At issue is the NATO two per cent doctrine. That calls for NATO nations to spend two per cent of their GDP on defence.
At issue is the NATO two per cent doctrine. That calls for NATO nations to spend two per cent of their GDP on defence.
American politicians, along with retired Canadian generals and Ottawa think tanks who receive funding from the arms industry, have used that to hammer Canada as a failure on defence.
Defence Minister Bill Blair has recounted how hard it is to try to convince cabinet as well as Canadians about the need to meet the two per cent commitment because “nobody knows what that means.”
Add to that mix the current fiscal environment and ongoing concerns from Canadians who have been struggling financially. Directing tens of billions of tax dollars into more tanks, submarines and fighter jets isn’t a top priority among Canadian families.
No matter how much equipment we purchased, it wouldn’t be enough. We would go down fighting. Half of the people here are so brainwashed, they’d be more likely to team up with the trump/putin alliance than defend Canada. It looks bad.
We would not get state level military support from any ally. China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and Cuba might help us.
The type of build up that would be effective (if it could even be called that) against a US invasion would be sapping roads and bridges like Switzerland, and transforming our army into a resistance/insurgency force. Should we re allocate our spending towards these aims?
It seems a little premature.
Maybe we should actually invest in helping Canadians (and Americans) engage with and value democracy and human rights.
We don’t have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. We don’t need more taxes. We could tax away the entirety of the wealth of our richest citizens and it’d only cover our federal+provincial deficits for 2-3 decades at most.
Something structural with our spending needs to change.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
We need to build up in case of a trump win in the US. He may well order US military action against Canada.
Yeah, we need to remain strong in the face of the fascists who would gladly betray Canada.
We do. And, they will if given the opportunity.
I agree that force is the only language fascists understand, But what would preparing Canada for a US invasion look like?
No matter how much equipment we purchased, it wouldn’t be enough. We would go down fighting. Half of the people here are so brainwashed, they’d be more likely to team up with the trump/putin alliance than defend Canada. It looks bad.
…
So how much should we build up? Or did you mean build up international alliances?
Both. We can build up enough to fight back with allies.
We would not get state level military support from any ally. China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and Cuba might help us.
The type of build up that would be effective (if it could even be called that) against a US invasion would be sapping roads and bridges like Switzerland, and transforming our army into a resistance/insurgency force. Should we re allocate our spending towards these aims?
It seems a little premature.
Maybe we should actually invest in helping Canadians (and Americans) engage with and value democracy and human rights.
Tax the rich more so that we can hit that 2% requirement.
Then we can adequately support Ukraine.
We don’t have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. We don’t need more taxes. We could tax away the entirety of the wealth of our richest citizens and it’d only cover our federal+provincial deficits for 2-3 decades at most.
Something structural with our spending needs to change.
but also, tax the rich, we can have both more money and better use of it
The people downvoting you like paying high taxes and having a government that wastes billions of dollars apparently.