Evan Prodromou
So, here's my defense plan for Canada. Basic philosophy: it is unsafe to wait for an attack.
1. Secure public confirmation from NATO that Article 5 applies even if the aggressor is also a NATO member.
2. Send an ultimatum to Washington demanding a public acknowledgement by the President of Canadian sovereignty and reconfirmation of non-aggression towards Canada.
3. In the absence of that acknowledgement, sever diplomatic ties, close the borders, and embargo trade in either direction.
[1/n]
Evan Prodromou
4. Evacuate Canadians from the border area; probably 300km or more. Yes, this is most Canadians being evacuated.
5. Declare a security corridor of 300km on the other side of the border, in US territory. Any military activity in that area is a sign of imminent aggression and will prompt a defensive strike.
6. If anything occurs, surge forward and take territory. Keep any war on US soil, not in Canada.
Evan Prodromou
The goal is to get Canadians out of harm's way for a shooting war with short-range missiles (500km-1000km); keep Canada's economy running; and bring the maximum pain to the US citizens, economy and government.
Evan Prodromou
We can't afford giving an aggressor the benefit of the doubt; too much of our population is within an hour's drive of the border.
Evan Prodromou
We have thousands of kilometers of borderland between the continental US and Canada, as well as Alaska and Canada. Even if the US makes headway into Canada, we can identify areas of the US to occupy. The psychological effect of having US territory occupied by a foreign country would be really devastating on its citizens.
Evan Prodromou
@skyfaller yes.
Nelson
@evan Do you think the majority of Canadians can be convinced that the USA under Trump is an existential threat before an actual US invasion? Because your plan won't be politically feasible if most Canadians believe the US is still fundamentally friendly until the US initiates military action.
ch0ccyra1n
@evan there is one problem I potentially see with closing the borders: trans people from the US who might be seeking asylum in the next few months and years.
Evan Prodromou
@ch0ccyra1n there are 193 other countries on the planet.
Evan Prodromou
@richlitt I think in a shooting war there are some pretty specific definitions for being part of the resistance, and they don't count posting about the "Cheeto-in-Chief" on X.
Richard Littauer
@evan as a Vermonter, this is disconcerting.
Perhaps an amendment: "Cause maximum pain to US citizens who are not part of the resistance."
Mick 🇨🇦
@evan holy shit Evan I’m glad you’re on our side. ✊
Paul Cantrell
@evan @jwz
Speaking as a US resident: Yes. Yes please.
Please take it •exactly• this seriously. Please take action on this kind of scale.
Leaders in this country — political, institutional, commercial, journalistic, judicial, you name it — just seem terrified of any sort of action that even remotely acknowledges the magnitude of the threat we face.
We need other countries reacting this forcefully, jarring people out of their sleep, because our own country has failed us. Strong international opposition to Trump/Musk has enormous popular support here.
Do it. Do it and you’ll have my wholehearted support.
Evan Prodromou
@TimFinnerty not an easy answer. The other option is sacrificing this populations and letting them get bombarded and/or occupied. I think evacuation is the better choice.
Tim Finnerty
@evan Um, where would you put the population of metropolitan Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver?
Evan Prodromou
@juliette yep, it's a pretty big deal. The other option is letting the occupier hold about 2/3 of our population.
juliette
@evan isn’t most of Canada’s economic activity well
within 300km of the border? You can evacuate all these people without blowing up Canada’s entire economy.
Evan Prodromou
@preinheimer I think if you give up 2/3 of the population to bombardment or an occupying force, it's game over.
But, yes, you can't keep most of the economy going this way. I'll change the post.
Paul Reinheimer
@evan I don’t think 300km from the border and keep the economy running is possible. That’s the entire Montreal to Windsor corridor, and half the country’s population.
Evan Prodromou
@sean @preinheimer as far as I can see it, it's move north, or get occupied. Is there another option?
Sean Coates
@preinheimer @evan …where even would we put 20 million(?) people?
Richard Littauer
@evan I agree with you on that. I just recognize that a good amount of my friends and community will likely agree with you if there is aggression from the US to Canada, and would likely be interested in doing physical acts of warfare against a fascist state.
The goal of taking US land would, I assume, be to cause regime change in the US to stop future aggression.
Richard Littauer
@evan Put another way: my discomfort is part of your Canadian defense strategy, and yes, I feel it.
Evan Prodromou
@richlitt yeah. Sorry.
Abu Hodja
@evan I've honestly never heard anything as self-destructive as the American goverment picking a fight with Canada and I've been going to AA meetings for 13 years
Evan Prodromou
@sean @preinheimer another option is calling on our fellow Commonwealth nations to take in children, seniors, and non-combatants, like we did for the UK in WWII.
Evan Prodromou
@preinheimer true, but we produce a lot of food. And we would have to count on our allies for aid.
Paul Reinheimer
@evan I’m concerned that we wouldn’t be able to feed that much of a displaced population. We’re also abandoning a lot of fertile soil.
Evan Prodromou
@skyfaller nothing's inevitable. Americans are daintier than Russians. Surviving occupation is the national sport there.
Nelson
@evan While fighting on enemy territory may be the correct military strategy, I'm not convinced taking enemy territory will inevitably have a significant effect on enemy morale. Ukraine advancing into Russian territory doesn't seem to have crushed Russian morale; or, alternately, Russian morale is already shot and the war machine does not depend on the morale of Russian soldiers or civilians.
Evan Prodromou
@sean @preinheimer oh, yeah. Sorry, my plan is to win. Surrendering is always an option if you're willing to give up sovereignty. Maybe in a generation or two, there'd be an opportunity to rebel.
Sean Coates
@evan @preinheimer Those both sound like the same outcome to me. In the case where we nearly-all need to give up all of our homes, schools, hospitals, jobs, and other infrastructure, we'd just be occupying ourselves—we'd be so demoralized, malnourished, and disease-ridden, that we'd be easy to conquer.
I think I'd rather lose in the first wave than suffer all of that and lose anyway because we're trying to huddle into tents and hope the wheat delivery isn't droned again.
Evan Prodromou
@TimFinnerty if your point is that American invasion would suck, I definitely concur. Not something to seek out.
Evan Prodromou
@skyfaller I don't think military plans are about finding One Weird Trick to Avoid Invasion. It's about finding weaknesses and exploiting them the best you can. I think occupation is a real weakness, and keeping the fight in US soil is also important.
Evan Prodromou
Another principle is jumping before we are pushed. if we wait to let troops and ordnance move to the border, while we hope to preserve trade with some last-minute deal, we're done. We have the take the initiative in our own defense or we will be subject to the whims of Washington.
Evan Prodromou
Last note: I am a software developer and standards enthusiast, not a military planner. I hope that PM Carney and his cabinet are having aides develop plans at this level of seriousness right now. I'm sure theirs will be a lot better than mine.
Evan Prodromou
@lakelady it could be partial; move non-essential people north or overseas in tranches. Pull back the final groups only when bombardment or attacks get too heavy (destroying infrastructure as they pull back).
lakelady
@evan evacuate all of Windsor? Vancouver? really?
Evan Prodromou
@lakelady another option would be declaring the security corridor much further into US territory; 500-1000km south (again, if we are concerned about short-range missiles). That is down to Virginia, Nebraska, or Northern California, and almost all of Alaska. It's possible but I think it's a lot harder to cover and defend.
Evan Prodromou
@lakelady I don't think there's a win condition where we let US troops and vehicles mass on the border, with most of the Canadian population within an hour's drive, and wait until they invade before making a move. There's just not a lot of territory between Niagara and Toronto to manoeuver.
Evan Prodromou
@peachfront @preinheimer it takes less than an hour to get from the US border to cities housing 2/3 of the population. There's just no time for evacuation when an invasion has actually started. If you're going to evacuate and keep most of your population from being occupied, it has to happen ahead of time.
peachfront
preemptively abandoning territory esp your most valuable real estate is just plain nuts + we have long range missiles so it's surrendering in advance for naught
Evan Prodromou
@peachfront @preinheimer and, of course, there would have to be military in that area. Just the minimum number of civilians possible.
Evan Prodromou
@lakelady Unfortunately that's not how war works.
It would definitely be easier for everyone in the US if it was only an invasion of Canadian soil, I agree. I just don't think it's a good strategy for Canada.
lakelady
@evan as a resident of Michigan I find this idea reprehensible. We have a democrat run state, democrat senators etc. Why kill those who don't support DT?
Evan Prodromou
@light @richlitt I think when occupying armies invade a territory, there's usually an opportunity to surrender, especially for civilians.
Light
@evan @richlitt Are you saying to cause pain to US citizens who can't or won't fight?
Evan Prodromou
@davew that seems like a really big bet to take!
Dave Winer ☕️
Do you really think the American military would follow an order to attack Canada?
But then I can’t imagine viewing it from your point of view.
Bill Zaumen
@evan You might want to delete "tear up ... rail lines" because Elon Musk it seems doesn't like our train systems (at a minimum, one of them) anyway. Why spend the effort if these bozos may do it for you?
https://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/editorials/article264451076.html
Evan Prodromou
@bzdev let's hope they put Elon in charge of supply lines! All the ammunition will be transported by child-sized submarines.
Nemo_bis 🌈
@Amgine How long do the USA last without Canadian oil?
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=62664
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Petroleum_Reserve_(United_States)
Amgine
Military planning is to identify goals and accomplish them in ways most surprising to the enemy.
Ideally, with no one hurt.
I like the first part of your plan the most: address this through the already extant treaties of international law - WHICH ARE ALSO US LAW. (See US Constitution, Article III, section 2)
Evan Prodromou
mmby
@evan short war, decades of Canadian IRA
Evan Prodromou
@mmby that's what happens if we lose.
Evan Prodromou
@skyfaller @fluffykittycat I think with luck and initiative, Canada could take some low population areas with high emotional value deep in US territory, like Yellowstone or Mt. Rushmore. The goal would be to require the attention of the US military to keep the fight over there so we don't have to fight over here. I don't think having to deal with partisans in big cities would be efficient.
Nelson
@fluffykittycat @evan I'd say that the US has had the enemy continuously on our soil since the Civil War, if not since its founding, but I understand your point. Not enough Americans know about events like the Tulsa race massacre, and don't recognize slavers and homegrown fascists as occupying forces.
Fluffy Kitty Cat
@skyfaller @evan Americans haven't had the enemy on our soil since 1942 and that was a remote island in Alaska. Tanks rolling down main St USA would make the consequences real for even the most cultish mouthbreathers
Evan Prodromou
Oh, one more thing: a common strategy for invaders is to let domestic rebellions happen, and then come in to "protect their rights". Hopefully CSIS and the Mounties can come down hard on any Canadian going on Fox News to invite invaders to come annex our country. It's a valid political position and thought experiment in peacetime; when there is a real possibility of a war, it's treason. Straight to jail! And definitely don't allow any kind of trucker convoy demonstrations in large numbers.
aswack
@evan this is incredibly depressing that people have to think about things like this. I’m so sad my country is doing this to people.
Evan Prodromou
@swacknificent I'm just some yahoo doing armchair general noodling on a Saturday afternoon. I think some smarter people are working in it in Ottawa!
Lydia RIEDEL-TRAMSEK
@evan and how should Americans flee if you close the border?
Evan Prodromou
@Tabby_Schaf I'm sure there are ways to make it work, but there are also 193 other countries on the planet. I'd recommend fleeing to one that your country is not trying to invade.
Dave Winer ☕️
I think it might work better if you had massive demonstrations telling Americans to wake the fuck up.
Evan Prodromou
@davew I mean, I totally agree. But about half of the US thinks annexation is a good idea.
Trump, famously, refuses to back down from even the stupidest of ideas. And the government is completely captive to his whim.
I don't think Canadians can count on internal US political resistance to prevent a war.
Evan Prodromou
@brennx0r @ch0ccyra1n I don't know what to tell you. Canada is a real country with almost 40M people in it, not an imaginary safe zone for American dissidents. I think it's imperative for all countries to take in refugees and asylum seekers, but maybe procrastinating until there's a war happening on the border you're trying to cross isn't the best plan.
brenna 🇧🇲🏳️🌈🇺🇸
@evan @ch0ccyra1n If the US government declares martial law and flights are grounded, there are only two countries that was feasible escape routes.
Evan Prodromou
@phil @richlitt sorry, maybe I wasn't clear. "Make it hurt for citizens" means economically and politically, not mass slaughter of civilians. I'll make sure to update that.
Phil
@evan@cosocial.ca @richlitt@mastodon.social
I don't understand this North American (I've seen the same sentiment from friends in the USA) bias for ignoring ROE.
Civilians, despite what other countries may have suggested by their actions, are not valid targets for military action.
To see this kind of sentiment is rather worrying, frankly.
Evan Prodromou
@Breedlov @brennx0r @ch0ccyra1n agreed. And obviously I am not in charge of Canada's defense. I don't know how a country defending against an invasion keeps a corridor open for refugees and asylum seekers from that same invading country. Maybe it's possible, I dunno.
Old White Dude
@evan @brennx0r @ch0ccyra1n you’re right, but #Canada would be wise to accept all the scientists, engineers, & technicians who are escaping the US.
Evan Prodromou
@AlgoCompSynth that would be good.
AlgoCompSynth by znmeb 🇺🇦
TBH I wish a Senate committee would haul their recently-promoted colleague Marco Rubio in to enter that public acknowledgement of Canadian sovereignty into the Congressional Record.under oath.
Lydia RIEDEL-TRAMSEK
@evan but how, since the planes are controlled?
Evan Prodromou
@Tabby_Schaf I honestly don't know. Where do Russian dissidents go? I am pretty sure they don't try to cross the front lines into Ukraine.
oscarfalcon
Start by Putting up a chainlink and barbed wire fence at the border with a second steel wire and steel post barrier 50 meters back as a buffer, might sound harsh but it will be necessary at some point.
Evan Prodromou
@oscarfalcon does that really help with tanks?
Kerry Mitchell 🍁
Evan Prodromou
@oscarfalcon Good point!
oscarfalcon
It does not but it gets a very special message across to the would-be oppressors: "don't fuck with us", this is protected land...
Evan Prodromou
One more, more thing: China.
One temptation would be to get military support and other aid from China. It's a huge economy, would benefit from our economic resources, and has massive military resources.
I think this might backfire badly. It would go from a war of choice for the Americans to a war of survival. They would probably fight more desperately than if it was just Canadians and their European allies.
Evan Prodromou
I'd love to see American opposition stop this preposterous, fratricidal war before it gets even near starting.
American citizens seem to be taking the atrocities threatened by their government lying down, and politicians are more interested in minor domestic issues than in stopping a continent-wide war or other military excursions.
Paul Schoe
I think that you underestimate how pliable people are and how much they will simply follow orders.
Most of the people running the Nazi camps were just like us and our neighbours.
rk: could be an enum
I would like to think that if we tried to invade Canada, the northern states would rebel against the federal government and/or most of our troops would refuse to obey those orders.
I am, unfortunately, not as sure of this outcome as I would’ve been just a few years ago.
Evan Prodromou
Meh, there are a whole lot of other things.
- Tactical bombers are a big problem; they have a range of 1500-2200km and you just can't get out of their range and stay out of the Arctic Circle.
- The Great Lakes present a lot of opportunities for fuckery. It's about 8000 km of US shoreline.
- What happens to the 60K US service members in the 100-200 US bases in Europe? Good question!
Evan Prodromou
@mark The more time and resources that were spent dicking around trying to recover the Alaska Panhandle or northern Maine would be time and resources not spent on Canadian territory.
I think the best move would be to hold a lot of rural area or wilderness, not any cities or even big towns (expensive and hard to hold). Make a big red stain on the map on the nightly news, with minimal effort.
Mark T. Tomczak
@evan Oh, absolutely. Americans do not know how it feels to be occupied; haven't had it happen since 1812.
I can't guarantee we wouldn't bite back like a rabid dog, but I can guarantee it would fuck with our identity fiercely to have a foreign sovereignty holding our soil.
Evan Prodromou
The point of these steps is that we don't benefit from delay. If it's going to happen, we need to start getting ready immediately, and not spin our wheels hoping for some change in policy.
Evan Prodromou
I guess this is called a "diversionary counterattack".
Evan Prodromou
@Tabby_Schaf well, I guess if there were a war going on on the Canadian border, you'd have to go to Mexico instead, and then fly from there.
It feels extreme to ask Canadians not to defend themselves from an invasion, so there's a convenient exit path for American emigrants? Am I misunderstanding the question?
Lydia RIEDEL-TRAMSEK
@evan they have some more borders. But once they crossed they continue to flee by plane. If I were American, I would cross the border to Canads and the take a plane to Australia, New Zealand, evtl. Portugal, GB
Lydia RIEDEL-TRAMSEK
@evan actually it's too late for them to flee. Initially they fled to Kazachstan, Georgia, Finland, Litauen, evtl. They could fly to Serbia or Turkey.
Evan Prodromou
Lydia RIEDEL-TRAMSEK
@Andres4NY @evan after invasion you have to close the border of course, this would be the frontline. But just now?
Evan Prodromou
@Tabby_Schaf @Andres4NY Right. In this case, the US government gives confirmation that it intends to invade. That's when the border would be closed. So Canada could prepare to stop the invasion.
Andres S
@evan @Tabby_Schaf As someone who would love to move to Canada (but can't right now due to family), I'm with you on this. If the US did invade Canada, it would be absolutely foolish for Americans to try to escape there - only to potentially be recaptured. A better plan is to stay put and sabotage/fight the fascists, or escape to a different country.
Lydia RIEDEL-TRAMSEK
@evan yes you misunderstood and eventually me too misunderstood: I thought you spoke of closing the border right now. In the moment of invasion you have to do.
Evan Prodromou
@Tabby_Schaf also, in doing a little research, there are usually humanitarian corridors maintained for refugees and asylum seekers, sometimes maintained by international organizations. Apparently, even some political dissidents and other Russian refugees did go across the battle line into Ukraine!
WTL
@evan Where do we send 20 million people though? The suffering caused by that kind of an evacuation would be unimaginable as we don't have the infrastructure to handle that many - even one percent of that.
Evan Prodromou
@WTL overseas or north. The suffering of being in easily bombarded or invaded cities would be much worse.
Evan Prodromou
@mad Denmark is part of NATO.
Antonio Madueno
4. Join forces with Denmark
Andre Nantel
@evan 1 and 2 are good for political pressure. But don’t blow up bridges and close the border because we’ll need that.
Geography and force discrepancy mean that regular forms of military resistance are bound to fail.
We should instead take advantage of these facts:
1- We have a huge border
2- 80% of Canadians look and talk like Americans.
3- The American people are extremely divided, even more so when it comes to invading us.
4- The US Army couldn’t handle insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan.
AlexanderVI
@evan I'm sorry, I agree we need to have a strong plan, but pre-emptively invading the United States is, frankly, insane.
Nothing will more quickly galvanize Americans to believe Trump's lies about how we are soooo bad. Our vestigial armed forces are in no position to make such an effort. Salients are a nightmare to defend, even if forces are equal.
We would be carpet bombed to oblivion.
Abandoning cities just gives them free real estate. Lower home prices 🇺🇸!
And nobody is going to help us.
Evan Prodromou
@AlexanderVI I think you might need to read through it again. In this case, the US has expressed its intention to attack and is moving troops into position within reach of the border.
Letting those troops to get into position and cross our border before taking any action would be insane. Especially with 2/3 of the population only an hour from the border.
And don't worry about real estate! It will be much less valuable when it's been pounded into rubble by American bombers and missiles.
Evan Prodromou
@AlexanderVI but I'd love to hear your defense plan. How would you protect Canadian sovereignty in the event of an American invasion?
AlexanderVI
@evan At present, if there's a full scale invasion, no such thing is possible. This is the most powerful military in all human history we are talking about.
To be clear, yes, a troublesome insurgency that adds to the domestic American polycrisis such that continuing is impossible is likely our only hope. But we should not be unrealistic. Vietnam went on for ages.
And moving millions of people hundreds of kilometres is simply not feasible and would pretty much immediately end our economy.
Evan Prodromou
@AlexanderVI so, because resistance would be hard, accept an occupation and lose any advantages whatsoever, and hope guerrilla actions nudge towards collapse of the empire?
Hand in the guns and fight with sticks?
That's just defeatism.
Evan Prodromou
@nantel yes, supporting insurgencies in the US would be a good idea. But partisan tactics on Canadian land is a last resort, not a primary plan.
Evan Prodromou
@AlexanderVI understood!
I think our only win condition is surviving long enough that the invader loses their will to continue the war and comes to the negotiating table.
I think holding US territory would be bad for US civilian morale. It would concentrate American firepower on troops in Minnesota, Idaho and Northern Maine rather than on the GTA.
It would also give us something to take to the table. Exchanging territorial gains and returning to pre-war borders would be a good outcome for us.
AlexanderVI
@evan no, I am not saying that.
I'm specifically saying the invasion piece is not a good idea, in my opinion. Many other aspects of your plan are sound goals, and I sincerely hope we can avoid the worst. I agree we need to maximize friction.
I'm taking a Scouting approach: Be Prepared. We need civil defence organization and emergency preparedness efforts so we can support each other. We should be massively expanding something like the Reserves, maybe even a Swiss approach.
I'm preparing.
Evan Prodromou
@AlexanderVI yeah, the US military is 20-30 times the size of Canada's, and the US economy is about 10-15 times bigger, too. We can't win a fair war.
AlexanderVI
@evan if you sincerely believe the Canadian Forces can go toe to toe against the US military, I completely understand your reasoning.
From the numbers, and from what I have seen of the US military up close, we are going to have very different opinions on that.
I am glad we are at least having frank discussions about this. I hope DND is as well.
For clarity, my family came to Canada as refugees when New York was evacuated in 1783. I have personally lived in the States. I will not do so again
Evan Prodromou
@AlexanderVI one hope would be that moving troops and weapons to North America for a war would destabilize other regions, requiring redeployment of those troops back to Europe, the Middle East, East Asia, or whatever.
But the US has about 1M active service members in the US right now. They wouldn't have to move anyone.
Andre Nantel
@evan You missed an important detail, I’m talking about partisan tactics on US soil. But mainly it’s leveraging divisions within American society. Remember that millions took to the streets to protest the Iraq war…a far-away conflict against “brown people” of a different religion who had “attacked” the US.
If steps 1 and 2 clarify their intentions, it would probably be easier for us and our allies to provoque a US civil war than for Trump to unify his fractured country againt Canada.
Evan Prodromou
@nantel yeah, definitely agree. The only way we retain sovereignty is to survive long enough that domestic opinion in the US turns against the war. So: robust defense and support insurgencies.
Waps
@evan my guess is that US won't attack Canada directly but might first attack Groenland(Danemark, a NATO member) for which Canada would need to respond accordingly with article 5.
Word is that Trump has already asked its military planners to make propositions...
Evan Prodromou
@waps that would suck, but it would also meaning fighting on someone else's territory, not ours (sorry, Greenland). And imperial wars in harsh climates are difficult and unpopular. It would also mean a multi-front war for Canada, though -- not easy!
Evan Prodromou
@feike it's almost impossible, but I don't see a lot of alternatives. But, yes, it's stupid that we need a plan.
Feike
@evan Stupid plan, don't you think, I mean, frankly, it is stupid that this is indeed neccicery ! The plan that you outline is a good plan, don't get me wrong, but it is stupid.
For you saying "is #nato #article5 also applicable betwéén NATO-members" there is some history: #France has a mutual defence argreement with #Greece because of the tread #turiye poses to Greece
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.