• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should the United States use force and or tariffs to force Canada to merge with the United State.

Should the United States use force and or tariffs to force Canada to merge with the United State.

  • Total voters
    69
Ikari said:
We're just trying to off load it for the other 6 months as well.
Click to expand...
Give it to Havana with the stipulation that they have to keep everyone who remains past the third day.
 
Luce said:
Again, winning is easy. Holding onto it is not.
Click to expand...

It's easy to hold empty land. Winter without grocery stores and heating fuel would kill way more of us than bombs and guns.

Most of our population lives next to the border. Look at a map, see what's above that line. Not much, and the higher up you go, the shorter the grow season, and the more rocky the ground.

Surrender, in the face of sending city dwelling Canadians to die in the tundra, would be the only choice.

That's not saying Canada wouldn't turn into northern Ireland in a jiffy. But that's not the same as restoring the country or taking it back.

Canadians are merely stewards of the land, we still have not tamed the vast majority of it. Nobody truly "owns" it, outside of imaginary lines on paper. That's both the beauty and the danger of this place, always has been. It will defend itself against all of us, if that is required.

Canada, as an idea, is pretty fragile. You guys could **** it up easily if you wanted to.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
Biden already tried with his open border policy. :ROFLMAO:
All that happened is the rest of the world shipped all their criminals here for our tax payers to take care of. 🤣
Now they are lighting people on fire and over crowding our jails and prisons. Our only hope is Trump will round them up and send them back. Of course it will not be easy considering the leaders of the countries they came from are not senile like Biden. Oh and the democrats are harboring them as well.;)
Click to expand...
Did you just make all this shite up yourself or did someone tell it to you?
 
reinaert said:
I get what you're saying. I don't even reject it. I'm just offering by way of counterpoint that a lot of us New Englanders got ourselves Canadian kin, off road vehicles and snow machines. Plus, you know how absolutely gunned up Maine, NH and VT are. Much will get through. It wouldn't be over in a year.
Click to expand...

Hehe... love you too, buddy. :)
 
OlNate said:
It's easy to hold empty land. Winter without grocery stores and heating fuel would kill way more of us than bombs and guns.

Most of our population lives next to the border. Look at a map, see what's above that line. Not much, and the higher up you go, the shorter the grow season, and the more rocky the ground.

Surrender, in the face of sending city dwelling Canadians to die in the tundra, would be the only choice.

That's not saying Canada wouldn't turn into northern Ireland in a jiffy. But that's not the same as restoring the country or taking it back.

Canadians are merely stewards of the land, we still have not tamed the vast majority of it. Nobody truly "owns" it, outside of imaginary lines on paper. That's both the beauty and the danger of this place, always has been. It will defend itself against all of us, if that is required.

Canada, as an idea, is pretty fragile. You guys could **** it up easily if you wanted to.
Click to expand...
Do you think the US could interdict EU and UK shipping for very long without catastrophe?
 
reinaert said:
Do you think the US could interdict EU and UK shipping for very long without catastrophe?
Click to expand...

Sure, just blow up / occupy the ports in the Maritimes and block the Saint Lawrence River with a carrier.

That is, if the UK / EU would even attempt to intervene. I would assume complete economic sanctions months ahead of any invasion.
 
OlNate said:
Sure, just blow up / occupy the ports in the Maritimes and block the Saint Lawrence River with a carrier.

That is, if the UK / EU would even attempt to intervene. I would assume complete economic sanctions months ahead of any invasion.
Click to expand...
Can we at least agree that out of sheer French contrariness, the French would try. And their Navy ain't nuthin'.
 
OlNate said:
It's easy to hold empty land. Winter without grocery stores and heating fuel would kill way more of us than bombs and guns.
Click to expand...
Not empty land with sneaky-ass Canadian infantry running around.

I was in the 10th mountain division for 7 years. I have a good understanding what kind of havoc a small number of motivated men can wreak, especially in cold weather.
 
Luce said:
Not empty land with sneaky-ass Canadian infantry running around.

I was in the 10th mountain division for 7 years. I have a good understanding what kind of havoc a small number of motivated men can wreak, especially in cold weather.
Click to expand...
Your guys regularly passed through my restaurant, adjacent as it was to a staging armory. Came down from the Ads through NH. Quiet bunch. Quieter than any of the others who mustered out. I remember the quietness.
 
Canadians have been living the good life a long time now...
Freaking USA protecting them so they could export Maple Syrup, Hockey and Moose Burgers.
ENOUGH!!
 
Helix said:
The US is not going to invade Canada. If Trump tried, the rich would probably 25a him to get the person who they really want to be president. Either that, or it could be worse.

See, here's the thing. In business, when you're 80, chaotic, making poor decisions, and the board really, really likes your VP because he's young, energetic, saner than you, and easily manipulated, you are in serious trouble. He'd be wise to keep that in mind, but he has never been wise.
Click to expand...
Your first sentence makes sense. The rest is just fluff. You should have stopped when you were ahead.
 
Show me five US citizens who would be willing to die to invade and conquer Canada. It's quite literally one of the stupidest and unlikely things I've heard suggested on these forums. And that's saying a lot.
 
OlNate said:
That defense is getting a little old and thin, Trix.

A president should understand that there are things that a president can't joke about, that his words (should) carry weight. If you make a joke about Canada, I can roll my eyes, maybe even laugh with you, and get on with my day.

A US president "joking" about Canada can influence stock markets, drive policy, or make a corporation decide not to build that plant or invest in our country. There is a much greater opportunity for consequences.

So while it might just be shits and giggles and Trump being a comedian for you, real people, who have done nothing to you, are impacted.

What i find weird about Trump supporters is that you spend half your time demanding he be taken seriously, the other half telling everyone not to worry, he's just "joking".

Which is it, and can you provide a manual? Asking for the rest of the world, who now have to deal with this shit.
Click to expand...
Again, and as I wrote above, he was just joking.
 
gbg3 said:
No, we shouldn't merge with Canada.

As far as tariffs, that's an entirely different topic, unrelated to a "merge".
Click to expand...

Correct. But IMO Trump wasn't being serious about Canada. IMO he was just messing with Trudeau and the Canadian government. We are already allied with them, there's no real need to merge. Too many cultural differences based on different socio-political history after the American colonies broke with England.

Now Greenland is another thing entirely. If the people of Greenland (all currently 56,669 of them) would agree to some link, I would have no issue with it. IMO Denmark is in no position to protect Greenland from incursions either military or economic from either China or Russia.

It doesn't have to be Statehood, it could be a treaty like we have with several Pacific Island territories/governments.
 
crazyyank said:
.t is time for people to take a stand on this both liberal and conservative, pro and con MEGA.
Click to expand...

Probably half of the people living in states bordering Canada have close relatives and friends in Canada. Half of the Canadian border provinces have the same number of American friends and relatives. It's going to be really hard to convince these people that they need to fight each other simply because some old senile fat guy made a stupid comment he thought was funny.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom