4 ms·
It will be very interesting to see how the Canadian government reconciles the existential need for a populace trained and armed to repel an American invasion an
by Teever 9mo ago
It will be very interesting to see how the Canadian government reconciles the existential need for a populace trained and armed to repel an American invasion and occupation with their political goals of banning private fireownership in Canada.
The Canadian government has recently banned many firearms and is forcing an incredibly expensive and unpopular gun buy-back program (the term is a misnomer -- people dind't buy the guns from the government so they're not actually buying them back.) This program has proved incredibly inefficienty and unpopular[0] with many leaders across the country including Police Chiefs and Provincial leaders refusing to support the program.[1][2]
It seems pretty clear to me that these two goals -- developing the skills to endure an invasion and repel an occupation and eliminating private gun ownership are completely incompatible and it isn't clear what the Carney government is going to do.
At the end of the day if you want a country that can win assymetric warfare you need a population proficient with firearms. That means training teens how to use them in extra curricular clubs like Air Cadets or Boy Scouts. That means the promotion of regional and national marksmen championships. That means the creation of properly equipped and sanctioned paramilitary groups that offer the public frequent opportunities to learn and practice activities like squad maneuvers, orienteering, and marksmanship.
If the Canadian government is serious about raising a force that can potentiall repel American invasion it needs to start putting guns in the hands of kids. It needs to start opening firing ranges in rural and urban environments and encouraging the responsible and safe use of firearms.
The Liberal Party of Canada has no choice but to re-embrace firearms as a part of Canadian cutlure and identity while rejecting the worst impulses of pacifists who would rather see Canada disarmed and vulnerable than armed and defended.
[0] https://archive.ph/7Byer https://archive.ph/7Byer
[1] https://archive.ph/r72mb https://archive.ph/r72mb
[2] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/alberta-ucp-agm-legislature-federal-firearm-seizure-program-9.6997686 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/alberta-ucp-agm-legi...
- toomuchtodo 9mo agoCanada simply needs to allow Chinese and European military bases on their land to defend against the US. You don’t need Canadian kids with guns, you need allies with weapons systems to defend against land and air attacks (with of course some soldiers trained to operate those weapons systems).
- pedroma 9mo agoChinese bases would certainly be the quickest way for all Canadians to gain US citizenship overnight.
- kibbul4 9mo agoThis is one of the most impotent things I've ever read. All you've achieved here is acknowledging that you are completely defenseless and welcoming foreign militaries into your territory (the thing you were trying to avoid). What's the plan? Trust the Chinese to defend your country out of the goodness of their hearts (without ever acting on their ability to claim it for themselves at any time knowing you will not and can not do anything to stop them)?
- Teever 9mo agoCanadian troops fought and died to free France from Nazi oppression. It is quite likely that France would be willing to extend their nuclear umbrella to Canada while Canada rapidly spooled up the domestic production of nuclear weapons. If that were to happen the question 'What's the plan?' becomes extremely pertinent. What's the plan if Canada builds a few dozen nukes and scatters them in silos across the prairies under the protection of a nuclear power with their own MIC?
- ChromaticPanic 9mo agoHilarious. Americans can't even fight government tyranny and you think the civilian population of Canada can fight off a foreign invasion force through gun ownership. If it comes down to it it will be a guerrilla war.