. lol this makes zero impact on that. The Canadian government doesn't even think it's own solder would fight the USA or sadly even run an insurgency. It's the consequence of trying to minimize nationalism and being cultural dominated by the USA for decades. If the USA wants Canada it gets Canada.
- k12sosse 1y ago
  You also get Canadians so enjoy being ruled by your so-called dominated peoples.
jjk166 1y ago
The US invading Canada isn't a realistic possibility. Any attempt to do so would trigger a civil war within the US, to say nothing of obliterating the geopolitical system. Attempting to annex in any way shape or form is currently nothing more than the musings of an old man, the only way any territorial changes could happen are through peaceful, mutually agreed upon transfer. If the US were to seriously entertain the notion of invading its neighbor, 300,000 poorly trained reservists aren't going to seriously change the calculus. Canada is strong per capita but it has a fraction of the absolute population, military strength, and economy of the US. Nearly all of its major population centers are within extremely close proximity with the US border. It's military and economy are both heavily intertwined with the US, regardless of what rhetoric is being thrown around. A reserve force is for freeing up the active military to be used most effectively, defending key chokepoints, launching offensives, and operating complicated equipment, with the reservists doing things like preparing defensive lines, manning low risk areas, and supporting logistics. In a war between the US and Canada, the US would be able to launch large assaults with professional soldiers in multiple places with no natural obstacles over the short distance between their origin and objectives. There would be little for reservists to do to help - there would be no low risk areas to man, no defenses to prepare, very little in the ways of logistics to be concerned with. If Canada had serious concerns about the US invading, its money would be better spent on disentangling its armed forces from the US, acquiring counters to US systems, and establishing defensible positions between its border and major population centers.
- silisili 1y ago
  > Any attempt to do so would trigger a civil war within the US What makes you say that? I could see heavy protests, even violent protests, as it's not something Americans want. I'm not sure I could envision any semblance of an actual civil war, though, but perhaps I'm underestimating things.
  - carlosjobim 1y ago
    > What makes you say that? Because the group of men fit to fight such a war would rather rebel against the government than fight a brother war. From lowest recruit to highest general.

qball 1y ago

>For a nation with basically zero chance of invasion of its home soil and an extremely low risk of internal conflict Clearly the Canadian government doesn't feel the same way. If they tried to conscript they'd quickly find themselves in a civil war (for the same reasons the US would), and one the Canadian capital clearly doesn't believe it'd win given how well it fared defending itself in 2022. Of course, bureaucrats aren't exactly known for their fighting prowess either. This is mostly a statement that "Toronto/Ottawa doesn't need the rest of the country, it can see to its own defense", and to try and retain/engage the Elbows Up crowd (which, being the only reason the sitting government is in power, is completely understandable).

nick_ 1y ago
Are you referring to the "Freedom Convoy"?
- BigGreenJorts 1y ago
  If so, the capital did perfectly fine breaking it up, they were just politically hamstrung. But otherwise, it took all of an afternoon and a couple horses to break up that nonsense.
  - nick_ 1y ago
    Yes, agreed. At this point I have seen many fantastical interpretations of what happened there. I assume popular US media coverage of it was a contributor there.
  - stackedinserter 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - nick_ 1y ago
      What?
    - k12sosse 1y ago

hotep99 1y ago

They are likely being pressured to meet minimum obligations as part of NATO membership. Canada's military realistically isn't going to be called on for defense of the homeland but as part of a support force for NATO.

Tiktaalik 1y ago
The new NATO funding requirements are so suddenly incredibly high that the government will probably have trouble actually finding the money to spend something on. So things like this are yeah probably a bit of a money sink to meet obligations.