this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2025
54 points (100.0% liked)
Canada
10569 readers
395 users here now
What's going on Canada?
Related Communities
🍁 Meta
🗺️ Provinces / Territories
- Alberta
- British Columbia
- Manitoba
- New Brunswick
- Newfoundland and Labrador
- Northwest Territories
- Nova Scotia
- Nunavut
- Ontario
- Prince Edward Island
- Quebec
- Saskatchewan
- Yukon
🏙️ Cities / Local Communities
- Anmore (BC)
- Burnaby (BC)
- Calgary (AB)
- Comox Valley (BC)
- Edmonton (AB)
- Greater Sudbury (ON)
- Guelph (ON)
- Halifax (NS)
- Hamilton (ON)
- Kingston (ON)
- Kootenays (BC)
- London (ON)
- Mississauga (ON)
- Montreal (QC)
- Nanaimo (BC)
- Niagara Falls (ON)
- Niagara-on-the-Lake (ON)
- Oceanside (BC)
- Ottawa (ON)
- Port Alberni (BC)
- Regina (SK)
- Saskatoon (SK)
- Squamish (BC)
- Thunder Bay (ON)
- Toronto (ON)
- Vancouver (BC)
- Vancouver Island (BC)
- Victoria (BC)
- Waterloo (ON)
- Whistler (BC)
- Windsor (ON)
- Winnipeg (MB)
Sorted alphabetically by city name.
🏒 Sports
Hockey
- Main: c/Hockey
- Calgary Flames
- Edmonton Oilers
- Montréal Canadiens
- Ottawa Senators
- Toronto Maple Leafs
- Vancouver Canucks
- Winnipeg Jets
Football (NFL): incomplete
Football (CFL): incomplete
Baseball
Basketball
Soccer
- Main: /c/CanadaSoccer
- Toronto FC
💻 Schools / Universities
- BC | UBC (U of British Columbia)
- BC | SFU (Simon Fraser U)
- BC | VIU (Vancouver Island U)
- BC | TWU (Trinity Western U)
- ON | UofT (U of Toronto)
- ON | UWO (U of Western Ontario)
- ON | UWaterloo (U of Waterloo)
- ON | UofG (U of Guelph)
- ON | OTU (Ontario Tech U)
- QC | McGill (McGill U)
Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.
💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales
- Personal Finance Canada
- Buy Canadian
- BAPCSalesCanada
- Canadian Investor
- Canadian Skincare
- Churning Canada
- Quebec Finance
🗣️ Politics
- General:
- Federal Parties (alphabetical):
- By Province (alphabetical):
🍁 Social / Culture
- Ask a Canadian
- Bières Québec
- Canada Francais
- Canadian Gaming
- EhVideos (Canadian video media)
- First Nations
- First Nations Languages
- Indigenous
- Inuit
- Logiciels libres au Québec
- Maple Music (music)
Rules
- Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
How are we feeling about this?
The cost of failing to deter aggression is incredibly high, look at Ukraine. We are in a similar situation, but we are even worse off. There is much less conventional parity between us and the hostile dictatorship next door. As an example, Ukraine started the war with a layered air defense network and thousands of interceptors to keep it in the fight, that led to Russian caution with their air assets and allowed a front to form. Canada has precisely 0 air defense batteries.
Ultimately there is no reasonable amount we can spend to gain conventional deterrent against the new United States. The money needs to yield a fast track to nuclear deterrence.
Unfortunately for us Canadians, we are staring at the choice between spending and sacrificing financially to hedge against the risk of invasion. If we don't, and the worst happens, we'll spend much, much more, and a lot of the cost will be blood.
This all makes sense. If we're getting a nuclear deterrent with this, that would be money well spent. If it does not and we endure any significant austerity as a result, then Canadians might straight up replace Carney with someone who welcomes annexation. This might call for debt-spending to avoid that, but I'm feeling Carney might like austerity instead. I hope I'm wrong.
There is no way the USA will allow nukes that close to their country. Did we forget about what happened when nukes were going to be located to Cuba?
Oh yeah, I think so too. We could possibly pull that off during a Democratic US government. But it's still unlikely.
This is not for military defense against the US. All the investment is focused on the Arctic and on deepening military alliance with Arctic states and states that border Russia.
Which border do we share with the US? Any hardening of that? Nope.
We are basically all-in on supporting the US defense strategy. We are part of the team to face Russia so the US can focus on China. Also, we are basically investing in defense infrastructure to provide security for the resource supply chain between our far north and the US.
We may not love them right now, but we're still team USA. We are still basically a resource colony, and we are doing as the empire's strategy demands of us.
This is not about defending against the US or Russia, it's about extortion to force Canada to buy US munitions.
Absolutely not. Nuclear weapons are an existential threat to humanity itself. I'm fine with more defence spending but building a bomb that can destroy the planet is to defence as building a coal plant is to energy. It's destroying the future to protect the present.
The other comments in this thread (almost) all talk about any amount of spending being useless in the face of the extreme might of the US army, so I'm curious how you see more spending as being ok? Genuine question, not trying to attack you or anything.
You can't convince other countries to form a military alliance with your country unless it has a half decent military. France isn't going to agree to protect our country unless we can convince them we can protect theirs. In an ideal word, nobody would spend on defence but we don't live in that world. Some amount of defence spending is unfortunately required. At least it sometimes does lead to societal improvements like GPS.
I also don't believe the idea that the US can just instantly win a war. Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq held their own. Russia thought they'd take over Ukraine in 3 days and it's been 3 years and counting. These super powers like to claim they could take on the entire planet and win but then get embarrassed by a bunch of farmers.
US dropped 89 kilotons of bombs on Iraq, over twice the power of Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.
I don't get the argument here... Countries should just be nuking each other all the time because it's not that bad? The US should have just dropped some nukes on Iraq and it would have been better?
Nukes kill children. Nukes destroy hospitals. Nukes give whole body third degree burns to everyone who isn't immediately obliterated. Nukes irradiate the land and sky so much that we can date paintings based on the presence of isotopes spread by nukes in the ink. Nuclear warfare is a war against humanity.
Bad.
There is no amount we could spend on defence that would stop the US. Any annexation would would be immediately over and instead be fought as a long expensive civil resistance at best. I think we spend enough on defence to know, cry about it, and help out around the world.
Instead of spending our money on making Canada a better place to live we are going to give it to a few corporations that make weapons, we'll probably sell them to israel to kill kids with.
Like there's just so many better places to spend this: housing, hospitals, infrastructure, transport, environmental projects.
Annoyed. The only realistic military threat we face is to the south of us and investing a whole lot of money into conventional weapons is about as good as lighting it on fire in the scenario where we fight a conventional war against the US. If you want an actual effective deterrent to a hot war against them invest in WMDs. Then use the money we don't blow uselessly on tanks and fighter jets to develop Canada into something that one day could afford to develop something competitive.
Good as long as the money doesn’t go to our enemy to the south.
It is. We are going to buy the F35’s. Why I have no fucking idea but here it is.
https://ottawacitizen.com/public-service/defence-watch/canadian-military-f-35-fighter-jet-spain-india-u-s
Even the US Navy rejected F35s as useless, expensive and unreliable.
Here I am boycotting US products by avoiding spending hundreds/thousands of my dollars and then my government goes and wastes billions there.
Fuck Carney. He's better than that other weasel but fuck Carney.
The only thing about Carney is about calling for a review for that (already planned) purchase, and that the review will be ready at the end of the summer.
There are a lot of bad things you can say about Carney, but I don't see this as one of them. Yet.
The US can remotely turn them off so they are DOA
Exactly. We should not even be thinking about buying the child rapist’s stuff no matter for the countries safety and jets.
Incidentally, according to Mark Carney's declaration of assets he's invested in Lockheed-Martin.