NationStates Jolt Archive

I know this has been done a shitload of times, I just love seeing you guys go at it about this kind of stuff though.

So let us think, if America, for whatever strange reason, decided to invade Canada, do you think there would even be a fight to record, or do you think the Canadians would put up some form of resistance. Let us discuss.

We'd put up a fight...for a very short while, there would undoubtedly be international outrage (although actual physical support is questionable at best, unless say China wanted an excuse to go toe to toe with the US). Don't forget, while our military is poorly funded and the recent budget increases are more for appearances than actual government support, since there's been some bad media attention regarding the horrific state of certain equipment. However, our airforce might down a few aircraft, the navy's frigates would put up a fight (they're pretty top notch, or so I've heard), and our mechanized forces are pretty good quality (the US uses our vehicles, the LAV 3, though they call them the stryker, but our LAV 3 APCs have 25mm cannons and grenade launchers on em) and our infantry equipment is pretty damn good to. Now, I'm not saying we'd win, because by all means, we wouldn't, but we'd definately put up a fight before we went down. Oh, and of course JTF-2 would go apeshit and knock out a good number of troops before they went down (all hail our snipers!)

Assuming that you're Canadian yourself, do you think underground resistance would continue even after Canada was occupied, or would you guys accept your fate.

I know that in Quebec there would definately be resistance, there would likely be resistance movements out west to, although here where I live in southern Ontario, there stands a good chance that it wont be as bad here as out west and in Quebec. I know that I for one would definately get a group of friends together and try to start up a resistance movement (keep in mind, I am an army reservist, or at least will be soon once I get the recruitment forms filled out and the physical tests and medical exam stuff done, then theres the training, but thats not till the summer)...of course, I might end up killed in the war itself.

I think if the US and Canada went to war, there'd probably be strong resistance against the Americans ..... by Americans!

I live in Manitoba myself and there would be resistance here thats for damn sure. Hell I'd even help out with the resistance. And also surprisingly our M16 clone the C7 is used by the American forces. That and our snipers would damn well raise some major hell before they were taken down.

Most, if not all Canadians would never accecpt being invaded. So the resistance would not stop.
I can pretty much gaurentee if the US invaded Canada, the entire Commonwealth would come to our aidin defence, it's one of the clauses of the commonwealth. So that drags Great Britian, Australia, and New Zealand (To name a few) into the fight, and chances are GreatBritian would drag the Eueropean Union in. Not to mention the fact that Canada is generally more liked by other countries, so I'd like to hope they'd come to the aid of Canada since Canada helped them so many times.
And let's not forget that Canadian soldiers are among the best trained in the world, even better then the US soldiers. Of course, we have to be, alot of our equipment is seriously out dated.

All in all, the US would never invade Canada, it would have to deal with the rest of the world if it did. It's like the school yard bully beating up the policeman's son, the bully get's in deep trouble.

I think if the US and Canada went to war, there'd probably be strong resistance against the Americans ..... by Americans!

i believe that America should get enough nukes to blow the whole world. then if anyone disagrees with us bam. nice knowing ya. France bye, Germany bye, anyone with a better population, land size average income, literacy rate see ya suckers. i mean honestly with tha much power, what would anyone do? :mp5: muhahahahahahahahahahh jk but it's kinda a nice idea.

How long do yall think it would last?

I live in Manitoba myself and there would be resistance here thats for damn sure. Hell I'd even help out with the resistance. And also surprisingly our M16 clone the C7 is used by the American forces. That and our snipers would damn well raise some major hell before they were taken down.

hell, if Canda was invaded there would be hell to pay in America. The world's ticked at us now, i shudder to think what would happen if we invaded some place with not even a made up reason. I would be glad to shoutgun the prez and pro-war senators if that happened. and there would be resistance in Canada to i'm sure.

How long do yall think it would last?

month or two the war. but the resistance god only knows. We might have to pull a Fallujah dunno how close other nations are following war in Iraq, but we are blowing up Fallujah to free the Iraquis (weird concept huh? blowin up a major city to stop them being pissed at us)

Most, if not all Canadians would never accecpt being invaded. So the resistance would not stop.
I can pretty much gaurentee if the US invaded Canada, the entire Commonwealth would come to our aidin defence, it's one of the clauses of the commonwealth. So that drags Great Britian, Australia, and New Zealand (To name a few) into the fight, and chances are GreatBritian would drag the Eueropean Union in. Not to mention the fact that Canada is generally more liked by other countries, so I'd like to hope they'd come to the aid of Canada since Canada helped them so many times.
And let's not forget that Canadian soldiers are among the best trained in the world, even better then the US soldiers. Of course, we have to be, alot of our equipment is seriously out dated.

All in all, the US would never invade Canada, it would have to deal with the rest of the world if it did. It's like the school yard bully beating up the policeman's son, the bully get's in deep trouble.

Don't kid yourself, the rest of the world wouldn't do a thing. How are Canadian soldiers better trained than the US soldiers?

Money is what makes good training. Whoever can spend the most money on training will produce the best troops. The Canadian military budget is tiny and it can't afford the training that American troops can.

Also, American troops have a lot more experience, when was the last time Canada fought a war?

Don't get me wrong, there are some very nationalistic Canadians that would put up quite a fight. The JTF-2 is one of the best SF units in the world and trains side by side with American SF.

I would think it would take a couple of months, Canada has a pretty well equipped military but it just wouldn't be able to stand up against the American war machine.

Hey Bob, hate to break it to ya, but the US already has enough nukes to wipe out the world, numerous times over.

If the US attacked Canada the arm on the space shuttle would just go mad and smash the astronauts. Plus all the ATI cards would make games unplayable.

Don't kid yourself, the rest of the world wouldn't do a thing. How are Canadian soldiers better trained than the US soldiers?

Money is what makes good training. Whoever can spend the most money on training will produce the best troops. The Canadian military budget is tiny and it can't afford the training that American troops can.

Also, American troops have a lot more experience, when was the last time Canada fought a war?

Don't get me wrong, there are some very nationalistic Canadians that would put up quite a fight. The JTF-2 is one of the best SF units in the world and trains side by side with American SF.

I would think it would take a couple of months, Canada has a pretty well equipped military but it just wouldn't be able to stand up against the American war machine.

well i am american, but if we spend $50,00 training 600 troops (dunno how much it costs) and the Canadians spend the equivalent of $10,00 to train 110 troops, they have a smaller amount of better trained troops.
and their :sniper: :sniper: kick

Hey Bob, hate to break it to ya, but the US already has enough nukes to wipe out the world, numerous times over.

o, i thought it was half. Question, why would you need to blow up the world with a mushroom cloud more than once? isn't that a waste of dough?

We have 4 good reasons to invade Canada:

1 Loverboy (http://www.theciviccenter.net/images/sm_loverboy.jpg) -Tight leather pants, small talent.

2 Celine Dion (http://images.theglobeandmail.com/archives/RTGAM/images/20030725/wceline0725/celine_done.jpg) -Someone get this woman some food.

3 Quebec (http://www.ravezone.qc.ca/photos/2003/quebecunderground/peacestar/quebec_underground-kkun_misterblack_moi.jpg) -Enough said

4 Anne Murray (http://cgi.canoe.ca/PeopleImagesM/murray_anne_ott.jpg) -This is truely the best reason, curse you Canada.

well i am american, but if we spend $50,00 training 600 troops (dunno how much it costs) and the Canadians spend the equivalent of $10,00 to train 110 troops, they have a smaller amount of better trained troops.
and their :sniper: :sniper: kick

Not really, the US spends $243 per man, Canada spends $146 per man, thus US troops are better funded and better trained.

Check strategypage.com (http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/howtomakewar/databases/armies/an.asp) to verify this.

So what they have good snipers? What would you rather have, a man with a 7.62mm sniper rifle, or an aircraft with 1000lb bombs?

Besides, we have good snipers too...

I don't want to invade Canada, due to the lack of Quality beer, Howsoever if I had to ..I would meet up with my French counterparts..(I'm from Louisiana)..

Le bons Temps Roule (http://www.wwoz.org)

Toronto would be lazy. We like our lifestyle, so we would probably just go about our daily business then if the Americans got in the way of our pothead and gays then there might be a problem here. Remember, Toronto has American style violence, so, when we do, we WOULD put up one hell of a fight. I don't know about the rest of Ontario though... Ottawa would rolle over (as it always does)

NAVY: US with 56 SSNs would win against the 3 active SSKs (1 is in repair after serious fire) As for Canadian FFs, they wouldn't get within range to fight against TASMs and would not have the ability to shoot down a Harpoon or TASM attack without the ability to counter attack. SSNs would sneak up also. Aegis ships prevent Canadian airstrike on US Navy. 12 CVBGs would dominate and overwhelm Canadian cities within 1,000 miles of the ocean. US would TLAM airfields and other positions. Next comes carpet bombing of TOronto and other cities. US wins in a landslide war in the air, land and sea.

I don't want to invade Canada, due to the lack of Quality beer, Howsoever if I had to ..I would meet up with my French counterparts..(I'm from Louisiana)..

Heck, it can't be worse than the US beer. Plus that Keith's is good stuff. Anyway, everybody knows that the US will invade Canada over the water, especially after global warming turns most of the US into a desert and opens the Northwest passage.

Compaired to american snipers Canadian snipers can shot the piss out of them. Hell a Canadian holds the longest shot record. That and if you look back in other wars Canadian troops were more ballsy than the american ones. Even the smaller nation can beat up a bigger nation. Besdies who was it that burned down the white house?

NAVY: US with 56 SSNs would win against the 3 active SSKs (1 is in repair after serious fire) As for Canadian FFs, they wouldn't get within range to fight against TASMs and would not have the ability to shoot down a Harpoon or TASM attack without the ability to counter attack. SSNs would sneak up also. Aegis ships prevent Canadian airstrike on US Navy. 12 CVBGs would dominate and overwhelm Canadian cities within 1,000 miles of the ocean. US would TLAM airfields and other positions. Next comes carpet bombing of TOronto and other cities. US wins in a landslide war in the air, land and sea.

LoL, IDF we know that the US would win, you don't have to lay out the statistics for us. :D

There would definitely be a large uprising among the citizens, our military may not be able to beat the United States' but Canadians aren't going down without a fight, sure as hell British Columbia here would form resistance (we'll channel our uber artsy skills to destructive power :p). I'm sure American citizens would not stand for it, sure we make jokes but we're very aware of your intelligance. Now if we could just scrounge up some politicians like Pierre Elliot Trudeau who won't run away with our money, we'll get a better fighting chance.

I would like to point out the determination in Canadian troops though. When we weren't being held back in London, knitting, in WWII one of our brigades liberated a heavily guarded town wherein they had little cover and had to drop and check themselves every few metres. I'm sorry I can't give a more detailed account of this, many history books I find focus on American, Russian, and British advances and I'm not in a high enough grade level in school to learn about it properly from a teacher. Perhaps somebody with more knowledge of history would know the story in depth.

Don't kid yourself, the rest of the world wouldn't do a thing. How are Canadian soldiers better trained than the US soldiers?

Money is what makes good training. Whoever can spend the most money on training will produce the best troops. The Canadian military budget is tiny and it can't afford the training that American troops can.

Also, American troops have a lot more experience, when was the last time Canada fought a war?

Don't get me wrong, there are some very nationalistic Canadians that would put up quite a fight. The JTF-2 is one of the best SF units in the world and trains side by side with American SF.

I would think it would take a couple of months, Canada has a pretty well equipped military but it just wouldn't be able to stand up against the American war machine.


Kid myself indeed. Perhaps you need to look around at the rest of the world. The US already isn't in good standing with the majority of nations. In fact, the only large nation that supports the US anymore on whatever it does is Great Britian, and that's all Tony Blair's doing. Everyone I've talked to from Great Britian, and that's quite a lot of people, don't think Blair will get re-elected. So once he's gone, I doubt even Great Britian will support the US.
Now back to best trained troops. Well, if I remember correctly, and chances are I do because the millitary is my life, the Italian Marines, British Royal Marines, and Swiss Gaurd share the top spots in "Best trained military units" in the world. So, we've just eleminated the US from top spot. Let's go even further down, doesn't the US send it's soldiers here to Canada to be trainied? Actually, plenty of countries send their troops here. Getting back to that wonderful list of "Best Trained Military Units", the US Marines, the best trained non-SpecOps unit in the US aresenal, is somewhere well below the Canadian Armed Forces. Like CAF is 15th or something, and the USMC is like 27th.
And as a final argument, let's go historical, say the war of 1812. If you read a real history book*, which I can only hope everyone has, then you'll notice that the US did in fact attempt an invasion of Canada, which was the war of 1812. And, you might also notice, depending on how detailed your sources are, that Canadians burned down the white house**, and managed to not only hold off the American attack, but in some cases push them back into the US with less soldiers then the American Army.

*(I've read some American history books, and quite a few of them are just lies, like say World War one started in 1917 for everyone, yet it didn't. Yes, I saw that in a Grade 6 Broward County Fla. History text book.)
**(The reason the white house is now white is because it's made of limestone, or rather the outside of it is, and after the Canadian insurgents burned it down they had to white wash it to get rid of all the char on the still standng lime stone exterior walls. So technicly, Canada is the reason the White House is White.)

Besdies who was it that burned down the white house?

The English!

Besdies who was it that burned down the white house?

*Buzzer* Holy jesus! 23 posts before somebody brought up the War of 1812. Wow. C'mon boys, we're all gettin lazy. The rest of the country must be busy tonight.

Compaired to american snipers Canadian snipers can shot the piss out of them. Hell a Canadian holds the longest shot record. That and if you look back in other wars Canadian troops were more ballsy than the american ones. Even the smaller nation can beat up a bigger nation. Besdies who was it that burned down the white house?

*Cough* British burned down the White House, not Canada *Cough*

Besdies who was it that burned down the white house?

Great Britain. We weren't Canada at the time. :)

Personally, if the United States invaded, I'd think about taking up arms against them... but I'd probably just say "screw it" and in typical apathetic Canadian fashion just submit to the will of the government.

Kid myself indeed. Perhaps you need to look around at the rest of the world. The US already isn't in good standing with the majority of nations. In fact, the only large nation that supports the US anymore on whatever it does is Great Britian, and that's all Tony Blair's doing. Everyone I've talked to from Great Britian, and that's quite a lot of people, don't think Blair will get re-elected. So once he's gone, I doubt even Great Britian will support the US.
Now back to best trained troops. Well, if I remember correctly, and chances are I do because the millitary is my life, the Italian Marines, British Royal Marines, and Swiss Gaurd share the top spots in "Best trained military units" in the world. So, we've just eleminated the US from top spot. Let's go even further down, doesn't the US send it's soldiers here to Canada to be trainied? Actually, plenty of countries send their troops here. Getting back to that wonderful list of "Best Trained Military Units", the US Marines, the best trained non-SpecOps unit in the US aresenal, is somewhere well below the Canadian Armed Forces. Like CAF is 15th or something, and the USMC is like 27th.
And as a final argument, let's go historical, say the war of 1812. If you read a real history book*, which I can only hope everyone has, then you'll notice that the US did in fact attempt an invasion of Canada, which was the war of 1812. And, you might also notice, depending on how detailed your sources are, that Canadians burned down the white house**, and managed to not only hold off the American attack, but in some cases push them back into the US with less soldiers then the American Army.

*(I've read some American history books, and quite a few of them are just lies, like say World War one started in 1917 for everyone, yet it didn't. Yes, I saw that in a Grade 6 Broward County Fla. History text book.)
**(The reason the white house is now white is because it's made of limestone, or rather the outside of it is, and after the Canadian insurgents burned it down they had to white wash it to get rid of all the char on the still standng lime stone exterior walls. So technicly, Canada is the reason the White House is White.)

Your history book is incorrect, the troops that burned the White House were British who had traveled across the Atlantic after beating up on some short dude who was in charge of the French.

This is just sad. No, Canada would NOT put up a good fight and no, there would be no significant resistance to speak of. This isn't the War of 1812, people. America could just demand Canada's surrender without a shot being fired. America would not be out to challenge Canada to a hockey game as you seem to think.

Great Britain. We weren't Canada at the time. :)

Personally, if the United States invaded, I'd think about taking up arms against them... but I'd probably just say "screw it" and in typical apathetic Canadian fashion just submit to the will of the government.

Just give up quietly, surrender your Tim Hortons coffee and you won't be hurt, otherwise there will be severe reprisals.

Not the bread bowls!

(PS Canada has more donut shops per capita than any other country in the world!)

Now, now. They may have technically been British when they burned down the White House, but they were fighting to save Canada :D.

I think they deserve to be considered Canadians. They can have dual citizenship under Canadian law ;).

Kid myself indeed. Perhaps you need to look around at the rest of the world. The US already isn't in good standing with the majority of nations. In fact, the only large nation that supports the US anymore on whatever it does is Great Britian, and that's all Tony Blair's doing. Everyone I've talked to from Great Britian, and that's quite a lot of people, don't think Blair will get re-elected. So once he's gone, I doubt even Great Britian will support the US.
Now back to best trained troops. Well, if I remember correctly, and chances are I do because the millitary is my life, the Italian Marines, British Royal Marines, and Swiss Gaurd share the top spots in "Best trained military units" in the world. So, we've just eleminated the US from top spot. Let's go even further down, doesn't the US send it's soldiers here to Canada to be trainied? Actually, plenty of countries send their troops here. Getting back to that wonderful list of "Best Trained Military Units", the US Marines, the best trained non-SpecOps unit in the US aresenal, is somewhere well below the Canadian Armed Forces. Like CAF is 15th or something, and the USMC is like 27th.
And as a final argument, let's go historical, say the war of 1812. If you read a real history book*, which I can only hope everyone has, then you'll notice that the US did in fact attempt an invasion of Canada, which was the war of 1812. And, you might also notice, depending on how detailed your sources are, that Canadians burned down the white house**, and managed to not only hold off the American attack, but in some cases push them back into the US with less soldiers then the American Army.

*(I've read some American history books, and quite a few of them are just lies, like say World War one started in 1917 for everyone, yet it didn't. Yes, I saw that in a Grade 6 Broward County Fla. History text book.)
**(The reason the white house is now white is because it's made of limestone, or rather the outside of it is, and after the Canadian insurgents burned it down they had to white wash it to get rid of all the char on the still standng lime stone exterior walls. So technicly, Canada is the reason the White House is White.)

Kid myself indeed. Perhaps you need to look around at the rest of the world. The US already isn't in good standing with the majority of nations. In fact, the only large nation that supports the US anymore on whatever it does is Great Britian, and that's all Tony Blair's doing. Everyone I've talked to from Great Britian, and that's quite a lot of people, don't think Blair will get re-elected. So once he's gone, I doubt even Great Britian will support the US.

LoL, didn't US friendly Paul Howard just get re-elected in Australia or did I dream that. :rolleyes: Who is "everyone you've talked to", how many people? What part of the country? What is their political alleigance? You can't decide that just because you talked to a couple of British that Teflon Tony won't be re-elected.


Now back to best trained troops. Well, if I remember correctly, and chances are I do because the millitary is my life, the Italian Marines, British Royal Marines, and Swiss Gaurd share the top spots in "Best trained military units" in the world.

LoL, Switzerland, how many wars have they fought? And I'm sure they have the best trained troops with the whole $9 they allow per man for training right? :p

Check strategypage.com (http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/howtomakewar/databases/armies/e.asp) if you don't believe me. Believe it or not the British Royal Marines are trained by the exact same standards as the USMC Marine Expeditionary Units, so how could they be better?

By the way, when was the last time Italy won a war? Oh that's right, they defeated the "barbarians" a few thousand years ago... :rolleyes:

the US Marines, the best trained non-SpecOps unit in the US aresenal, is somewhere well below the Canadian Armed Forces.

LoL, your comparing the USMC to the Canadian Armed Forces? :eek: Can't say I ever heard that. You know of course that the USMC has been in more military engagements than any other unit in history right?

I'm sure you also know that the 1st Marine Division became the most effective unit in history in the Korean War when they defeated four Chinese divisions and crippled three more while outnumbered 29:1. The United States Marines are the most prestigous unit in the world, don't compare them to the CAF please...

If you read a real history book*, which I can only hope everyone has, then you'll notice that the US did in fact attempt an invasion of Canada, which was the war of 1812. And, you might also notice, depending on how detailed your sources are, that Canadians burned down the white house**, and managed to not only hold off the American attack, but in some cases push them back into the US with less soldiers then the American Army.

Oh that's right, the Canadians burned the White House I forgot. Wait didn't the US burn the British capitol in Canada first? If you knew your history you would know that the reason the British, not the Canadians, burned the White House was because the American burnt the British capitol in Canada first.

Besides, Canada wasn't even a real nation at the time.

And the burning of Washington was not the main battle of the war. No, that would be when Andrew Jackson's militia completely slaughtered an experienced British unit at the Battle of New Orleans.

The Battle of New Orleans secured an American victory, the burning of Washington was only a morale victory for the British.

And isn't it embarrasing to the Brits that even if they did burn the capitol of the United States, they still lsot the war? :p

I remeber one day when I was reading through the DND site, it said something about training that was included in US special forces training, that was standard in all Canadian units. Of course, I can't confirm that, and I'm not necessarily saying our regular troops are equal to US special forces. As for an insurgency, well, weapons would be a problem, since we don't have millions of AKs and RPGs floating around, although we do have lots of hunting rifles with scopes and a number of fairly decent shooters with said weapons, so civilian snipers would likely be a big problem for US troops, until the bombers/armour forces rolled in. Of course, the US would need a lot of troops to maintain law and order in its own country, and I had forgotten about the whole commonwealth thing. Oh, and another thing, the war wouldn't just start one day, there would be months and months (if not several years) of rising tensions and mobilization and the like leading up to it. Thus, looking at past recruitment (30,000 recruits in the first days of WW1) we would get tons of recruits, and the people would be screaming for military expansion before the US got its invasion started, so we would have large numbers of well trained troops at the ready.

I remeber one day when I was reading through the DND site, it said something about training that was included in US special forces training, that was standard in all Canadian units. Of course, I can't confirm that, and I'm not necessarily saying our regular troops are equal to US special forces. As for an insurgency, well, weapons would be a problem, since we don't have millions of AKs and RPGs floating around, although we do have lots of hunting rifles with scopes and a number of fairly decent shooters with said weapons, so civilian snipers would likely be a big problem for US troops, until the bombers/armour forces rolled in. Of course, the US would need a lot of troops to maintain law and order in its own country, and I had forgotten about the whole commonwealth thing. Oh, and another thing, the war wouldn't just start one day, there would be months and months (if not several years) of rising tensions and mobilization and the like leading up to it. Thus, looking at past recruitment (30,000 recruits in the first days of WW1) we would get tons of recruits, and the people would be screaming for military expansion before the US got its invasion started, so we would have large numbers of well trained troops at the ready.

How do you people keep saying that Canadian troops are well trained? How exactly can you quickly train large numbers of troops effectively anyway.

I hate to break it to you but funding makes a good soldier.

Yes snipers would be a problem...until we bomb them...

This isn't the War of 1812, people. America could just demand Canada's surrender without a shot being fired.

Ahem.

One of the famous first battles of the War of 1812 (abridged for the sake of not boring us all to death, of course). The saviour of Canada, Sir General Issac Brock, sent his troops to Detroit. He brought with him a couple hundred natives. He was grossly outnumbered. He told the American general that he was going to take the fort, and when the fighting started, he would not be able to control the "savages", who had been known to scalp their enemies (of which gave the American nightmares, as his family was with him in the fort).

The American general surrendered without one shot being fired.

Not the War of 1812 my ass.

Well, I live about 40 km from the U.S. border, and I know if they invaded (those bastards!) I'd take a rifle from the closet, stuff my pockets full of bullets, and head down the 401 to pot me some Yankees, without even waiting for my Reserve group to be called up, no offence intended ;) I'd hope the other residents of my beloved Southern Ontario wouldn't be such pussies as to take a U.S. invasion right up the ass, if you'll pardon the expressions.

All things considered, the regular army in its current state would not put up much of a fight. But if you examine the rapid increase of size of the Canadian military at the beginnings of both world wars, and the fact that no war is started just out of the blue, I think we'd put up a pretty damn good fight, at least until some terrorist nation decided to sneak some WMD's in while you're distracted.

And yes, the entire regular forces of the U.S. could kick our ass, but not with your current troop deployments, in which case we'd give you a damn good run for your money. If you pulled out to go against us, the terrorists, North Koreans, Iraqis and others would have a field day right across the globe. Think about the big picture.

*Cough* British burned down the White House, not Canada *Cough*

Actually, it was a group of Newfoundlanders attached to the British forces. Why don't you all get your facts straight? And the United States launched five invasions of Canada during the War of 1812, all of which failed miserably (my American History textbook from New York tactfully ignores this fact), and the only battle you actually won was after the peace treaty was signed. Wow. Don't you feel proud?

You can rest assured there would be a rebellion in this country. With 7 million firearms (see: Bowling for Columbine) in Canada, most of which would be pointed at Americans, you wouldn't be in for a nice fight. Think of it as the whole Iraq boondogle in a First World country with friends. Capice?

Colchus: Wow, and I thought Canadians were anal :D.

Yes...bomb the guy with the .50 cal sniper rifle picking off your troops with headshots from 2 klicks away. Especially when it takes time for the aircraft to get to the area in the first place. And of course, I'm sure our snipers would pack it up after a few shots and simply melt away, making it, well, difficult for the aircraft to spot the highly camoed special forces sniper who knows the terrain rather well and likely has a lot of outdoor experience.

Ahem.

One of the famous first battles of the War of 1812 (abridged for the sake of not boring us all to death, of course). The saviour of Canada, Sir General Issac Brock, sent his troops to Detroit. He brought with him a couple hundred natives. He was grossly outnumbered. He told the American general that he was going to take the fort, and when the fighting started, he would not be able to control the "savages", who had been known to scalp their enemies (of which gave the American nightmares, as his family was with him in the fort).

The American general surrendered without one shot being fired.

Not the War of 1812 my ass.

And what exactly was this famous battle that you have failed to name?

I'm sorry but a strange man standing outside of a fort demanding the surrender of enemy forces by throwing around savages that are known to "scalp" enemies is no way to win a war. And did you really have to say that the "savages" are known to scalp their enemies. Come on, how many Indian tribes do you know that weren't known to scalp their enemies?

You must have gotten the War of 1812 mixed up with the Boys Crusade as there's no way any self-respecting American General would surrender a fort to a dim-witted man and his posse of Indians!

Yes...bomb the guy with the .50 cal sniper rifle picking off your troops with headshots from 2 klicks away. Especially when it takes time for the aircraft to get to the area in the first place. And of course, I'm sure our snipers would pack it up after a few shots and simply melt away, making it, well, difficult for the aircraft to spot the highly camoed special forces sniper who knows the terrain rather well and likely has a lot of outdoor experience.

Wake up! This isn't a Hollywood movie man, it's real life! Do you really think an average Joe Canadian businessman is going to have access to and know how to shoot a .50 cal rifle?

And do you really think American troops will just stand there and get plunked in the head from 2 clicks away?

It doesn't matter how damn well camoed they are, all an American soldier has to do is give the general location of a sniper to an aircraft and I guarantee you your "highly camoed" will be dead.

I'm sorry, but no amount of Kevlar or ghillie suits will save you from Daisy Cutter bombs.

Our native soldiers during 1812 war (as far as I know at least) didn't scalp, of course I could be completely wrong on that point. And yes, that actually happened, although I forget the name of the battle (last I talked about it was in history class over a year ago). That's an example of the lack of information in American history class. Oh, and btw, you didn't win 1812. If you want proof, fly to Ottawa, and look at what flag is flying on the paliament building. I assure you, it isn't American.

ok lets face the the facts.
as a canadian, i can say the the "war" would last about lets say 3 times longer then the "war" in iraqi, just on the basis of size.
canadian forces dont hold a chance when the us comes knocking we would not fight back much. if war comes to my country it is in the men and women that will be the makers of your tomestones.
i have nothing against you yanks but if you invade my home i have no problem shoting you.
i come from b.c. and i have a great shot, and if take out just one of you, i will think my life as fulfilled. i love my country and i will protect it to my last breath. the war wouold not last long but the resistance will last as long as there are people like me still living, and there are many :sniper: :mp5: :gundge:

LoL, Switzerland, how many wars have they fought? And I'm sure they have the best trained troops with the whole $9 they allow per man for training right? :p


So...You're assuming that firsthand experience is the only way for a military strategist to gain knowledge and that every battle and war is covcered by the American media? True, it is better to have first hand but it doesn't mean they'll go in dazed and confused as you seem to imply.

Switzerland is pretty tough on their training, they train every able bodied man and any willing women for an initial period of 18-21 weeks and train again for 3 weeks every year or other. This 524,000-strong army spend most of their time in their regular citizen lives but are ready to suit up at any time, and 400,000 troops can be mobilized in 24 hours. I don't have a conclusive source on the military expenditure but if the government is that determined for defense, I'm sure they'll not pay 9$ on training.

You must have gotten the War of 1812 mixed up with the Boys Crusade as there's no way any self-respecting American General would surrender a fort to a dim-witted man and his posse of Indians!

Oh really?

http://www.galafilm.com/1812/e/people/hull_detroit.html

"The only thought that seems to have made sense to his muddled mind was to immediately stop the advance of danger. He could do this by simply waving a white flag. The only decision he made that day was the one to surrender. "

I resent you calling General Brock "dim-witted", as he is one of the greatest Canadian war heros of all time (one of the few who can be credited with saving the fate of the whole damn country), but I wont hold it against you, :D.

LoL, didn't US friendly Paul Howard just get re-elected in Australia or did I dream that. :rolleyes:
You did dream it. Paul Howard is not an Australian Politician. :rolleyes:
The name is JOHN Howard.

So...You're assuming that firsthand experience is the only way for a military strategist to gain knowledge and that every battle and war is covcered by the American media? True, it is better to have first hand but it doesn't mean they'll go in dazed and confused as you seem to imply.

Switzerland is pretty tough on their training, they train every able bodied man and any willing women for an initial period of 18-21 weeks and train again for 3 weeks every year or other. This 524,000-strong army spend most of their time in their regular citizen lives but are ready to suit up at any time, and 400,000 troops can be mobilized in 24 hours. I don't have a conclusive source on the military expenditure but if the government is that determined for defense, I'm sure they'll not pay 9$ on training.

I'm sorry but modern warfare has changed, large clumps of untrained, unorganized troops are a bad thing. With super-accurate weapons and highly efficent bombs thousands of massed troops can be exterminated with ease.

Yes, Switzerland's budget per man is only $9 apiece, I think it is obvious that they don't train their troops well.

Oh really?

http://www.galafilm.com/1812/e/people/hull_detroit.html

"The only thought that seems to have made sense to his muddled mind was to immediately stop the advance of danger. He could do this by simply waving a white flag. The only decision he made that day was the one to surrender. "

I resent you calling General Brock "dim-witted", as he is one of the greatest Canadian war heros of all time (one of the few who can be credited with saving the fate of the whole damn country), but I wont hold it against you, .

Toronto Island, the link you posted and the post you made are completely different!

Tecumseh's "few hundred Indians" as you put it, were a large well armed force. They weren't the savages that you said they were.

Also, the fort wasn't given up without firing a shot. British cannons had rained on it for a long time, not to mention that dragging a military all around freezing Canada isn't good on morale.

Please, your post made it sound like the Americans defending simply gave it up when they heard that the "savages" were known for scalping. :D

Sorry about the insult though, I just finished watching Monty Python's Holy Grail and your post reminded me of the scene where the peasant scolds Arthur that "strange ladies lying in ponds distrubting swords is no basis for a system of government." No insult intended. :D


Veredia Our native soldiers during 1812 war (as far as I know at least) didn't scalp. And yes, that actually happened, although I forget the name of the battle (last I talked about it was in history class over a year ago). That's an example of the lack of information in American history class. Oh, and btw, you didn't win 1812. If you want prove, fly to Ottawa, and look at what flag is flying on the paliament building. I assure you, it isn't American.

Uh, yeah they did.

Fly to Washington, is a British or Canadian flag flying there? ;)

You did dream it. Paul Howard is not an Australian Politician. :rolleyes:
The name is JOHN Howard.

Damn, I got Canada and Australia mixed up again! :headbang: ;)

Compaired to american snipers Canadian snipers can shot the piss out of them. Hell a Canadian holds the longest shot record. That and if you look back in other wars Canadian troops were more ballsy than the american ones. Even the smaller nation can beat up a bigger nation. Besdies who was it that burned down the white house?


Not to mention in the past 110 years the Canadian Armed Forces has been involved with more wars the the US forces, and for longer in each war.
This includes:
Spanish-American War (1898): Canada not involved/ 1898 America Involved
Boer War (1899 - 1902): 1899 - 1902 Canada involved/ America not involved
World War One (1914 - 1918): 1914 - 1918 Canada involved/ 1917 - 1918 America Involved (Troops not in Europe until early 1918, and saw limited action.
All 3 Chinese Opium Wars (Spanning 1919 - 1928): 1921 - 1928 Canada involved/ 1926 - 1928 US involved in the 3rd Chinese Opium War
Spanish Civil War (1936 - 1939): 1936 - 1938 Canada involved/ America not involved
World War Two (1939 - 1945): 1939 - 1945 Canada involved (European, African, and Pacific fronts)/ 1941 - 1945 America involved (Same fronts as Canada).
Franco-Vietnamese War (1945 - 1954): Canada involved (2 companies attached to a French Batallion as part of a treaty with France)/America not millitarily involved.
Korean War (1950 - 1953): 1950 - 1953 Canada Involved/ 1950 - 1953 America Involved
American-Vietnamese War (1961 - 1975): 1968 - 1975 Canada Involved (Single Canadian company sent in to support US Ground Troops)/ 1961 - 1975 America Involved
Ango-Argentenian War (Falkland Islands, 1982): 1982 Canada Involved (in Commonwealth ground forces occupying the islands)/America not militarily involved
Panama Invasion (1989): Canada not involved/ 1989 America involved
First Gulf War (1990 - 1991): 1990 - 1991 Canada Involved/ 1990 - 1991 America Involved
Former Yugoslavian Civil Wal (1992 - 1995): 1993 - 1995 Canada Involved (And still has troops there)/ 1993 - 1995 America Involved (And no longer there as a millitary group)
Somalian Civil War (1992 - 1993): 1992 - 1993 Canada Involved/ 1992 - 1993 America Involved (However ceased major military actions within 2 months due to the infamous Mogadishu incident, and remained only for logistics support and SpecOps operations).
Invasion of Afganistan (2001): 2001 Canada Involved (And also happens to be the major military force in Afghanistan)/ 2001 America Involved(Troops removed in 2002 to move to another war)
Second Gulf War (2003 to present, hostilities still continue, thus this war is not technicly over): Canada Not Involved/ 2003 to present America Involved.

So, with a little math... that's about 70 out of the past 110 years Canada has spent involved durectly in wars. And that's about 37 years the US spent in wars in the past 110 years.

So... who's been in more wars?

I never said average Joe Canadian Business businessman would have a 50 cal. But the army sniper and and his buddies (present world sniper record: 2.43 klicks by a Canadian) would have access to said 50 cal rifles, and could fire off a shot or two, and get out before the area he's in is carpet bombed.

However, with seven million weapons, and 32 million people (take into account how many of those people are to young, to old, not fit, sick, mentally/physically disabled) and the number of people who have access to weapons and can use them goes up considerably, especially when you take into account the fact that not all would be willing to fight. I know for a fact that my grade at my High school alone could probably field 20-30 armed insurgents at least, the grade above, another 30. Our high school is kind of small also, so image the larger ones. Then when you get into the gangs in Toronto and the such, who have AR-15s and the like (I saw in the paper it said that AR-15s can be legally purchased for hunting up here, I don't know cuz the weapon was legal, but got stolen from a house by a gangster, who used it to spray a restaurant with fire) it equals up into a numerically considerable resistance, and since the US doesn't carpet bomb like it used to, it would present some significant challenges to the US. I'm not saying we would win, but by god, we'd at the very least ensure that a considerable number of the veterans check every nook and cranny for a canuck insurgent, and wake up screaming in the middle of the night for the rest of their lives, and obviously kill a few.

Yes, there is a US flag at Washington...because we never set out to conquer America. The war of 1812 was a defensive war against US imperialism. Of course probably more than one brit would have liked to conquer the US.

I hope this hasn't been brought up already, but I will anyways.

Number of Canadians who own rifles/hunting rifles: 9 Million.
Number of Canadians who would resist: 9 Million.
Number of Canadians who would resist after that first shot: 18 Million.

Why does it double you ask? Well I dunno, ever seen what a hunter can do to a soldier in the Canadian Wilderness? Want to? Invade Canada.

I even wrote a story about the US invading Canada... it involved me and my friend attacking US supply lines... as I really would. Its simple, a man with a hunting rifle, hiding in some tree's. He shoots, and kills a Soldier, and flee's into the wilderness. This continues on and on... and on and on...

Oh and lets not forget... AK-47's can cost a minimum of $25... I had $25 at the age of 10 along with a dislike of the US. The USA would be facing MASSIVE resistance... just like 1812.

In any area that is occupied by a hostile force there is always resistance. Just look back through history. The size and strength of the US forces may quell or severly limit the actions of any resistance, but it will exist. At least, initially.

I never said average Joe Canadian Business businessman would have a 50 cal. But the army sniper and and his buddies (present world sniper record: 2.43 klicks by a Canadian) would have access to said 50 cal rifles, and could fire off a shot or two, and get out before the area he's in is carpet bombed.

However, with seven million weapons, and 32 million people (take into account how many of those people are to young, to old, not fit, sick, mentally/physically disabled) and the number of people who have access to weapons and can use them goes up considerably, especially when you take into account the fact that not all would be willing to fight. I know for a fact that my grade at my High school alone could probably field 20-30 armed insurgents at least, the grade above, another 30. Our high school is kind of small also, so image the larger ones. Then when you get into the gangs in Toronto and the such, who have AR-15s and the like (I saw in the paper it said that AR-15s can be legally purchased for hunting up here, I don't know cuz the weapon was legal, but got stolen from a house by a gangster, who used it to spray a restaurant with fire) it equals up into a numerically considerable resistance, and since the US doesn't carpet bomb like it used to, it would present some significant challenges to the US. I'm not saying we would win, but by god, we'd at the very least ensure that a considerable number of the veterans check every nook and cranny for a canuck insurgent, and wake up screaming in the middle of the night for the rest of their lives, and obviously kill a few.

I don't bloody care how far you can shoot from and kill someone, what really matters is how far you can shoot a missile from and kill 20 guys!

Dostanuot Loj, Buddy all you did was name the major wars. Between 1800 and 1934, the USMC staged over 180 amphibious landings across the war.

LoL, don't even try to compare the Canadian Armed Forces to the United States Military.

Damn, I got Canada and Australia mixed up again! :headbang: ;)

that is why you would have a hard time ruling canada you dont know a thing about anything. dont shot yourself in the foot on the way up

Yes, but missiles require a target. One sniper who fires, kills, and runs off doesn't make an easy target. And a Canadian brigade in an even 1v1 fight with a US brigade could win. Our armour forces have won many competitions against your better funded armour forces, who also have better tanks (M1A1 Abrams compared to our now retired 40+ year old Leapords we bought simply because our other tanks got to the point where we had no other choice but to replace them). Our mechanized infantry are top of the line, and could go toe to toe with US mechanized forces anyday. Your marines may have more experience, but our soldiers simply seem to be naturally superior (since, as you've been saying, we obviously can't be better trained, cuz we have less funding)

Tecumseh's "few hundred Indians" as you put it, were a large well armed force. They weren't the savages that you said they were.

Also, the fort wasn't given up without firing a shot. British cannons had rained on it for a long time, not to mention that dragging a military all around freezing Canada isn't good on morale.

Please, your post made it sound like the Americans defending simply gave it up when they heard that the "savages" were known for scalping. :D


Lol, okay you got me. Shots were fired. I lied. But the point is, taking the fort was a "mere matter of marching"... (hmm, where have I heard that before *gets out history textbook*).

And of course I don't mean to imply that they actually were "savages". I only refer to them as "savages" with "quotation marks" (ahahaha... ha... heh... *sigh*). General Hull wasn't too fond of the natives, and likewise, they weren't too fond of Americans.

But you can't deny, General Hull surrendered without putting up a fight. Guess he wasn't very self-respecting, eh? ;)

Lol, it's alright, no offence taken on my part. As for the spirit of General Brock... well... :D

If the US attacked Canada the arm on the space shuttle would just go mad and smash the astronauts. Plus all the ATI cards would make games unplayable.
In that case, it's a damn good thing they're still grounded. :D

Yes, but missiles require a target. One sniper who fires, kills, and runs off doesn't make an easy target. And a Canadian brigade in an even 1v1 fight with a US brigade could win. Our armour forces have won many competitions against your better funded armour forces, who also have better tanks (M1A1 Abrams compared to our now retired 40+ year old Leapords we bought simply because our other tanks got to the point where we had no other choice but to replace them). Our mechanized infantry are top of the line, and could go toe to toe with US mechanized forces anyday. Your marines may have more experience, but our soldiers simply seem to be naturally superior (since, as you've been saying, we obviously can't be better trained, cuz we have less funding)


Please provide a link.

Look, an aircraft doesn't look around for the actual sniper, it bombs the crap out of a large killbox. Look, in a sniper vs. plane fight the plane always wins, trust me.

Now how could a Canadian brigade defeat an American armored brigade. One of the most important factors in tank battles is experience. How much experience do Candian forces have? American tanks faced off in one of the biggest tank battles of all time in the first Iraq War and outnumbered, easily defeated them.

Every military source will tell you that the US has the best armored brigades in the world. Don't even try and argue that.

The M1A2 Abrams and Leopard 2A5 are the best tanks in the world. However the Abrams will almost always defeat the Leopard in battle because the American crew is more experienced than the German, or in this case, Canadian.

And why do you keep saying that Canadian troops are "obviously superior" to American? That makes no sense at all.

How much action has Canadian troops seen?

American soldiers are better funded, better trained, better equipped, and have actually been in a war. There is no way Canadian troops are better trained! Please I am sick of arguing that point...

And Toronto Island, you do know what happened to brave Tecumseh in the end don't you? ;)

Well, I'm officially dropping out of this argument. Apparently a 12 year old bigot who quotes websites (Which you should know by now arn't very reliable, and would be laughed at as credibility in any university), and can't wrap his head around real military tactics. I have better things to do with my time, like study military history, the REAL military history that I'm working on my degree in at University. And while Im atit, I think tommorow I'll head over to the exact bar that the group of Canadians (Newfie's and a pair of Nova Scotianers led by an Ex-British officer technicly) came up with the idea to burn down the white house.

Well, I'm officially dropping out of this argument. Apparently a 12 year old bigot who quotes websites (Which you should know by now arn't very reliable, and would be laughed at as credibility in any university), and can't wrap his head around real military tactics. I have better things to do with my time, like study military history, the REAL military history that I'm working on my degree in at University. And while Im atit, I think tommorow I'll head over to the exact bar that the group of Canadians (Newfie's and a pair of Nova Scotianers led by an Ex-British officer technicly) came up with the idea to burn down the white house.

Woah, very mature way to drop out of an argument.

12 year old bigot, you got me there. :rolleyes:

And what do you mean, military tactics? The only point you have made is that the Canadians burned down the White House almost two hundred years ago...

Speaking of military tactics, if you knew anything about them you would know that the American Army would easily defeat the Canadian Armed Forces.

Good night to you sir.

*Cough* British burned down the White House, not Canada *Cough*
It isn't his fault he's confused. He's Canadian afterall. :p

Actually, it was a group of Newfoundlanders attached to the British forces. Why don't you all get your facts straight? And the United States launched five invasions of Canada during the War of 1812, all of which failed miserably (my American History textbook from New York tactfully ignores this fact), and the only battle you actually won was after the peace treaty was signed. Wow. Don't you feel proud?
Well technically you guys still weren't a nation. You were a collection colonies controlled by Great Britain. Therefore, the British burned the White House, not the Canadians. I rest my case. :D

And Toronto Island, you do know what happened to brave Tecumseh in the end don't you? ;)

Yes, it's a shame. Brock has his own monument with all the trimmings. When he was killed, both British and American cannons fired in salute.

They gave Tecumseh a rock with a very brief plaque.

So let us think, if America, for whatever strange reason, decided to invade Canada, do you think there would even be a fight to record, or do you think the Canadians would put up some form of resistance. Let us discuss.
Attack Canada? Why would we do that? I mean I thought they were the 51st state. ;)

They gave Tecumseh a rock with a very brief plaque.

LOL, I'm sorry but I can't help but laugh. General Brock was given a monument and Tecumseh got a rock...

Hehe..I'm sorry... :D

I never said obviously superior, I said naturally, :D lol. And as for the Abrams/Leapord 2, we don't have Leapord 2s, we bought Leapord 1s. As for a one brigade versus one brigade scenario, I guess I should have been more specific and said mechanized brigade (light armour/infantry forces primarily) Afterall, we don't have any tanks anymore. Oh, btw, I only said 'seem to be naturally superior' because you maintain that the average, standard US soldier is superior to a Canadian soldier in regards to training. However, Canadian troops are better trained, we integrate US special forces training into our normal basic training. As for the sniper/plane scenario, yes, if a plane is there, then it will take out the sniper, though it may need to bomb a good square kilometer of area to get said sniper. But, take into consideration the fact that snipers aren't stupid, and they might decide to fire when there is no fighter flying circles overhead. And besides, I have doubts about your pilots' competence, seeing how they killed four Canadians who were doing training exercises in Afghanistan. Note, the pilot had explicit orders to not fire on that area. As for the largest tank battle, well, lets see here, old PoS Soviet tanks, against vastly superior, top of the line, Abrams tanks used by the US...yeah, I can see how they won that battle.

I wanna know, how many of you "up in arms" would actually do what you said you would do. I'm not doubting Canadians, but im preatty sure most of you would not go out and basically have a big "KILL ME" sign. Sure, you take out3-4 americans if you lucky. (I do have to admit people in canada are very nice though)

Actually, it was a group of Newfoundlanders attached to the British forces. Why don't you all get your facts straight? And the United States launched five invasions of Canada during the War of 1812, all of which failed miserably (my American History textbook from New York tactfully ignores this fact), and the only battle you actually won was after the peace treaty was signed. Wow. Don't you feel proud?
Terrans, I got news for you. Most American History high school textbooks also devote typically a paragraph on the battle of Gettysburg. And that is in a reasonable good history text. Quite frankly they do a shitty job of telling history period. I mean how can you condense such a major battle into a paragraph or less? If you went to the battlefield at Gettysburg, like I did, you could spend months learning all the stuff that went on there and still not know everything about it.

ok a little info about warfare.
the tank even the great yanks last in a battle 10 sec. they are tied with the shortest life span the common trooper last 60 sec. it takes one shot from a grunt to take a tank out. its great what you can buy for $100 nowadays. the iraqi was was across and open battlefield it gives the tanker a good shot when you can see your target from such a great distance not so good in mountains

boom

I never said obviously superior, I said naturally, :D lol. And as for the Abrams/Leapord 2, we don't have Leapord 2s, we bought Leapord 1s. As for a one brigade versus one brigade scenario, I guess I should have been more specific and said mechanized brigade (light armour/infantry forces primarily) Afterall, we don't have any tanks anymore. Oh, btw, I only said 'seem to be naturally superior' because you maintain that the average, standard US soldier is superior to a Canadian soldier in regards to training. However, Canadian troops are better trained, we integrate US special forces training into our normal basic training. As for the sniper/plane scenario, yes, if a plane is there, then it will take out the sniper, though it may need to bomb a good square kilometer of area to get said sniper. But, take into consideration the fact that snipers aren't stupid, and they might decide to fire when there is no fighter flying circles overhead. And besides, I have doubts about your pilots' competence, seeing how they killed four Canadians who were doing training exercises in Afghanistan. Note, the pilot had explicit orders to not fire on that area. As for the largest tank battle, well, lets see here, old PoS Soviet tanks, against vastly superior, top of the line, Abrams tanks used by the US...yeah, I can see how they won that battle.

I think you have to spend more than $146 per man to integrate US SF training into your basic training?

I wouldn't doubt the competence of pilots because of some mistakes. I don't mean to sound cruel, you have my condolences that good Canadian soldiers were killed but friendly fire happens all the time. When you have that many planes in the air your going to have instances of friendly fire.

However, American pilots have completely succeding in wiping out Iraqi and Afghani ground forces don't you think?

Being Canadian, i would hope the u.s. wouldn't invade. But if in 20 years they do, i wouldn't suprise me. We have a huge amount of natural resources. But how would the U.S. invade? canada is far too large to occupy. it's massive, and the terrain is harsh in alot of areas. Canadians are extreamly patriotic, and would fight to the death. I dont think the United States would be at all able to accomplish their task if they did invade. it would end up a huge mistake. like when Napolien ( i forget how to spell.), and Hitler tried to invade Russia.
The Canadian ground forces may consist of a few ground hogs and beavers, and the air force may only be a few geese for now, but in the near future the conservative party of canada will come into power and drastically increase military spending. and canadian troops have a history of proving themselves in war time. examples are: 1812, WWI,WWII,Korea,Bosnia,Afganistan,And several other world conflicts. and of course canadians have experiance in this sort of thing. alot of the canadian forces are assigned as peace keepers around the world.
Thats what i have to say out here in vancouver.

ok a little info about warfare.
the tank even the great yanks last in a battle 10 sec. they are tied with the shortest life span the common trooper last 60 sec.
Say what? Try to use some grammar next time Calm Minds. I think I know what you were trying to say, but I'm not 100% sure.

Being Canadian, i would hope the u.s. wouldn't invade. But if in 20 years they do, i wouldn't suprise me. We have a huge amount of natural resources. But how would the U.S. invade? canada is far too large to occupy. it's massive, and the terrain is harsh in alot of areas. Canadians are extreamly patriotic, and would fight to the death. I dont think the United States would be at all able to accomplish their task if they did invade. it would end up a huge mistake. like when Napolien ( i forget how to spell.), and Hitler tried to invade Russia.
The Canadian ground forces may consist of a few ground hogs and beavers, and the air force may only be a few geese for now, but in the near future the conservative party of canada will come into power and drastically increase military spending. and canadian troops have a history of proving themselves in war time. examples are: 1812, WWI,WWII,Korea,Bosnia,Afganistan,And several other world conflicts. and of course canadians have experiance in this sort of thing. alot of the canadian forces are assigned as peace keepers around the world.
Thats what i have to say out here in vancouver.

Keep in mind that both Napolean and Hitler were very ill-prepared the United States won't be.

However I do hope that your conservative party will come to power, good luck to you.

Oh, we're nice, and friendly, and would rather not have a war. But when war comes...well, see how many people enlisted and what we did for foreign wars, and consider that a domestic terrorist threat consiting of two kidnappings and some mailbox bombings resulted in martial law. Now, think of what a foreign invasion would do. I can honestly state that a good 30-60 people from my high school alone would be armed and ready to fight. Also, we're not saying that our army would be the US', because we all know it wouldn't. What we're saying is that it would put up a fight before it got obliterated. Then, there would likely be a large scale resistance.

Canada is far too large to keep under wraps. In the interior, away from the cities, the U.S. wouldn't be able to keep anything under controll. Canadians are friendly people, and we try to be friendly to foriegners, but if they are trying to kick our asses, we'll drop the gloves and beat them like todd bertuzzi beat steave moore. (odds our against us though) we'll need some outside help.

As for the $146 per person for training...yes, we only have $146 dollars per person for training. Despite the fact that the clothing and the other things like that they give you costs more than that. Hell, you use more than a $146 worth of ammunition and fuel in training. Oh, and then theres the food, thats a helluva lot more than $146. Oh, right, the CADPATS uniform...thats more than a $146. Get that number out of your head, its near meaningless.

veredia, wat part of canada u in?

I always like this topic. Haha. What do you need to fight a war? Money. The U.S. currently has a record deficeit of 3 something trillion dollars. A war with Canada would cost a vast amount of money. They would need to enact a draft and pay to equip at least one million soldiers probably more, while the Canadian resistance, if any, would camp out in various terrain types and more than likely fight a guerilla-style resistance. Bottom line the war's winner the United States without a doubt, within about 2 months successfully secured all major Cities in Canada's 10 provinces and the Yukon along with minor cities in Nunavut and the North-West Territories but the successful occupation would take far longer than Iraq's will simply because of sheer size, just imagine it would be like looking for Osama in Afghanistan times 50,000 (or whatever the number is). But aside from all politics and economic issues the U.S. would win with somewhat of a bitter struggle

Southern Ontario, about a little over an hour away from Toronto, town called Milton.

Southern Ontario, about a little over an hour away from Toronto, town called Milton.


Kool.

Where are you from?

Where are you from?

North Vancouver B.C.

Uh, Colchus, I have a wee problem with you source. (Oh, and Canada's PM is Paul Martin, Australia's is John Howard. We're clear? :rolleyes: )
Now, you're citing the BUD MAN in that chart to indicate superiority of troops' training. However, looking at your source (http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/howtomakewar/databases/armies/default.asp#men) I found this explanation.

BUD MAN is the annual cost per man for armed forces in dollars. This is an excellent indicator of the quantity and, to a lesser extent, the quality of weapons and equipment. Some adjustments should be made for different levels of personnel costs, research and development, strategic weapons and waste. The United States, in particular, is prone to all four afflictions. The precise adjustments for these factors are highly debatable. One possible adjustment would be to cut the US cost per man by at least one third. Other nations with strategic programs and large R&D establishments (Russia, Britain, France, China, etc.) should be adjusted with deductions of no more than 15 percent. Britain could also take another 5 or 10 percent cut because of its all-volunteer forces higher payroll. At the other extreme, many nations produce a credible defense force using far less wealth. Low paid conscripts, good leadership and the sheer need to improvise enables many of these poorer nations to overcome their low budgets. However, most nations end up with what they pay for.

So, basically what it's saying is that your numbers don't necessarily prove superior training. Now, if we followed that suggested adjustment for the US, and reduced the cost per man by one third (the minimum suggested amount), it would be $162: more than Canada's $146, but not as significant as the numbers first suggest. Also, better equipment makes the real difference, which doesn't necessarily mean better training.
However, that being said, the US beats Canada in just about evey category, except for Traditon:
"Trad is tradition. Military tradition, good military habits, based on practical experience" Both rank a 7.
Now, a better indicator of quality of training would seem to be Exp:
"Exp is experience. Not just combat experience, but the quality of training"
The US rates an 8, and Canada a 7. Now, when one considers the fact that the US troops have a lot more experience than Canadian, the quality of training is probably equal, or actually in favour of Canadians. There is no explanation of how Experience and training are factored into the equation to come up with a number, so combat experience may put the US up a few points: who knows?

Its been said before but basically us Australians would probably join in to help out you canadians. It weird considering we have a treaty through our commonwealth but also we have the ANZUS treaty with the states(but I really dont think that means didleysquat!)
But anyways us Aussies would come to fight, we dont have a large standing army but we have a lot of reserves and our special forces are one of if not the best in the world(I read that somewhere but can't remember). We fight hard and look at some of the big battles of the world and you'll find us there doing our part!
Granted we are tiny in the world scale but we can supply all the beer and BBQ'S required and atleast we would make that war fun!

I would think it would take a couple of months, Canada has a pretty well equipped military but it just wouldn't be able to stand up against the American war machine.

Actually, we'd probably let you roll in without a fight. You would declare victory. Then we would peg your soilders off one by one from all around. Hmm, that sounds familiar, where did that happen recently?

There would also probably be a lot of "terrorists" popping up south of the border.

But anyways us Aussies would come to fight, we dont have a large standing army but we have a lot of reserves and our special forces are one of if not the best in the world(I read that somewhere but can't remember). We fight hard and look at some of the big battles of the world and you'll find us there doing our part!
Granted we are tiny in the world scale but we can supply all the beer and BBQ'S required and atleast we would make that war fun!
I'm sure the Australian contribution would be appreciated.... but you do know that we have four seasons up here, right?
Sitting out would be a wise choice, though... unless of course you guys are eager for another Suvla.

Well, I think that since America and Canada have the same dominant religion (christianity), speak just about the same english dialect, and for the most part, look and dress the same, it would be harder for a U.S. troop to kill someone who looks and talks like him than it would be an Iraqi or a North Korean who are almost opposites. Or I could be wrong. But with that kind of factor involved I'd think there'd be alot of upset people at home (America), and the whole hippie vibe would return but on a much larger scale.

The russian winter is quite hard, but the eastern canadian winter is much harder. Napoleon and Hitler had to back off in Russia due to the winter.
I'm sure canadian, even if they lost the conventionnal war would only have to wait for the winter, where the americans would simply freeze !

It isn't his fault he's confused. He's Canadian afterall. :p


Well technically you guys still weren't a nation. You were a collection colonies controlled by Great Britain. Therefore, the British burned the White House, not the Canadians. I rest my case. :D


Of course, if we were to go down that silly route, then you get to toss about half of your American History books out the window too....

America didn't win the war of independance, because they weren't a real country 'til after.

The Japanese didn't stage a suprise attack against the US at Pearl because Hawaii was still just a protectorate.

The Alamo isn't a part of US history. Neither are the pilgrims, Thanksgiving, or any of the early settlements - including things you hear about like the Boston Tea Party. Paul Revere is not an American Hero. He is just another Brit.


I could go like this for a loooooooooooong time.... is that the way you want your history edited?

ok a little info about warfare.
the tank even the great yanks last in a battle 10 sec. they are tied with the shortest life span the common trooper last 60 sec. it takes one shot from a grunt to take a tank out. its great what you can buy for $100 nowadays. the iraqi was was across and open battlefield it gives the tanker a good shot when you can see your target from such a great distance not so good in mountains

boom

Translate please?

Oh, we're nice, and friendly, and would rather not have a war. But when war comes...well, see how many people enlisted and what we did for foreign wars, and consider that a domestic terrorist threat consiting of two kidnappings and some mailbox bombings resulted in martial law. Now, think of what a foreign invasion would do. I can honestly state that a good 30-60 people from my high school alone would be armed and ready to fight. Also, we're not saying that our army would be the US', because we all know it wouldn't. What we're saying is that it would put up a fight before it got obliterated. Then, there would likely be a large scale resistance.


There is a big difference between being armed and ready to fight, and actually being skilled at fighting. Remember that movie Red Dawn, well that was a crock of bs. Yeah some high school kids armed with hunting rifles and ak's can defeat special forces.

Compaired to american snipers Canadian snipers can shot the piss out of them. Hell a Canadian holds the longest shot record. That and if you look back in other wars Canadian troops were more ballsy than the american ones. Even the smaller nation can beat up a bigger nation. Besdies who was it that burned down the white house?

the brits. not the canadians. :)

America didn't win the war of independance, because they weren't a real country 'til after.
So I guess declaring our Independence during the whole damn thing was pointless? I mean honestly at least the US had declared independence by the time the Revoluntionary War wrapped up. You guys weren't given some form of independence until what the mid-1800's (1867 I believe)? Even then Canada didn't gain full automony with the commonwealth until 1931. So quite taking credit. It isn't like I said a bunch of British soldiers came over in a rowboat, and crossed the Atlantic just to burn the White House. :rolleyes:

Besides I was making light of the whole arguement. I'm sorry you're wound so damn tight you can't figure that out.

the brits. not the canadians. :)
Don't even try. They're all convinced that they were Canadians. :rolleyes:

Still if they were ruled by Great Britain, despite living in what is Canada, it still makes them British. End of discussion. Thank you and good day. :p










Or would all you Canadians out there prefer Candian British or British Canadians? ;)

The Canadians didn't burn down the White House? According to Pierre Berton's Flames Across the Border the troops who burned the whitehouse were for the most part born in Lower and Upper Canada, and were known as CANADIANS. Not British. It's that Upper Canadian arrogance that led their name "Canadian" to be applied to the rest of the country after confederation.

In the same argument, George Washington was born in America, and was an American, even though he was born before the American revolution. However, if you consider Canadians British, then so was George Washington.

But, Americans do have a rather ardous history of fighting "Brother against Brother". If you can't even get along with yourselves, how do you expect the rest of the world to like you?

some canadian resistance, but not as much as we see iraq resisting.

http://cwd.ptbcanadian.com/ - A true Canadian World Domination Site :D

But, Americans do have a rather ardous history of fighting "Brother against Brother". If you can't even get along with yourselves, how do you expect the rest of the world to like you?
Are you upset? I'm asking because I get this sense of hostility coming from you. ;)

Are you upset? I'm asking because I get this sense of hostility coming from you. ;)

Nope, I think this thread is in need of a Fluffle. :fluffle: If everyone fluffled more often, the world would be much nicer, peaceful place. Much like Canada in fact ;)

LET'S END THE WAR OF 1812 HERE:

Alright, a couple of points before I make my way off to a party (keep in mind, I've had a few glasses of wine, I apologize in advance for typos, historical incorrections, and arrogant insults about Americans [something which is proudly part of Canadian culture]).

A) If you Americans are going to throw technicalities at us Canadians, and claim we weren't Canadians when we burnt down the White House, then technically, you weren't Americans when you started your little revolution, were you?

B) I'll admit, I don't know the exact statistics. It's certainly arguable whether or not the men who burnt down the White House were actually right off the boat from Britian, or whether or not they had been citizens of Upper (and Lower) Canada for a long time. It's just something I don't know. You Americans can pick that apart till we all die. But...

C) The point of the War of 1812 was this: To assimilate and conquer Canada, and control North America in it's entireity, as to avenge the unfair and cruel treatment of Americans by the British. But yet, a Canadian flag flies proudly over the Canadian capital of Ottawa. You did not win the War of 1812. Just admit it, and stop changing the subject.

Now I suggest we let the lines be drawn here. Canada still exists. America does too. You proved your point. The UK wont fuck with you anymore, so stop trying to prove Canada never fucked with you in the first place when you tried to take us over, and failed.

Let's let the War of 1812 go. Canada won. I'm sorry, but you LOST. We're still here. And we're not about to let you forget it.

And we'll be nagging you about it for the rest of your lives. That's just what we do. We're just that arrogant. We're just that annoying.

We're CANADIAN.

- - END OF WAR OF 1812 DISCUSSION - -

Thank you Toronto. And yes, there is a difference between ready to fight and being trained to fight. We would indeed be slaughtered by special forces, and individually we would do very little to an American soldier. However, you have to consider the numbers. While the kill/death ratio would be vastly in your favour, dozens of skilled shooters from long distances would be picking apart American infantry forces to a limited extent. Thus, while America would indeed win the actual combat, we would put a dent in your forces nevertheless, thats our main point. Although, we might even be able to get you to withdraw, though that would be a best case scenario.

Well, i think Dostanunot Loj is right: The entire world would help us (I live in Québec) fight the US army...

- - END OF WAR OF 1812 DISCUSSION - -
I got a better way to end this entire thread: Let's place Jamaica Reborn in front of a firing squad for even starting this whole damn thing. :mad:

And judging from the name this whole thread doesn't concern him. Unless that is Jamaica is planning on invading the whole of North America after a few of their citizens make sure Canada and the United States annihilate each other. :mad:

Oh seems I've stumbled upon something. Clever, clever Jamaica Reborn....... Now any last words before we annihilate your personage? :D




Jamaica Reborn :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5:



OH! Too late..........

We could simply make it a war the Americans are unwilling to fight. In the middle of Winter we Canadian Patriots could take out the Hydro dams in Quebec and the Oil and Natural Gas Pipelines in the West plunging the Northeast US into a freezing darkness and also deprive the other Northern States of large quantities of heating oil. Much of the US would be in a virtual economic ruin. Also remember, despite our Gun control regulations there are still over 50 million guns in Canada.

Plus, the Napoleon affect cannot be downplayed. There is no way for the US military to plan around the Canadian winter.

Much of the US would be in a virtual economic ruin. Also remember, despite our Gun control regulations there are still over 50 million guns in Canada.
And everybody here bitches about the US being violent..... :rolleyes:

I find the whole premise ridiculous considering how closely tied the two nations economies are.

Please, continue......that's right, argue some more about it. No one will ever suspect little ol' Jamaica arising to whoop everybody's ass while they fight amongst themselves....muahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!


:eek:
*dies*

NEWS ANCHOR:
But minister, it isn't like this film is the first troublesome thing to come out of Canada. Let us not forget Brian Adams a few decades ago.

CANADIAN MINISTER OF MOVIES:
No , the Canadian Governament has apologised on several occasions for Brian Adams .

Please, continue......that's right, argue some more about it. No one will ever suspect little ol' Jamaica arising to whoop everybody's ass while they fight amongst themselves....muahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!


:eek:
*dies*
:D
I knew it! Ha ha! I stopped it. I stopped Reborn's plot! Wooooooooo..........

Hey, what are all you looking at? Can't I celebrate? I just saved your asses people....................

:headbang:
Ok then, if you want to carry on, go ahead. Help them, help them I say. You'll be sorry though. Mark my words, you will be sorry!

Now excuse me while I procure some tickets to somewhere. Let's see. Mexico? Nah, too close. Brazil? No, those evil Jamaicans might strike there next. How about Europe? Some where in Africa? Asia maybe? The Pacific perhaps? Hmmmmmm..................................

I've stayed out of this one, because, well, it's silly.
Better question, what if Canada and the US declared war and no-one showed up.

President "I guess the war goes to you Paul, my guys couldn't make it, something about a rerun of a Baywatch episode that day"
Prime Minister " You couln't make it either George? Meant to call you, we were all watching the Red Green Show, sorry"

From where im standing I don't think anyone would come to help Canada. Most countries rely on US for transport to and from warzones (France can airlift 1800 troops in total). I'm thinking the US isn't gonna send to troops to Canada so someone can put a fight.

Also countries like NZ (where i live) simply don't have the money or military to send to Canada. Countries such as Britain, France etc rely on US for trade another deterrent to them sending help. The world would condemn the US but i don't think we would do much else

Remember the last time this happened? 1812, and we won! yes, Canada beat the US
too bad this wouldnt happen in the present
but it would cause world war 3 cause everyone loves Canada more than the US

Remember the last time this happened? 1812, and we won! yes, Canada beat the US
too bad this wouldnt happen in the present
but it would cause world war 3 cause everyone loves Canada more than the US
I think you had a little help from chaps in red coats then. And if there was a this time I think they would be wearing black and have a winged dagger on said uniform. So you might not get alot of help from the UK but it would be effective.
And anyway, where would all the US objector and cowards flee if the war was with Canada?

where would all the US objector and cowards flee if the war was with Canada?
Most likely Mexico (if they're lucky...)
Interesting idea tho
thank god this would never happen

If the US attacked Canada the arm on the space shuttle would just go mad and smash the astronauts. Plus all the ATI cards would make games unplayable.

Don't the ATI cards already make some games unplayable? :p

Yes, but missiles require a target. One sniper who fires, kills, and runs off doesn't make an easy target.

He does to a patrolling Apache using FLIR to aim and turn him into hamburger with the machine gun from a mile away. I'm sure there would be Canadian resistance, but we have our own gun nuts down here just waiting for a chance to see some action. :mp5: :p

Plus, the Napoleon affect cannot be downplayed. There is no way for the US military to plan around the Canadian winter.

Ummm... yes it can be downplayed. We have forces for harsh winter environments and resupply is not a problem at all with or without the road systems in place. It would be nothing like Napoleon/Hitler invading Russia. If you remember, the Russians just went east leaving nothing (essentially staying in the same climate they left). Canadians would have to run north into colder, less populated environments, leaving them to freeze while the US just occupies the southern cities.

Assuming that you're Canadian yourself, do you think underground resistance would continue even after Canada was occupied, or would you guys accept your fate.

Lets face it if we let them take over then we'd be able to buy weapons for the resistance at any 7/11. Plus most of us would rather risk our lives fighting in an undergroud resistance than drink American beer.

We'd put up a fight...for a very short while, there would undoubtedly be international outrage (although actual physical support is questionable at best, unless say China wanted an excuse to go toe to toe with the US). Don't forget, while our military is poorly funded and the recent budget increases are more for appearances than actual government support, since there's been some bad media attention regarding the horrific state of certain equipment. However, our airforce might down a few aircraft, the navy's frigates would put up a fight (they're pretty top notch, or so I've heard), and our mechanized forces are pretty good quality (the US uses our vehicles, the LAV 3, though they call them the stryker, but our LAV 3 APCs have 25mm cannons and grenade launchers on em) and our infantry equipment is pretty damn good to. Now, I'm not saying we'd win, because by all means, we wouldn't, but we'd definately put up a fight before we went down. Oh, and of course JTF-2 would go apeshit and knock out a good number of troops before they went down (all hail our snipers!)

It would go beyond that, our infanty is generally regarded as one of the best light infantry forces on earth, our mechanized forces are... decent, we have no tanks but they would be more a liability then an asset, Canada needs tank destroyers, not tanks.

Our snipers are up there with Russia and Israel(a Canadian holds the record for longest kill).

Our frigates, while considered some of the finest vessels of their class would be useless against an invasion from the south, after all, the thrust would probably be made through Ontario, nowhere near where they would be stationed.

Our air force are well trained, but slightly upgraded F/A-18Ls(a lightened F/A-18A modified for land use) would be eaten alive by much superior(in the air-to-air role) F-15Cs. Canada chose the F/A-18 because it was the best all-around fighter for the price with two engines.

(Had I been in charge I would of gone with a mix of F-15Es and F-20s, or, as I don't think the F-15E had entered production when the choice was made, the F-16A and F-20s, even though neither is twin engined... or maybe MiG 29s if only it were possible...)

Otherwise the US would crush our standing army by shear numbers and the situation would devolve into guerrilla warfare. Between that and American troops refusing to fight in large numbers (because they don't want to go to war with their neighbors, not because they're scared) the US would slowly back out and take over with their corporations who come to rebuild Canada instead.

Either way Canada winds up being the 51st-62nd states.

PS: Britain may or may not send forces which may or may not be enough to do dick-all.

And also surprisingly our M16 clone the C7 is used by the American forces. That and our snipers would damn well raise some major hell before they were taken down.
no it isn't don't make up facts

And everybody here bitches about the US being violent..... :rolleyes:

We own guns but we shoot deer and turkeys with them, not each other.

Owning guns =/= murdering with guns.

no it isn't don't make up facts

He's mistaken, the C7 is an M16 produced under licence in Canada and equipped with a scope. Some American units have scopes mounted on their M16s, they look identical but they're not.

We own guns but we shoot deer and turkeys with them, not each other.

Owning guns =/= murdering with guns.
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Do you see my rolling eyes? I WAS BEING SARCASTIC THANK YOU VERY MUCH! Now next time, think before you post.

I know this has been done a shitload of times, I just love seeing you guys go at it about this kind of stuff though.

So let us think, if America, for whatever strange reason, decided to invade Canada, do you think there would even be a fight to record, or do you think the Canadians would put up some form of resistance. Let us discuss.

Same answer as always. Western Canadians are (North) Americans. Eastern Canadians are French and/or government employees. We do not want their communist/socialist unions, and take New England, please (per, HennyYoungman)

Same answer as always. Western Canadians are (North) Americans. Eastern Canadians are French and/or government employees. We do not want their communist/socialist unions, and take New England, please (per, HennyYoungman)

We will not pay your socialist welfare taxes (to Quebec), but if (when) necessary We will defend Our part of North America, with or without your eastern libs.

We will not pay your socialist welfare taxes (to Quebec), but if (when) necessary We will defend Our part of North America, with or without your eastern libs.

The reason why the US does not currently own Mexico and Canada is because neither is worth it today. Western Canada will probably join the US first (by the vote of their residents, within 10 years, who consider themselves Western Americans). Eastern Canada will go bankrupt, and (probably) take KerryLand with it. NorthEastern US/Canada will tighten up (like Eastern Europe) and revive after socialists go away. Mexico will join (unwillingly at first, due to corruption). Ultimately, there will be the United States of America (South America will be sucked up too; why not). Sorry, too much info for most of you ("successful" gripers). Have your grandchildren use this for "practice" writing, and help them save/bury it for 30-50 years. You'll be dead, and they'll be rich, but they may remember to blame/honor you.

It would go beyond that, our infanty is generally regarded as one of the best light infantry forces on earth, our mechanized forces are... decent, we have no tanks but they would be more a liability then an asset, Canada needs tank destroyers, not tanks.

Our snipers are up there with Russia and Israel(a Canadian holds the record for longest kill).

Our frigates, while considered some of the finest vessels of their class would be useless against an invasion from the south, after all, the thrust would probably be made through Ontario, nowhere near where they would be stationed.

Our air force are well trained, but slightly upgraded F/A-18Ls(a lightened F/A-18A modified for land use) would be eaten alive by much superior(in the air-to-air role) F-15Cs. Canada chose the F/A-18 because it was the best all-around fighter for the price with two engines.

(Had I been in charge I would of gone with a mix of F-15Es and F-20s, or, as I don't think the F-15E had entered production when the choice was made, the F-16A and F-20s, even though neither is twin engined... or maybe MiG 29s if only it were possible...)

Otherwise the US would crush our standing army by shear numbers and the situation would devolve into guerrilla warfare. Between that and American troops refusing to fight in large numbers (because they don't want to go to war with their neighbors, not because they're scared) the US would slowly back out and take over with their corporations who come to rebuild Canada instead.

Either way Canada winds up being the 51st-62nd states.

PS: Britain may or may not send forces which may or may not be enough to do dick-all.

#51-62 = exactly the point.