100% agree, as an American citizen and veteran, on all allies putting up every brick wall they feel up to whenever Trump does his thing.
Here's the secret truth about the USA: the country is primed to break apart. I know, I know, that's crazy talk, but so was the USSR simply up and dissolving itself. Just take a close look at how geography, partisanship, economy, and culture all coincide in the USA on the national level.
The critical factor that Canada would be crazy not to consider when making the fateful choice in such an insane scenario is that the road to annexation would rip the USA clean in half. You would be facing not the USA, but whatever Red America could salvage from the wrecked Pentagon and spare from trying to subdue the West Coast, Northeast, and much of the Southwest.
Having correctly forecast more about my country's sad future than 99% of analysts to this point, I'm now very, very confident in this much: American unity, even within each partisan tribe, is a bluff. It's a society built on self-deception - if we can't come to a common understanding about the germ theory of disease, you aren't getting rank and file military members to obey orders to invade a democratic ally. That's the point where the federal government is clearly a threat to the Constitution that even most Red States fear.
It's simple, world: hold the line, call American bluffs, and remind the Blue States that if worst comes to worst, you'll back us standing up for our Constitutional rights.
Thanks so much for this and it matches my assessment. I’ve pushed hard for a decisive and direct Canadian response to Trump’s threats, partly for the reasons you’ve identified.
I agree, I think you would have a real internal struggle if your President moved militarily against Canada. I have a feeling that your president is testing the military by using them to round up people to deport. It could be to see if they would agree to move against the Cartels, but that kind of operation would break a lot of stuff, not just the bad guys. The Chinese curse has come true. We are living in interesting times.
Thanks for your thoughts on it. There was a movie called "Civil War", not the Marvel movie, that explored such a scenario despite being relatively superficial.
This is an honest question from someone with no military background: is there a point at which the critical mass of the US armed forces would follow the dictates of the president and the secretary of defense? The duty as I understand it is to the constitution and defense of the US. If the constitution is debased as much as it seems to have been in the first 10 days, the reference points of the last 250 years go out the window.
Is there a marked difference in the mission training between the forces? The drift is would there be a variance of adherence to the commander in chief's orders between the forces?
Is there a point where the professional military would step in to order their troops to stand down in the face actions ordered by the president? As BC6 noted, these are dangerous times and full discussion of dangerous scenarios seems to be warranted with appropriate framing and explanation.
That’s a hard question to answer because I get the sense a whole lot of professionals are quietly asking it and coming up with different answers. When one branch of the government asserts powers it doesn’t have under the Constitution, and the partisans who control it say otherwise… the situation is kind of screwed.
My wife, a trained attorney who works in senior university admin now, has been asked similar questions about how the law works in this situation. Her answer is simple: it doesn’t. Law presumes everyone will abide by certain rules, interpreted broadly the same way. What’s happening now is like a jury deciding to ignore established rules because its members happen to like one of the sides more.
That’s when you’ve stepped beyond the rules of normal politics and gone someplace really effing scary. It comes down to individuals choosing whose orders to consider legitimate.
This is why I expect most of what Trump is doing to hit a functional brick wall real fast. People in the government at all levels have no idea exactly what the rules are, but the mechanisms are all so byzantine now that it doesn’t take much to gum up the works. The Executive Branch can issue whatever proclamations it likes, but that doesn’t mean it can actually make pieces move on schedule.
However, that’s a deeply unstable place to be. My expectation continues to be effective fragmentation of the federal system - groups of states with a similar partisan lean (West Coast, New England) will start banding together to replace its functions out of necessity. And it’s going to take years for loyalists in the Pentagon to fill out enough positions that it might be remotely possible to use it against dissenting states. Trump is basically blowing up his own power - but it’s hard to say what will get broken as he flails.
Thanks for the comments. It's very hard to understand how we got to this place. One piece I read today by Daniel Drezner seemed to make sense and fits with what everyone is now observing (link following). The one observation that might give some hope is by Charles Blow of the NYT who maintains that at some point, the projectile vomiting of EOs will take a hiatus. We will need to be ready to take advantage when that happens (second link with gift article)
Annexing Canada would mean adding millions of Democratic voters, not a good thing. Many Canadians have been weened on free stuff and lies from the liberals.
I am a Reaganite, anti-Trump, Canadian conservative. I would vote straight Democrat out of spite as the surest way to destroy the United States from within.
It is not just the 51st state that would vote Democrat. Snowbirds in Florida and many other swing states would turn them solidly Democrat too. The Republicans would never win another election.
Good thoughts on the invasion. Wondering how much collaborators would come into play? I have seen this happen in Hong Kong and we have a general idea of how they operated based on WW2 history.
I agree, this is only a thought exercise. But I could easily see our absorption (as opposed to invasion) become a goal for some people in America, and we have lots of examples of how quickly a crackpot idea can be made mainstream if it’s platformed on the right outlets. Add in the inevitable sympathizers/collaborators in Canada (the ones flying Trump flags for example) and it could get ugly
Extremely well written and full of information as always. What's most important is that Canada have a suitable PM and clear headed military to navigate this situation. As dismal the outcome sounds for Canada, I can see how it wouldn't be good for the US of A either, just in different ways. I apologize, a relative just pointed out your perfect Angry Canadian Beaver logo. I'm 76 but sign me up for part of our resistance movement.
With the fracas over the attempt by our Office of Management and Budget to "pause" any and all grant-making programs by the federal government, the possibility of being able to whip up a new spin on the 1930s Bonus Army is probably pretty high. Providing logistics support for aggrieved people who suddenly find that Medicaid, Section 8 house, Medicare, and more have disappeared indefinitely would definitely help turn the screws. Facing a massed body of people like President Hoover did might thoroughly change his mind.
From what you describe, that sort of unconventional warfare *might* be something that could be accomplished with the resources at hand. There is a court hearing in progress in DC at the moment. If it doesn't stop the funding pause we're going to be facing our own economic chaos shortly.
Can't think of another Substack out of a hundred or so that generates a higher percentage of thoughtful responses and questions or a better blend of what is becoming known as "that Substack feeling", i.e. civilized discourse and dialogue with people who listen and often dialogue. And to think BC6 was wondering just a few weeks ago if this site would fly :-)>
My other thought (I have two) is that Ukraine did not believe it could or would happen, until it did. Putin wants a bigger empire, and the Orange One wants an empire of his own as well so he can strut his top dog stuff: Greenland, Panama and Canada run through his thoughts, loosely defined.
Putin thought Ukrainians would just roll over. Very wrong. Canadians have an advantage ref Trump... knowing how truly dangerous the world has suddenly become for democracies, a bit of time to signal loud and clear that a similar assumption on his part would be very wrong.
As part of my Masters I’ve been examining the infamous Defence Scheme No.1.
That plan was based on rapidly getting every WWI vet a rifle and scraping up enough kit for 11 to 15 Divisions of infantry to strike south and conduct a fighting retreat until the rest of the Empire/Commonwealth and Hopefully Japan to come to our aid. The problem was the planner didn’t get 109% buy in from:
a. The CGS - who was trying to work out what the role of the Militia was - home defence or expeditionary operations;
b. The RCAF and RCN;
c. The Imperial Defence Council - which was not convinced that Canada was defensible from the US in the 1860s, let alone after WWI; and
d. The Cdn govt - who had the same question as the CGS…
But yeah, the modern version would rely on a national resistance movement/insurgency forming and using the insurgency techniques learned in Afghanistan against former allies and would last only so long as the national will to resist exists, and convincing the US that our will to not become Americans will cost them more than they’d gain.
I was a reservist 1989-1993 and I’m well aware that my service has never been either welcome or taken seriously by anyone who’s served in Reg Force, but I feel I got 4 years of training in going toe-to-toe with the Warsaw Pact and I’m perfectly willing to fuck with the US Army and all its resources if the need and/or occasion arises.
Personally, given Canada’s vast area and its minimal population density, I feel the country isn’t effectively defensible. Vancouver has value as a Pacific port, but it’s not like the US also has Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles, etc. The GTA, as far as I can tell, has no strategic value apart from being an obstacle on the road from Detroit to Ottawa. We have the bulk of our mechanized forces centered on Edmonton and Quebec City, but it’s not like the US couldn’t make short work of our mechanized or air assets. This pains me to say, because I know a standing Canadian force would put up a hell of a fight, but ultimately it would be a lost cause.
I don’t often disagree with you. In fact, I don’t think I have until now.
In my opinion, I believe a post like this is teetering on the dangerous side.
- As curious as people may be; most will not/cannot comprehend envisioning such a scenario, especially at a time when tensions are high.
- IMHO I think the scenario(s) you’ve laid out are painted with a wide brush. There are so many factors involved that would be difficult to explain in one post. I believe there are a lot of smaller brush strokes that have been missed in such a broad scenario.
I do agree, absolutely, that the Canadian military should have been planning and spending at a 2% minimum years ago. I also know that when push comes to shove, Canada rises to the challenge.
More than fair. To be honest, I debated publishing this article, but I get asked about this subject a dozen times a day, so thought an *overview* might be useful.
The employment of military force is fraught with danger and uncertainty. As we used to say, no plan survives contact. It’s a point Trump needs to consider.
I knew you would understand my point of view. I also had some idea that you had struggled with posting it.
The great thing about meeting you and other, likeminded individuals through this, is knowing that we can have some debate and not resort to mindless name calling.
Most people I know in real life can only handle a small amount of the current news at a time, so seeing a possible scenario makes things too “real”.
You were absolutely right to publish this. You're provided a framework for considering the possibilities and tentatively assigned a few probabilities. That framework can and necessarily will change as events unfold, but it offers a way to orient careful thought and avoid impossibilities right from the beginning.
I haven't focus as much as I should have on military history, but one thing that comes up all the time is how small unpredictable things can totally change the course of history. IMO every Canadian adult should be educated in this kind of fantasy thinking plus hard facts. It would wake us up out of our political/military slumber. The alternative is to get steamrolled by the USA.
I’m definitely not diminishing Black Cloud Six’s professional knowledge on the subject of military battle. I’m merely concerned for the layman or civvie and how it may be ingested in the current, high stress atmosphere.
There is an entire National Readiness division that, hopefully, has operation and contingency plans. It should be quite extensive and now (if not before) include the US as a probable threat.
I just don’t want mass hysteria in the civilian population.
As a former senior Army operator/planner with access to the entire shebang, I can tell you Canada does *not* possess contingency plans that include the US as a threat.
That is not true. The US has tried to invade Canada on two previous occasions on both they did not fare well. These were many years ago. I cannot imagine the Canadian Military not wondering if the "Third Times The Cham" may be true and playing with ideas on how to stop them. It would make sense to keep that information close to the vest.
This is unfortunate. One thing that keeps me somewhat sane is stories my father used to tell me about the war games against the US forces. Canadians would wipe them quite consistently.
Hi Mission, I would 'argue' that access to this type of discussion, to laypeople or civvies, can be quite illuminating, and (in my case,) quite calming! I would posit that some/most of us that come to sites like BCS and take it in can take some reassurance from that you describe -ie: National Readiness, not having a related background to draw on. Otherwise, I am one of the 'inquiring minds' at this point who is trying to understand the scope and breadth of this discussion! (All of that to say, I (also) believe the type of civilians that could be prone to hysteria would probably not have found this post, let alone read this far down the thread! And I appreciate your taking the time to comment and show that concern!)
We’re here to THINK together. Stow the paternalistic “I just don’t want mass hysteria in the civilian population”. That was an utter failure during the pandemic. And since we’re talking insurgency, let me remind you of who those folks usually are - civilians.
Mission:, thanks for saying this, but I disagree with you. The reason this subject should be talked about, is because it is never a good idea to be silent when a tyrant if being a tyrant. It has never in the history of tyrants for the silent majority to stay silent, it has never worked out for them. When Trump said he didn't know what project 2025 was and he would never do those things, it is clear, by his first week in office, he was lying. Never be surprised when a lier, lies. Be very surprised and maybe afraid when he tells the truth.
It’s not that I want to keep quiet. I’m very loud when it comes to the current state of global politics.
I respect the hell out of Black Cloud Six and appreciate his voice and insight.
I know that Canada has been pushed in the past and has overcome. In WW2 Canada went from a total military count of 10,000 personnel total to 400,000 two years in.
So, I guess what I’m saying is that the average reader, without any insight or understanding, may experience an overwhelming feeling of loss or helplessness if they read an article like this.
Again, I am extremely vocal and would never meaningly disrespect BCS
I do not know if I am average — but that was not my reaction. I certainly have no direct military experience to call on. if anything — the way Black Cloud 6 framed the scenario — allowed me to think about it calmly; while earlier, I had been imagining similar scenarios but immediately got so stressed out I mainly felt disoriented as folks do when they are in a nightmare and trying to wake up out of it. So for me, reading the options was calming and allowed me to move (mentally). Suspect everybodies mileage may differ, depending on personality, life experience and where we are in a fight-flight reaction to a looming but unclear threat. We are one stressed out nation. Talking it through together helps. So thanks to everybody here speaking their point of view.
Not in Canada here. Every time some politician suggest we join the US or invade the US, that suggestion gets us to stop fighting amongst ourselves, just look at the Premiers. Just recently 12 of the 13 got together and agreed that we could not let the Trump's Tariffs tear us apart. I will be 70 this year and this is the first time that the Provincial Premiers suggested getting rid of the provincial trade barriers and everyone should now buy Canadian. There is now a web site were we can look up product, to find out were we can buy it from a Canadian store, or buy an equal Canadian product. We are just a big family that bickers and fights amongst ourselves until someone, not us, wants to take one of us on. I think if the USA tried to invade Canada they would find a standing army of 30 million people. We are not all armed, but per capita we have as many guns as the USA does. That surprises the crap out of a lot of people. That's why the 1812 war didn't go to well for the US invaders, the Generals didn't know who the enemy was. Personally I think this whole "Canada as the 51st State" is your president's way of renegotiating NAFTA. Anyway I hope that is all it is. Thanks for your input and comments.
I’ve always been frustrated we have not learned from the Finns. Their govt provides a number of free courses related to national support, such as wilderness survival, weapons training, emergency response etc. These courses are popular, they bring people from all walks of life together so build cohesion, builds and maintains national pride, AND makes Finland difficult to suppress. They could hold off the Russians for sometime to see if anyone comes to their aid, and if not, a large part of the public could make the occupation very painful. Canadians are too complacent to accept conscription, but free national service courses would be a good place to start combined with a strong media push (participaction was very successful if you’re old enough to remember)
Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Norway all have mandatory conscription (with Norway and Sweden including both men and women). I have heard that the conscription does wonders for building cohesion within society and learning new non-computer skills. But Scandinavia has another lesson for Canada in its focus on national resilience in the face of natural disaster or war. These countries have dusted off their communal bomb shelters and have circulated booklets (in electronic format and/or print) with clear guidelines of what to do in a natural disaster/war and the expectations for all residents in the countries. Here are the links to the English versions of the Finnish guide and Swedish guide : https://www.suomi.fi/guides/preparedness or https://rib.msb.se/filer/pdf/30874.pdf
2% or 5% don’t matter if Canadians don’t decide in large enough numbers to serve themselves by joining - Regular and Reserve are both chronically short-staffed, as you know.
And I agree that a conventional defence against the US in 2025 is impossible. The only realistic military deterrence is nuclear, and I don’t think it would take years to get a functional warhead - we already know how to do that and have the necessary raw materials. What would take time is the delivery system. Although worst case scenario you throw it in a U-Haul truck and drive it to the middle of whichever state supports Trump the most. No point nuking New York or Chicago - they’re already on our side.
One thing you didn’t discuss is whether the US military would even obey an order to attack an ally. Their oath is to the Constitution, not the president. And there is precedent - in the War of 1812 some state militias (Kentucky’s comes to mind) refused to cross the border.
As you say, though, I think this is all just a thought exercise. Even Trump himself explicitly stated he wouldn’t use military force against Canada - and although he’s obviously not trustworthy I don’t think he would have ruled that out unless he meant it. Chaos and bullying are his game, after all.
I hate to think about the idea; but am thinking about it. Problem I see is that though our nation has the raw technical capability ; the timelines are against us. Someone else mentioned it would take years — and we might not have years.
That someone was me. It would take several years in a crash program that occupied the absolute highest priority of the government. And that’s not accounting for the need for a delivery system.
Further Canada is a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which aims to limit the spread of nuclear weapons. I’m not sure the Canadian public would buy-in either.
100% agree, as an American citizen and veteran, on all allies putting up every brick wall they feel up to whenever Trump does his thing.
Here's the secret truth about the USA: the country is primed to break apart. I know, I know, that's crazy talk, but so was the USSR simply up and dissolving itself. Just take a close look at how geography, partisanship, economy, and culture all coincide in the USA on the national level.
The critical factor that Canada would be crazy not to consider when making the fateful choice in such an insane scenario is that the road to annexation would rip the USA clean in half. You would be facing not the USA, but whatever Red America could salvage from the wrecked Pentagon and spare from trying to subdue the West Coast, Northeast, and much of the Southwest.
Having correctly forecast more about my country's sad future than 99% of analysts to this point, I'm now very, very confident in this much: American unity, even within each partisan tribe, is a bluff. It's a society built on self-deception - if we can't come to a common understanding about the germ theory of disease, you aren't getting rank and file military members to obey orders to invade a democratic ally. That's the point where the federal government is clearly a threat to the Constitution that even most Red States fear.
It's simple, world: hold the line, call American bluffs, and remind the Blue States that if worst comes to worst, you'll back us standing up for our Constitutional rights.
Thanks so much for this and it matches my assessment. I’ve pushed hard for a decisive and direct Canadian response to Trump’s threats, partly for the reasons you’ve identified.
I agree, I think you would have a real internal struggle if your President moved militarily against Canada. I have a feeling that your president is testing the military by using them to round up people to deport. It could be to see if they would agree to move against the Cartels, but that kind of operation would break a lot of stuff, not just the bad guys. The Chinese curse has come true. We are living in interesting times.
Thanks for your thoughts on it. There was a movie called "Civil War", not the Marvel movie, that explored such a scenario despite being relatively superficial.
This is an honest question from someone with no military background: is there a point at which the critical mass of the US armed forces would follow the dictates of the president and the secretary of defense? The duty as I understand it is to the constitution and defense of the US. If the constitution is debased as much as it seems to have been in the first 10 days, the reference points of the last 250 years go out the window.
Is there a marked difference in the mission training between the forces? The drift is would there be a variance of adherence to the commander in chief's orders between the forces?
Is there a point where the professional military would step in to order their troops to stand down in the face actions ordered by the president? As BC6 noted, these are dangerous times and full discussion of dangerous scenarios seems to be warranted with appropriate framing and explanation.
That’s a hard question to answer because I get the sense a whole lot of professionals are quietly asking it and coming up with different answers. When one branch of the government asserts powers it doesn’t have under the Constitution, and the partisans who control it say otherwise… the situation is kind of screwed.
My wife, a trained attorney who works in senior university admin now, has been asked similar questions about how the law works in this situation. Her answer is simple: it doesn’t. Law presumes everyone will abide by certain rules, interpreted broadly the same way. What’s happening now is like a jury deciding to ignore established rules because its members happen to like one of the sides more.
That’s when you’ve stepped beyond the rules of normal politics and gone someplace really effing scary. It comes down to individuals choosing whose orders to consider legitimate.
This is why I expect most of what Trump is doing to hit a functional brick wall real fast. People in the government at all levels have no idea exactly what the rules are, but the mechanisms are all so byzantine now that it doesn’t take much to gum up the works. The Executive Branch can issue whatever proclamations it likes, but that doesn’t mean it can actually make pieces move on schedule.
However, that’s a deeply unstable place to be. My expectation continues to be effective fragmentation of the federal system - groups of states with a similar partisan lean (West Coast, New England) will start banding together to replace its functions out of necessity. And it’s going to take years for loyalists in the Pentagon to fill out enough positions that it might be remotely possible to use it against dissenting states. Trump is basically blowing up his own power - but it’s hard to say what will get broken as he flails.
I wrote a piece last week about illegal orders and how the military views them. I used a Canadian context, but it can be applied to others as well.
In a nutshell, an order has to be *manifestly* illegal to be disobeyed.
Thanks for the comments. It's very hard to understand how we got to this place. One piece I read today by Daniel Drezner seemed to make sense and fits with what everyone is now observing (link following). The one observation that might give some hope is by Charles Blow of the NYT who maintains that at some point, the projectile vomiting of EOs will take a hiatus. We will need to be ready to take advantage when that happens (second link with gift article)
https://open.substack.com/pub/danieldrezner/p/the-trouble-with-taking-trump-seriously?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=x56vk
Stop Feeling Stunned and Wounded, Liberals. It’s Time to Fight Back. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/29/opinion/democrats-trump-resistance.html?unlocked_article_code=1.tE4.t_rU._2njxAUPi574
Does that mean that Canada would end up becoming a participant in an American civil war between red and blue states?
If the USA attacked Canada, then yeah.
Annexing Canada would mean adding millions of Democratic voters, not a good thing. Many Canadians have been weened on free stuff and lies from the liberals.
I am a Reaganite, anti-Trump, Canadian conservative. I would vote straight Democrat out of spite as the surest way to destroy the United States from within.
It is not just the 51st state that would vote Democrat. Snowbirds in Florida and many other swing states would turn them solidly Democrat too. The Republicans would never win another election.
Even partisans see reason sometimes
Good thoughts on the invasion. Wondering how much collaborators would come into play? I have seen this happen in Hong Kong and we have a general idea of how they operated based on WW2 history.
I agree, this is only a thought exercise. But I could easily see our absorption (as opposed to invasion) become a goal for some people in America, and we have lots of examples of how quickly a crackpot idea can be made mainstream if it’s platformed on the right outlets. Add in the inevitable sympathizers/collaborators in Canada (the ones flying Trump flags for example) and it could get ugly
I agree. However, there's also a lot of Americans who have our Canadian more moderate tendencies.
Extremely well written and full of information as always. What's most important is that Canada have a suitable PM and clear headed military to navigate this situation. As dismal the outcome sounds for Canada, I can see how it wouldn't be good for the US of A either, just in different ways. I apologize, a relative just pointed out your perfect Angry Canadian Beaver logo. I'm 76 but sign me up for part of our resistance movement.
With the fracas over the attempt by our Office of Management and Budget to "pause" any and all grant-making programs by the federal government, the possibility of being able to whip up a new spin on the 1930s Bonus Army is probably pretty high. Providing logistics support for aggrieved people who suddenly find that Medicaid, Section 8 house, Medicare, and more have disappeared indefinitely would definitely help turn the screws. Facing a massed body of people like President Hoover did might thoroughly change his mind.
From what you describe, that sort of unconventional warfare *might* be something that could be accomplished with the resources at hand. There is a court hearing in progress in DC at the moment. If it doesn't stop the funding pause we're going to be facing our own economic chaos shortly.
As you conclude, we should be doing this now, demonstrating that we can be a Thorne in tRumps side. He is a bully!!!!
Can't think of another Substack out of a hundred or so that generates a higher percentage of thoughtful responses and questions or a better blend of what is becoming known as "that Substack feeling", i.e. civilized discourse and dialogue with people who listen and often dialogue. And to think BC6 was wondering just a few weeks ago if this site would fly :-)>
My other thought (I have two) is that Ukraine did not believe it could or would happen, until it did. Putin wants a bigger empire, and the Orange One wants an empire of his own as well so he can strut his top dog stuff: Greenland, Panama and Canada run through his thoughts, loosely defined.
Putin thought Ukrainians would just roll over. Very wrong. Canadians have an advantage ref Trump... knowing how truly dangerous the world has suddenly become for democracies, a bit of time to signal loud and clear that a similar assumption on his part would be very wrong.
As part of my Masters I’ve been examining the infamous Defence Scheme No.1.
That plan was based on rapidly getting every WWI vet a rifle and scraping up enough kit for 11 to 15 Divisions of infantry to strike south and conduct a fighting retreat until the rest of the Empire/Commonwealth and Hopefully Japan to come to our aid. The problem was the planner didn’t get 109% buy in from:
a. The CGS - who was trying to work out what the role of the Militia was - home defence or expeditionary operations;
b. The RCAF and RCN;
c. The Imperial Defence Council - which was not convinced that Canada was defensible from the US in the 1860s, let alone after WWI; and
d. The Cdn govt - who had the same question as the CGS…
But yeah, the modern version would rely on a national resistance movement/insurgency forming and using the insurgency techniques learned in Afghanistan against former allies and would last only so long as the national will to resist exists, and convincing the US that our will to not become Americans will cost them more than they’d gain.
I was a reservist 1989-1993 and I’m well aware that my service has never been either welcome or taken seriously by anyone who’s served in Reg Force, but I feel I got 4 years of training in going toe-to-toe with the Warsaw Pact and I’m perfectly willing to fuck with the US Army and all its resources if the need and/or occasion arises.
Personally, given Canada’s vast area and its minimal population density, I feel the country isn’t effectively defensible. Vancouver has value as a Pacific port, but it’s not like the US also has Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles, etc. The GTA, as far as I can tell, has no strategic value apart from being an obstacle on the road from Detroit to Ottawa. We have the bulk of our mechanized forces centered on Edmonton and Quebec City, but it’s not like the US couldn’t make short work of our mechanized or air assets. This pains me to say, because I know a standing Canadian force would put up a hell of a fight, but ultimately it would be a lost cause.
I’m grateful for your posts, man. Thank you 🙏
BCS,
I don’t often disagree with you. In fact, I don’t think I have until now.
In my opinion, I believe a post like this is teetering on the dangerous side.
- As curious as people may be; most will not/cannot comprehend envisioning such a scenario, especially at a time when tensions are high.
- IMHO I think the scenario(s) you’ve laid out are painted with a wide brush. There are so many factors involved that would be difficult to explain in one post. I believe there are a lot of smaller brush strokes that have been missed in such a broad scenario.
I do agree, absolutely, that the Canadian military should have been planning and spending at a 2% minimum years ago. I also know that when push comes to shove, Canada rises to the challenge.
With all due respect
More than fair. To be honest, I debated publishing this article, but I get asked about this subject a dozen times a day, so thought an *overview* might be useful.
The employment of military force is fraught with danger and uncertainty. As we used to say, no plan survives contact. It’s a point Trump needs to consider.
I knew you would understand my point of view. I also had some idea that you had struggled with posting it.
The great thing about meeting you and other, likeminded individuals through this, is knowing that we can have some debate and not resort to mindless name calling.
Most people I know in real life can only handle a small amount of the current news at a time, so seeing a possible scenario makes things too “real”.
With Hegseth in command, they’re FUBAR anyways. 😂
You were absolutely right to publish this. You're provided a framework for considering the possibilities and tentatively assigned a few probabilities. That framework can and necessarily will change as events unfold, but it offers a way to orient careful thought and avoid impossibilities right from the beginning.
I haven't focus as much as I should have on military history, but one thing that comes up all the time is how small unpredictable things can totally change the course of history. IMO every Canadian adult should be educated in this kind of fantasy thinking plus hard facts. It would wake us up out of our political/military slumber. The alternative is to get steamrolled by the USA.
Hi Sandra,
I’m definitely not diminishing Black Cloud Six’s professional knowledge on the subject of military battle. I’m merely concerned for the layman or civvie and how it may be ingested in the current, high stress atmosphere.
There is an entire National Readiness division that, hopefully, has operation and contingency plans. It should be quite extensive and now (if not before) include the US as a probable threat.
I just don’t want mass hysteria in the civilian population.
As a former senior Army operator/planner with access to the entire shebang, I can tell you Canada does *not* possess contingency plans that include the US as a threat.
That is not true. The US has tried to invade Canada on two previous occasions on both they did not fare well. These were many years ago. I cannot imagine the Canadian Military not wondering if the "Third Times The Cham" may be true and playing with ideas on how to stop them. It would make sense to keep that information close to the vest.
Reread my post just above yours.
There are no plans.
This is unfortunate. One thing that keeps me somewhat sane is stories my father used to tell me about the war games against the US forces. Canadians would wipe them quite consistently.
Is this still the case?
On exercise, usually. Our troops were, and are, probably the best on the planet…and I mean that sincerely.
I would be very interested in knowing how many shots were fired for each confirmed kill in Afghanistan, For all the coalition forces.
Hi Mission, I would 'argue' that access to this type of discussion, to laypeople or civvies, can be quite illuminating, and (in my case,) quite calming! I would posit that some/most of us that come to sites like BCS and take it in can take some reassurance from that you describe -ie: National Readiness, not having a related background to draw on. Otherwise, I am one of the 'inquiring minds' at this point who is trying to understand the scope and breadth of this discussion! (All of that to say, I (also) believe the type of civilians that could be prone to hysteria would probably not have found this post, let alone read this far down the thread! And I appreciate your taking the time to comment and show that concern!)
We’re here to THINK together. Stow the paternalistic “I just don’t want mass hysteria in the civilian population”. That was an utter failure during the pandemic. And since we’re talking insurgency, let me remind you of who those folks usually are - civilians.
My thoughts entirely! I'm so happy to have found BCS, to have access to these collective inputs.
Mission:, thanks for saying this, but I disagree with you. The reason this subject should be talked about, is because it is never a good idea to be silent when a tyrant if being a tyrant. It has never in the history of tyrants for the silent majority to stay silent, it has never worked out for them. When Trump said he didn't know what project 2025 was and he would never do those things, it is clear, by his first week in office, he was lying. Never be surprised when a lier, lies. Be very surprised and maybe afraid when he tells the truth.
Hi Gerry,
It’s not that I want to keep quiet. I’m very loud when it comes to the current state of global politics.
I respect the hell out of Black Cloud Six and appreciate his voice and insight.
I know that Canada has been pushed in the past and has overcome. In WW2 Canada went from a total military count of 10,000 personnel total to 400,000 two years in.
So, I guess what I’m saying is that the average reader, without any insight or understanding, may experience an overwhelming feeling of loss or helplessness if they read an article like this.
Again, I am extremely vocal and would never meaningly disrespect BCS
I do not know if I am average — but that was not my reaction. I certainly have no direct military experience to call on. if anything — the way Black Cloud 6 framed the scenario — allowed me to think about it calmly; while earlier, I had been imagining similar scenarios but immediately got so stressed out I mainly felt disoriented as folks do when they are in a nightmare and trying to wake up out of it. So for me, reading the options was calming and allowed me to move (mentally). Suspect everybodies mileage may differ, depending on personality, life experience and where we are in a fight-flight reaction to a looming but unclear threat. We are one stressed out nation. Talking it through together helps. So thanks to everybody here speaking their point of view.
Not in Canada here. Every time some politician suggest we join the US or invade the US, that suggestion gets us to stop fighting amongst ourselves, just look at the Premiers. Just recently 12 of the 13 got together and agreed that we could not let the Trump's Tariffs tear us apart. I will be 70 this year and this is the first time that the Provincial Premiers suggested getting rid of the provincial trade barriers and everyone should now buy Canadian. There is now a web site were we can look up product, to find out were we can buy it from a Canadian store, or buy an equal Canadian product. We are just a big family that bickers and fights amongst ourselves until someone, not us, wants to take one of us on. I think if the USA tried to invade Canada they would find a standing army of 30 million people. We are not all armed, but per capita we have as many guns as the USA does. That surprises the crap out of a lot of people. That's why the 1812 war didn't go to well for the US invaders, the Generals didn't know who the enemy was. Personally I think this whole "Canada as the 51st State" is your president's way of renegotiating NAFTA. Anyway I hope that is all it is. Thanks for your input and comments.
Excellent. My partner (a 40-year veteran in an occupation that knows stuff), and I totally agree. Thanks for putting this together.
I’ve always been frustrated we have not learned from the Finns. Their govt provides a number of free courses related to national support, such as wilderness survival, weapons training, emergency response etc. These courses are popular, they bring people from all walks of life together so build cohesion, builds and maintains national pride, AND makes Finland difficult to suppress. They could hold off the Russians for sometime to see if anyone comes to their aid, and if not, a large part of the public could make the occupation very painful. Canadians are too complacent to accept conscription, but free national service courses would be a good place to start combined with a strong media push (participaction was very successful if you’re old enough to remember)
Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Norway all have mandatory conscription (with Norway and Sweden including both men and women). I have heard that the conscription does wonders for building cohesion within society and learning new non-computer skills. But Scandinavia has another lesson for Canada in its focus on national resilience in the face of natural disaster or war. These countries have dusted off their communal bomb shelters and have circulated booklets (in electronic format and/or print) with clear guidelines of what to do in a natural disaster/war and the expectations for all residents in the countries. Here are the links to the English versions of the Finnish guide and Swedish guide : https://www.suomi.fi/guides/preparedness or https://rib.msb.se/filer/pdf/30874.pdf
This stack convinced me to subscribe.
2% or 5% don’t matter if Canadians don’t decide in large enough numbers to serve themselves by joining - Regular and Reserve are both chronically short-staffed, as you know.
And I agree that a conventional defence against the US in 2025 is impossible. The only realistic military deterrence is nuclear, and I don’t think it would take years to get a functional warhead - we already know how to do that and have the necessary raw materials. What would take time is the delivery system. Although worst case scenario you throw it in a U-Haul truck and drive it to the middle of whichever state supports Trump the most. No point nuking New York or Chicago - they’re already on our side.
One thing you didn’t discuss is whether the US military would even obey an order to attack an ally. Their oath is to the Constitution, not the president. And there is precedent - in the War of 1812 some state militias (Kentucky’s comes to mind) refused to cross the border.
As you say, though, I think this is all just a thought exercise. Even Trump himself explicitly stated he wouldn’t use military force against Canada - and although he’s obviously not trustworthy I don’t think he would have ruled that out unless he meant it. Chaos and bullying are his game, after all.
Maybe strategic nuclear weapons is the answer, as a deterrent force? I do not for-see the world getting more stable & predictable, let alone the US.
I hate to think about the idea; but am thinking about it. Problem I see is that though our nation has the raw technical capability ; the timelines are against us. Someone else mentioned it would take years — and we might not have years.
That someone was me. It would take several years in a crash program that occupied the absolute highest priority of the government. And that’s not accounting for the need for a delivery system.
Further Canada is a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which aims to limit the spread of nuclear weapons. I’m not sure the Canadian public would buy-in either.
So, conventional it is…
Ahh … thought it was you; but could not recall where …. Substack needs better search