Military models Canadian response to hypothetical American invasion

border_humper

Staff Member
Moderator
Chief Disinfo Officer

Armed Forces envision insurgency tactics like those used by Afghan mujahedeen, sources say. But officials and experts stress a U.S. operation is unlikely, and the scenarios are conceptual

The Canadian Armed Forces have modelled a hypothetical U.S. military invasion of Canada and the country’s potential response, which includes tactics similar to those employed against Russia and later U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan, two senior government officials say.
It is believed to be the first time in a century that the Canadian Armed Forces have created a model of an American assault on this country, a founding member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and a partner with the U.S. in continental air defence.
A military model is a conceptual and theoretical framework, not a military plan, which is an actionable and step-by-step directive for executing operations.
The Globe and Mail is not identifying the officials, who were not authorized to discuss the military’s thinking on this matter publicly. The officials, as well as a number of experts, say it is unlikely the Trump administration would order an invasion of Canada.
The Globe reported this week that Canada is considering sending a small contingent of troops to Greenland to join a group of eight European countries that are holding military exercises as a show of solidarity for Denmark, of which the self-ruling island is a territory.
U.S. President Donald Trump has been challenging NATO allies with repeated calls for the U.S. to acquire Greenland and threats to impose tariffs on European countries who oppose the takeover. Those threats escalated after his attack on Venezuela and capture of President Nicolás Maduro earlier this month.
Mr. Trump has also repeatedly mused about Canada becoming the 51st state. On the weekend, NBC reported Mr. Trump has been increasingly complaining to aides in recent weeks about Canada’s vulnerability to U.S. adversaries in the Arctic. Steve Bannon, the former Trump chief strategist who remains close to the President, said Canada is “rapidly changing” and becoming “hostile” to the United States.
The two senior government officials said military planners are modelling a U.S. invasion from the south, expecting American forces to overcome Canada’s strategic positions on land and at sea within a week and possibly as quickly as two days.
Canada does not have the number of military personnel or the sophisticated equipment needed to fend off a conventional American attack, they said. So, the military envisions unconventional warfare in which small groups of irregular military or armed civilians would resort to ambushes, sabotage, drone warfare or hit-and-run tactics.
One of the officials said the model includes tactics used by the Afghan mujahedeen in their hit-and-run attacks on Russian soldiers during the 1979-1989 Soviet-Afghan War. These were the same tactics employed by the Taliban in their 20-year war against the U.S. and allied forces that included Canada. Many of the 158 Canadian soldiers killed in Afghanistan from 2001 to 2014 were struck by improvised explosive devices or IEDs.
The aim of such tactics would be to impose mass casualties on U.S. occupying forces, the official said.
The modelling provides the keenest insight yet as to the level of threat assessment now being actively discussed by Canada with respect to the Trump administration.
One of the officials noted, however, that relations with the U.S. military remain positive and the two countries are working together on Canada’s participation in a new continental defence system, or “Golden Dome,” to defend against Russian or Chinese missiles.
The military has also run models on missile strikes from Russia or China on Canadian cities and critical infrastructure.
Military planners envision an American attack that would follow clear signs from the U.S. military that the two countries’ partnership in NORAD, the North American Aerospace Defence Command, was ending, and the U.S. was under new orders to take Canada by force.
Conscription has been ruled out for now, but the level of sacrifice that would be asked of Canadians remains a central topic, the officials said. General Jennie Carignan, Chief of the Defence Staff, has already announced her intention to create a 400,000-plus-strong reserve force of volunteers. The officials said they could be armed or asked to provide disruptions if the U.S. becomes an occupying power.
A senior Defence Department official said Canada would have a maximum of three months to prepare for a land and sea invasion. The first indications that invasion orders had been sent would be expected to come from U.S. military warnings that Canada no longer has a shared skies policy with the United States, the source said.
This rupture in the joint defence agreement would likely see France or Britain, nuclear-weapon states, being called on to provide support and defence for Canada against the U.S.
The Globe is not identifying the senior defence official, who was not authorized to discuss Canadian war-modelling scenarios.
Retired major-general David Fraser, who commanded Canadian troops in Afghanistan alongside the United States, said Canada could also use drones and tank-killing weapons like the Ukrainians used against the Russians to blunt their invasion in February, 2022.
Mr. Fraser said it is unthinkable that Canadian planners have had to draw up a U.S. invasion scenario. Whatever Mr. Trump does with Greenland and possibly Mexico would weigh into any Canadian scenario, he said.
But Canada can count on support from European countries, Britain, Japan, South Korea and other democratic nations.
“You know if you come after Canada, you are going to have the world coming after you, even more than Greenland. People do care about what happens to Canada, unlike Venezuela,” Mr. Fraser said. “You could actually see German ships and British planes in Canada to reinforce the country’s sovereignty.”
Mr. Fraser said Canada should immediately place more military assets in the North to claim its right to the region.
If the threat from the U.S. became serious, he said Canadian soldiers would be placed along the border even though there is no realistic possibility that Canada could defeat the U.S. militarily.
Insurgency tactics would be the best way to deal with U.S. invading forces, he said.
“There is a quantum difference between defending another land like Canadians did in Afghanistan versus defending Windsor, Ontario. You do not walk across that border because everybody is your enemy then,” Mr. Fraser added.
Retired lieutenant-general Mike Day, who headed Canadian Special Forces Command and served as chief strategic planner for the future of the Canadian Armed Forces, said it was “fanciful” to think the Americans would actually invade Canada.
But he acknowledged Canada’s armed forces could not stand up to the world’s biggest and most sophisticated military. He said, however, that the U.S. would have great difficulty occupying a country the size of Canada.
“We wouldn’t be able to withstand a conventional invasion. We would, for a limited period of time, be able to defend a very small civilian population, like the size of Kingston,” he said.
“Notwithstanding the size of the American military, however, they do not have the force structure to occupy, let alone control every major urban centre in Canada.”
“Their only hope would be a Russian-like drive to Kyiv and hope that works and the rest of country capitulates once they seize the seat of power in Ottawa,” he added. “Like Ukraine, it would inconceivable to me that we would give up if they seized our capital.”
Gaëlle Rivard Piché, executive director of the Conference of Defence Associations, said she did not see a situation where the U.S. would attack Canada. But she also said it’s crucial for Canada to significantly build up its defence capabilities.
“Clear signalling to our neighbour to the south that we want and we’re willing and able to rapidly be a credible ally that is capable of defending itself, ensuring our own national security, our national defence, will play a deterrence role towards a potential willingness by the United States to control some of Canada or to invade a portion of Canada,” she said.
University of Toronto political scientist Aisha Ahmad said Canada needs to drastically boost its homeland defence capabilities, regardless of the potential U.S. threat to the border.
“The better Canada can embrace this approach to homeland defence, the less likely all of these horrible scenarios that nobody wants will ever come to pass,” she said.
U.S. generals would be aware that Canadians would fight back against an invasion, using whatever tactics would be the most effective, she said.
“I do believe that there are intelligent generals south of our border who could very easily identify that risk environment.”
Canada does not have the number of military personnel or the sophisticated equipment needed to fend off a conventional American attack, they said. So, the military envisions unconventional warfare in which small groups of irregular military or armed civilians would resort to ambushes, sabotage, drone warfare or hit-and-run tactics.
One of the officials said the model includes tactics used by the Afghan mujahedeen in their hit-and-run attacks on Russian soldiers during the 1979-1989 Soviet-Afghan War.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 20

Armed Forces envision insurgency tactics like those used by Afghan mujahedeen, sources say. But officials and experts stress a U.S. operation is unlikely, and the scenarios are conceptual



Canada does not have the number of military personnel or the sophisticated equipment needed to fend off a conventional American attack, they said. So, the military envisions unconventional warfare in which small groups of irregular military or armed civilians would resort to ambushes, sabotage, drone warfare or hit-and-run tactics.
One of the officials said the model includes tactics used by the Afghan mujahedeen in their hit-and-run attacks on Russian soldiers during the 1979-1989 Soviet-Afghan War.
border_humperFunny since the USA funded the afghans during that time frame against the Russians, then the afghans were funded by the Russians and Chinese during ISAF’s stomping around.
As currently the govt is trying to take “assault” weapons away, the average person does not have access to certain IED making materials. They also lack faith in their religion to push through adversity. So I am guessing china and Russia will be supplying Canada to fight the Americans?
Also the whole Middle East debacle was a money making racket for arms makers, if the US had to deploy its full strength(average populace never cared about that war) the war would of been a total different outcome
 
Could be Liberal fear mongering as Liberals clearly want a majority and may head to the polls again in the spring.
 
In that case Trump is actively trying to get the Liberals re-elected by constantly threatening to invade Canada
 

Armed Forces envision insurgency tactics like those used by Afghan mujahedeen, sources say. But officials and experts stress a U.S. operation is unlikely, and the scenarios are conceptual



Canada does not have the number of military personnel or the sophisticated equipment needed to fend off a conventional American attack, they said. So, the military envisions unconventional warfare in which small groups of irregular military or armed civilians would resort to ambushes, sabotage, drone warfare or hit-and-run tactics.
One of the officials said the model includes tactics used by the Afghan mujahedeen in their hit-and-run attacks on Russian soldiers during the 1979-1989 Soviet-Afghan War.
border_humperA reminder that Red Dawn was fiction...
 
Genuine insurgent movements have existed in many countries
 
View previous replies…
Quebecers were capable of it in the 70s and 80s. I don’t see enough social cohesion anywhere in the country, especially after the covid era, to think there would be much organized resistance now. People just want to make their mortgage payments on their million dollar plywood boxes.
 
@border_humper: You don't think that if US troops were raping Canadian women, for example, there wouldn't be any violent pushback? If they could do that with impunity it wouldn't be due to a lack of "social cohesion" but to a sheer lack of balls on the part of Canadian men
 
@ovarieasy Reconcile the fear of invasion with the disarmament of the population. Canadians will not fight in any organized capacity, only people who feel personally attacked might consider it ( father of a raped daughter kind of situations )

This is where zero tolerance policies and violence never being the answer no matter what comes to bite the country in the ass to the point it probably ends the country.

Without a warrior class you do not have a nation nor a people. The very notion of a warrior caste is offensive to Canadians.

To fix Canada requires the same thing that defending Canada does. Total philosophical transformation and a complete realignment of priorities.

The age of the average voter is something like 55 so all you will get is wailing and gnashing of teeth, senior citizens demanding someone do something.

Canadians defeated themselves a long time ago.
 
Of course such a stupid article would use retired Canadian military generals as their source. In my experience in the CAF the officers were some of the most absolute useless and retarded people I have ever met in my life. The only good officers I met after 12 years in the Army were commissioned from the ranks, MCpl, Sgt, WO. They had already spent at least a decade in the military and had a good understanding of their trades and how the military works. But most officers in the Canadian military end up there because they could not succeed in their trade in the civvy world, (whatever they went to university for) and the CAF is eager to hire people who are in school debt and desperate for a job. Either that or you have the RMC tards who are bottom of the barrel, they went to RMC for "free university" and see their 5 years of mandatory service as some kind of extra class lab session they can do their best to sleep through.

But anyways the article is so stupid because it does not mention how many Canadians would welcome the Americans and actively work as an insurgency to disable and disarm whatever Canadian military or police (or international) force. If I am gonna pull percentages right out of my ass I would say 30% of Canadians would actively support the Americans, 40% would sit on the fence and wait to see how it plays out and only 30% would actively fight on behalf of the corrupt criminal Canadian government, which has participated in the COVID scamdemic, locked our country down for years, collapsed our economy, encouraged and tried to force the COVID death vax on everyone, killed people with ventalators in hospitals, killed elderly people in retirement homes, brought millions of hostile filthy foreign invaders into the country, attempted to seize property and restrict firearm ownership, killed over 90,000 Canadians over the past 4 years since government euthanasia was legalized, and probably more evil shit I forget right now.

Those 30% that do fight for the corrupt criminal Canadian government would be mostly our military who are forced to fight for the government of Canada and are being paid, and some police and security forces that can be paid by the corrupt rich people or corporate (and Chinese) interests who make money off the Canadian phony scam country. And there would be the completely retarded mainstream normies who got told to "fight the Americans" on a facebook post, but they have never even held a gun and will be used as cannon fodder or human shields, basically dying instantly as soon as the Americans show up cause they post selfies of themselves on reddit giving away their postiton and getting their whole unit drone striked.

Although America does have lots of problems with corruption across their society and government, (and also many problems we face in Canada like having millions of hostile foreign invaders are also happening in America), we have a lot more to gain from beign a part of the USA then we have to lose.

I know the number one concern around joining the states for most Canadians is the idea that it could disrupt our legal weed privliges. But consider there are lots of states that have fully legalized cannabis and there is no reason that the Americans would waste time banning or restricting cannabis in Canada or changing policy around medicinal cannabis for military veterans. In fact one of the main negotiation points will be preserving the most important things in Canada, and we would in fact bring free medical cannabis for eligible American military veterans as well, so the Americans do pick up some benefits from annexing Canada.

Motherfucking Mark Carney has lowered the medical cannabis coverage for Canadian veterans last month if you want to add to the list of reasons to not support our criminal Canadian government. Thank God medical cannabis companies seem to be just eating the cost instead of restricting the cannabis available to veterans. But it still eats into the profits of Canadian cannabis companies which is morally wrong and who knows what else this criminal government will take from the people if they are allowed to continue existing outside of prison.

So joining America would include keeping our cannabis and not letting the criminal Canadian government touch our medical cannabis for veterans, as well we would pick up all US constitutional rights such as free speech which is literally a foreign concept in Canada, and of course our 2nd amendment firearm rights, which is literally under attack by our criminal Canadian government by not even legeslative means but the dictat of a black face wearing clown and his Epstein-friend international banker successor carnival clown.

Oh that reminds me of another point for the negotiations. All manner of negoes, be they jungle, sand, curry or taco shall be sent from the 51st state down to some southern shithole like Mississippi. The Great White North shall be Caucazoid exclusive and if any other northern states want to adopt this policy they should be welcome to.

Anyways stupid article from the Globe and Mail. The funnest part of the American invasion would be having free reign to hunt down and MAID all globalists and commies who have been corrupting and subverting our old nation for decades as they pathetically try to use "taliban tactics" to fight the Americans as the article suggests. The taliban lost every firefight they had with Canadian/US/NATO troops over 20 years of occupation, they only survived by fleeing to the mountains of Pakistan where they were protected. That's another benefit of US occupation, half of Brampton will probably return to hajistan if they realize they cannot scam Canadians any more cause our country was absorbed into the states and they will have ICE kicking down their doors.
 
"30% of Canadians would actively support the Americans, 40% would sit on the fence and wait to see how it plays out and only 30% would actively fight on behalf of the corrupt criminal Canadian government"

My own guesstimate would be 15% of Canadians enthusiastically accepting American invasion, less than 5% actively resisting it (because most people are cowards), and the remaining 80% bitching and moaning while doing absolutely nothing about it one way or the other
 
In my experience in the CAF the officers were some of the most absolute useless and retarded people I have ever met in my life.

Yeah that sounds consistent with bureaucrats in other public sector entities.
 
View previous replies…
I've heard, don't know if it's true, but I've heard that in the German Army you have to serve in the ranks before you can become an officer. I've always thought that was a very good idea we should adopt.
 
Back
Top