top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 96 points 2 weeks ago (43 children)

And i am very serious about killing any doodle who sets foot in this country with that intent.

I don't care if i die.

I am not living undet the rule of people who worship curtis yarvin.

  • source
  • hideshow 43 child comments
  • [–] 64 points 2 weeks ago (25 children)

    MAGA dipshits severely underestimate how many Canadians would actually enjoy taking a break from the rat race to repel invaders.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 41 points 2 weeks ago (22 children)

    Asymmetrical warfare is our thing

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)

    Because every war you've ever been in was asymmetrical?

    I kid, I kid...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 2 weeks ago* (6 children)

    Yupp..

    Act 1 US war of independence founded modern Canada because a) the quebecois ever fearful of cultural erasure, ever relevant today given those US demands, b) those not in favour of a racist dictatorship (yes the anglosphere was turning their backs on a monster they helped create), my family moved to loyalist country, fitting, and c) Britain's desire to legitimize presence by recognizing first nations,... founded canada. The US invaded thinking we would join but Quebec and the indigenous wanted nothing to do with that genocidal regime. An asymetrical response ended American interests.

    Act 2 The war of 1812, the US claims they kinda won because they genocided the Iroquois nation and paved a way for continental-scale genocide .. but another goal was conquest of Canada. A goal they failed on every county..britain, its loyalists, and later founders of Canada fought back and said fuck you. Canada 100% repelled the US invasion using asymmetrical warfare.

    Act 3 Fuck around and find out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (9 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 19 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (10 children)

    I wouldn't. Why conduct the destructive mess that is a war in our own living room?

    I'd contribute to any effort to make long range drones that strike energy and electronic infrastructure deep inside the US instead.

    Keep the destruction over there. Watch American arrogance melt away as they realize that fighting a war isn't just some thing they send troops elsewhere to die over while they get to stay comfy and safe at home anymore.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

    The answer is going to be both.

    Drones are the future of warfare. Ukraine has proven that.

    But if the US decides to invade, it absolutely WILL send troops over the border. And we'll be there, shooting them down. Carney may have to undo Trudeau's silly handgun restrictions for us RPAL holders for the good of Canada.

    I'm too old to be a soldier, but I can still hold a rifle. I'm not a violent person, but I will defend my country. I don't believe that most people in the US support this, but I will shoot to kill any that come across the border with plans to invade.

    In my nearly 60 years on this planet, this is the first time I've said I will die defending my country.

    So yes, in a situation of war we support drones. We support attacks deep within US territory, rather than traditional face-to-face combat.

    But we will do whatever it takes to protect our country.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 45 points 2 weeks ago (7 children)

    I'm american, and NOPE i am not, the Trump & Co are tho

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 38 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    The title seems to be generating confusion, but the author's point is that there are billionaire oligarchs (not just Trump, people whose power is not term-limited) pushing to gain control of Canada's resources. He's not talking about ordinary Americans nor is he necessarily talking about an invasion or a war.

    The playbook here is generally to apply economic pressure with the aim of causing political discontent, while at the same time financing an opposition faction that's more pliable, like they're doing against Cuba, Afghanistan, Iran, etc.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 37 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

    I'm American (unfortunately) and I want no part in annexing any country. I actually can't recall anyone else here who does... Well except big orange wrinkly pimples in DC.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    I’m 51 and would murder every single American that entered here and tried to take away my country, freedom and my family.

    I’d die, but I’d hopefully murder a fuckload of yanks before that.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 21 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (7 children)

    I could see it happening in bite sized pieces. Just like Ukraine really. Annex a small area, wait till the protests die down then repeat. I'm sure Vladimir would be cheering that on. After all great nuclear powers do whatever they want, don't they.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

    They'll be aiming to crush Canada economically until Albertans are sure they want to go it alone. Then they can start physically dismantling the country, starting with Alberta, and intensifying the economic pressure on the rest until Canada submits to de facto US rule. They can formalize it later with humilitating treaties and guns.

    Canada needs to work quickly on economic and military independence. Our whole international position needs to change before the USA really gets going with the program. And Canada needs to figure out how to make it very painful for the USA if it attempts anything. If ever the USA invades, we need to already be there inside their country, physically and virtually, making life hard for them in surprising ways. And we need to build up alliances until they're so strong that it becomes uncomfortable for our allies to flake out and go along with the USA.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

    Yeah the people in here who are imagining some kind of WW2-esque total-war scenario are not living in reality...

    I mean, I get it. It's heroic and satisfying to imagine oneself going down in a blaze of glory or getting into a firefight or a slugfest with a bunch of boots-on-the-ground foreign invaders, but that's not the century we're in.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 19 points 2 weeks ago (14 children)

    Get your gun license. I'm not kidding.

    You don't have to own a gun. Just learn how they work so when push comes to shove, you'll be ready.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • load more comments (14 replies)
    [–] 15 points 2 weeks ago (14 children)

    It's one American in particular pushing it, so it's a bit funny to use plural, but yes, he means it.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • load more comments (7 replies)
    [–] 14 points 2 weeks ago

    Yeah that's the thing you have to remember about this flood the Zone shit Trump does. None of it's a distraction. All of it's a distraction. Both at the same time. He means it all.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    I don't like guns but I am a very good shot with a rifle. I'm also a menopausal woman. I fucking dare him.

    Isn't it a point of honour with these creeps that an enemy has never set foot on American soil? Bet.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

    It's really just a few of us, but they control the media and military so that sucks.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 weeks ago* (3 children)

    Even if we came willingly, the Republicans wouldn't really want another California.

    Trump doesn't seem to get that's what it would be, though. Except also add a raging insurgency, which would most likely spread.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    I'm in California, Canada - please annex us. We can draw up a map of the places you should leave behind. You know, the conservative ones.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    blah blah blahyadda yadda yadda hype hype hype.

    They might be serious about WANTING to annex Canada, the same way the Quebec separatists WANTED to separate from Canada, but serious about actually DOING it? When push comes to shove, they never actually get around to DOING it. They always want someone ELSE to do it.

    When it comes right down to it, what they REALLY want, is attention.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    Nah, they're not. Orange Fatass just wants you to stop talking about his 30 year relationship with the guy who sold child sex slaves.

    Of course, Canada should still be prepared against psyops and whatnot, but Trump will never invade a NATO country.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 6 points 2 weeks ago

    Don't confuse me with that thing that was ostensibly a government once. Please.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next β€Ί