A Canadian's Perspective on US Behavior Since the Trump Regime Was Installed | Hacker News Reader

A Canadian's Perspective on US Behavior Since the Trump Regime Was Installed

writer.oliphant.social

55 pointslatexr26 comments

What are Canada’s options for successfully resisting a US invasion? I imagine it could call on NATO and UK military support? Support from other commonwealth nations? It seems it would be outmatched by the US military might. I think its only real hope is that US military personnel would refuse to obey orders to attack our neighbors.

I really hope this doesn’t come to pass. Part of me has always expected the US to attempt this. I thought there could be a point in which climate change would become so bad and water and resources so scarce that the US would find it irresistible. I thought this scenario, if it happened, would be decades from now. It’s surreal to see it playing out. My SO is Canadian and if it happened, we would likely plan our own AmeriExit, for our family.

There is 0 chance American military would resist those orders. They would obey.

Before the attack, there would be period of economic was and vilification of Canada. They would believe all of that and blame Canada for US economic problems. That process already started.

There would also be a period of replacing leadership and members by loyalists... that already started to happen too.

"...would be outmatched by the US military might." Such as in Korea, Vietnam or Afghanistan? Perhaps Canada could become the US version of Ukraine?

Unlike any of those countries, the majority of Canada's population lives almost touching the border. And most of that is in a single strip. They also don't have an environment conducive to guerilla warfare.

The advantage they do have is a modern military and, maybe, French nukes.

Any modern leader not thinking of nuclear proliferation as a form of self defense at this point is a fool.

Invading Canada may cause a civil war yo erupt in the US, or at least it might be one of the outcomes with the highest chance of success.

Question for Americans here: is the idea of the U.S. annexing Canada within a 4-year Trump presidency even remotely realistic?

Assuming Democrats return to power in 2028 and reverse course, could such a drastic move even be attempted in that time frame?

Additionally, wouldn’t Republicans need full Congressional support to initiate something like this? If not, what is the actual strategic thinking of the current Republican party in terms of foreign policy ambitions?

I'm trying to understand whether there's any political/strategic framework where something like this is even being considered, or if it's just a negotiation tactic for tariffs..

Unfortunately, you're still operating in the land of norms. We don't know, he's moving so fast and breaking so many laws and gutting so many institutions and making so many threats and ideas that we just cannot keep up.

At this point, your assumption of even having elections in 2028 could be faulty. Remember, there was an attempt overthrow the US government in 2021 by Trump.

But to answer your question: he can basically do anything he wants and the only thing that could stop him is mass refusals or the Republicans in legislation. There is nothing else.

> your assumption of even having elections in 2028 could be faulty.

The 2026 midterms will likely be compromised too. Remember that Trump has pardoned all J6 rioters. One can now expect more hardcore MAGA folks to come out of the woodwork to destroy voting booths in Democrat-leaning constituencies, knowing that they won't suffer any consequences.

If the US does something as bold and illegal as attacking Canada, there’s no fucking way free and fair elections are happening again.

Military Strength isn't military power. For an action to be successful you need willpower behind your resources. Prompts like 9/11 buy you a lot of will but I don't think Canada's tariffs are going to pull the same levers in the minds of everyday Americans. Maple syrup is good, but not that good.

Honestly I'd expect the union to break apart and civil war before an invasion on Canada were possible. Lots of rich blue states up north too.

Night of Camp David by Fletcher Knebel, 1965. U.S. president's cabinet realized he was insane because of his obsession to annex Canada.

I've wondered for some time what most explains people's willingness to hand over nuclear codes to an obviously insane man, for a second time, knowing he's a rapist, a felon, and a vile insurrectionist. He's a persistently untrustworthy liar, and support for this nonsense keeps growing rather than being rejected.

Is it something like mass hysteria? Is his malignant narcissism somehow contagious and becomes collective narcissism?

A war with Canada tells me there's not much, if any, humanity left to save in the United States. Therefore I sooner believe it's a trap.

> ...regime was installed

Someone seems seriously upset here.

Why do you say that? Because of the word "regime"? I mean, Trump’s early term is notable enough that it could be considered a rupture of the previous US regime. None of the usual checks and balances seem to apply anymore, and executive orders are apparently law now.

Well yes, I think that’s very much the point of the article…

This quote probably makes it a little bit clearer though if any doubt remains:

> “We're angry. We're really, really fucking angry.”

He's threatening to invade their country!? Are you serious?

I've been trying to reason over this. I don't think Trump is insane or as stupid as they media is trying to paint him and I think some of the actions he will take will be taken by democrats too (ie: the tariffs on China).

I think if China continues its rise, the old world model positioned by the US (and its "allies") is pretty much dead. In this world, it would make sense for the US to concentrate resources near its vicinity (Canada, Greenland, Mexico) and only fortify positions in its continent (North and South America).

He is highly immoral and your "makes sense" is just apology for literally trying to start a war.

I am not from the US, so I am not trying to be apologetic for anyone. His moral stance is irrelevant if you just want to weigh the odds of a war happening. At the end of the day, most of the world is run by interests and if the majority of interests are aligned against yours, you have to reconsider your position.

> I am not from the US, so I am not trying to be apologetic for anyone.

You do not have to be from country X to produce apology for them.

> His moral stance is irrelevant if you just want to weigh the odds of a war happening.

It is super relevant. With a moral person as a president, the attempt for annexation and steal wont happen. With immoral one, it is significantly more likely.

> At the end of the day, most of the world is run by interests

Current American politics is highly emotions driven. Trump, Musk, Vance ... they are all very emotional people rather then cold calculators. A lot if not everything is about how they feel.

It matters when you have a rabid, screaming fanbase who ignores even blatant in your face contradictions and fellates everything God, I mean, Trump says.

Making enemies of Canadians is in fact an insane, stupid way to "concentrate resources", the country has been a strong and very aligned ally of the US for decades.

Ah, yes, we strengthen our position in the world order and convince countries to stand against China by...

Destroying all trade alliances, removing all reinforcers of soft power, making our weapons exports suspect, and threatening (nuclear) war against our allies.

Your plan is stunningly brilliant.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com