Does that mean the US won't try to annex Canada and Greenland, after all?

switchbak 23 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

When they say "The Arctic", you can often read that as being within the borders of Canada.

When you have something, and you lack the means to defend and assert that right - do you really have it? Canada has so defunded its military, that it's effectively an undefended nation.

▲

throwaway5752 6 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Do you know how much hard power credibility the US has lost from the Iran War failure?

The US couldn't defend our bases in the area or our newly less enthusiastic regional allies. It couldn't keep the Hormuz open. The US wasted years worth of advanced munitions inventory defending against relatively cheap missiles.

The US couldn't annex Canada if it wanted to. Canada doesn't even need a military to destroy the US via assymetric tactics.

▲

testing22321 7 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Do you feel the same way about your personal property? Defend it at all times with force or it is effectively someone else’s?

What a horrible world you live in.

▲

msie 21 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Canada has so defunded its military

Not anymore.

▲

switchbak 10 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

I presume you mean the recent changes to finally get Canada up to 2% GDP for its military spending? (I'll put aside some of the accounting shenanigans going on there)

I disagree - literal generations of cutting to the bone and beyond cannot be turned around overnight. Defunding isn't just about the dollars, it's about the lost mindshare, training, culture, morale, equipment, stockpiles - everything.

It will take a generation of strong investment and actual commitment to get this force back to something it ought to be. And based on trends since the 80's, future governments will be quick to pull back on any recent allocations.

▲

Onavo 10 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Nah, they are essentially irrelevant unless they are operating as part of a coalition. Last I checked they are still waffling on what 5th generation fighter jet to procure while the rest of the world are starting to plan for the 6th generation.

	▲	switchbak a few seconds ago \| parent [-]
		We're quite literally flying the "Legacy Hornet" that was phased out of the US arsenal in the early 2000's. We bought the ones Australia retired so we could keep flying these ancient planes. We had such poor capability and data link compatibility that we've been passed over on recent NATO exercises. Their replacement has been a political football for the last ~20 years, extending so far beyond the rational lifetime of our original CF-18's that it boggles the mind. Those who've tried to keep rust buckets on the road know how high the cost can be for trying to keep something flying for so long. This extends to basically every part of the Canadian military - extreme delays followed by politically motivated (and extremely bad) decision making.

▲

10 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]