.
Irony of history. There were some voices obsessing about the Arctic and calling for more Canadian military preparations to counter the oh-so fearsome Russians in the Arctic region; icebreakers, infantry with snow vehicles and whatnot.
Now it becomes obvious that the actual threat to Canada's sovereignty isn't coming from the North; it's coming from the South - icebreakers and fancy snow special forces won't make a difference.
Canadian deterrence & defence isn't about navy, air force or armoured vehicles any more. It's about occupation-proofing themselves by becoming an armed nation.*
Being allied with Europe won't help Canada much if the Fascists in Washington, D.C. Mar-A-Lago get too greedy for land. It's simply not credible deterrence, for Europe cannot defend Canada against the U.S. given the logistical issues and requirement for troops to face Russia in parallel.
So I offer four advices for Canada
- Avoid angering the Fascists too much, particularly don't suddenly shut down the electricity exports.
- Arm yourself with training, equipment, weapons and munitions that would make an occupation impractical and bloody even with a million occupation troops, and let the American public know about it. Conscription for three to six months training is warranted under the current circumstances in my opinion, much longer conscription service for personnel qualified to train the recruits.
- Build up a conventional deterrent, such as the ability to launch ten thousand cheap cruise missiles within an hour to destroy thousands of fragile power grid and (petro-)chemical industry targets up to 1,500 km deep in Fascist America.
- Ward against subversion. Shut out American media, prohibit immigration and travel from Fascist America, minimise the quantity of Fascist American diplomats to a skeleton crew in Ottawa, cut all intelligence and security cooperation including ejecting all American military personnel (even embassy marines), shut down NORAD.
Canada: Stop wasting money on toying with a miniature balanced military. Almost none of it has any relevance to Canadian security.
S O
*: The Americans have the myth that a nation armed with light weapons such as assault rifles is a nation that cannot be occupied. The current crop of American politicians is stupid enough to believe such propaganda, and so will be the loyalty-over-competence crop of new generals that get installed in commands to coup-proof the Fascist regime.
.
You only used "fascism" or variations of the word six times. Thats fewer than one per paragraph.
ReplyDeleteI mean, I get it, you don't like the new government and there are good reasons, and the defense advice you lay out also sounds reasonable (same goes for many countries to be honest), but I believe it is a bit of an overreaction to scream about fascism from the rooftops.
Just my two cents.
I scream from rooftops about problems years before others realise them.
DeleteMussolini was in power for 13 years before he started wars of aggression.
Hitler was in power for 5 years before he started grab land.
Canada needs 3 years to satisfactorily apply what I prescribed even if it went all-in on the effort. Rather 10 years at ordinary speed.
The American Fascism checks all boxes of Fascism, it's just not honest about what it is because the brand is burnt (the overt hostility to antifascism is an indicator that at least parts of the movement will become overt Fascists).
One can also describe it as well as oligarchy-kleptocracy with dissolution of separation fo church and state (the "church" serving at a tool to control the population as in Russia, or at least certain demographics).
In the end, it's very much the same as Fascism and it already shows a total lack of respect for the sovereignty of other countries, which means Canada needs a different deterrence & defence ASAP.
@anon:
DeleteI deleted your comment and the rewrite of your comment because I don't tolerate the bollocks about Fascism being an Italy-only thing.
Get some actual political science book or a history book, or even only read wikipedia. Whatever, you will find in non-crazy sources that Fascism is a political ideology/movement. It can exist and has existed in many countries. Nazism is not on the same level, it's a subcategory of Fascism.
Literally on the second paragraph of the German wikipedia article on "Fascism" it says:
Delete"Die Verallgemeinerung des Faschismus-Begriffs von einer zeitlich und national begrenzten Eigenbezeichnung zur Gattungsbezeichnung einer bestimmten Herrschaftsart ist umstritten, besonders für den deutschen NS-Staat."
So much for that.
So your own opinion is in no way consensus.
DeleteIf you disagreed you could have written a counterpoint instead of just censoring, which, in combination with your corresponding rhetorics, just makes you look like a authoritarian leftist.
This blog is in English.
DeleteThe English wikipedia agrees with me wholly, while the German one disagrees with your assertion, as you quoted. Worst case interpretation of the German wikipedia article is that I deleted a comment that asserted something as certain that's disputed.
BTW
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism
Also, I dislike manipulative cherrypicking.
DeleteThere's a whole chapter in the German wikipedia article on fascism listing 6 regimes that are considered Fascist by scholars and 22 European countries where unsuccessful (didn't come to power) Fascist movements existed.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faschismus#%C3%9Cberblick_der_als_faschistisch_bezeichneten_Bewegungen_in_Europa
Well, it doesn't hurt (much) to prepare for various possibilities, and Trump is somewhat erratic so the advice is generally sound (especially the bit about not pissing him off, not so much shutting out the media, most of the US media dislike him somewhat :D ).
ReplyDeleteOne nitpick: Saying you're against "antifascism" makes you fascist? I always saw those antifa guys as essentially a politically motivated group of violent thugs. Dressing in black and wearing masks and beating people for their political opinions, I don't know. Always saw them as the lefts modern version of the Nazis SA during the twenties, but I guess peoples view on that depends what type of politics they were socialised into.
The US needs Russia to help contain China. China is the peer adversary.
ReplyDeleteRussia failed to overrun Ukraine. The US has decided that NATO is no-longer essential.
For a realistic look at whats happening
George Friedman at Geopolitical Futures
https://youtu.be/cYpL-QvGM8M?si=2-JI1YPvgzSpR-GG
For a historical context
Sarah Paine (US navy historian)
https://youtu.be/x0QrOjqXx8U?si=QfceC0cbWZM7ExFh
Seems to me the American's are working to reduce the size of their government and are giving us warnings about free speech.
ReplyDeleteNot very fascist like behavior.
Also abolishing the rule of law and threatening military invasion of other states. Seems moderately and increasingly fascist to me.
DeleteThe American Fascists aren't pursuing "free speech". They want their propaganda to be louder and have absolutely no interest in protecting free speech of political enemies.
DeleteThey "reduce the size of the government" only in regard to consumer protection, white collar crime prosecution, social benefits for the poor and middle class. That's in no way in conflict with the Fascism diagnosis.
If there is a head of state you dislike and he is opposed to all that is good on literally every single point and everything is only ever evil and bad and obviously so yet tens of millions voted for him, you might want to consider that perhaps the problem is that you found your way into a bit of a media echochamber.
DeleteI didn't write about like or dislike. I wrote about what they do.
DeleteI notice you didn't even try to disprove that.
Not like there is much to dispute, you said america is now fascist, I believe you're wrong. But I'll try to at least counter the two points you did make here in the comments.
Delete"The American Fascists aren't pursuing "free speech". They want their propaganda to be louder and have absolutely no interest in protecting free speech of political enemies."
Do you have any proof for this assertion? I don't see it like that, I see almost all political censorship coming from the left ("hatespeech" etc.), while the right (sorry, the "american fascist") actively wants the left to say whatever they want because the left in the US is so far gone that it actually helps the right when people see what these lunatics are up to. Again, just my opinion, fully aware you don't share them.
"They "reduce the size of the government" only in regard to consumer protection, white collar crime prosecution, social benefits for the poor and middle class. That's in no way in conflict with the Fascism diagnosis."
I don't see proof of this, though it is too early yet to see where it will ultimately go. Considering just how much fraud there must be in a government that massive (and with such ridiculously lax corruption laws) I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt for now. The reaction of the opposition to audits suggests the government might still only be scratching at the surface, but as I said, I'll wait and see.
I am with you that the talk of annexing other people's territory is inappropriate to say the least. Though the annex canada thing is just trolling, as if the conservatives would want canada to become part of the US, it would actually hurt their future election chances.
The problem with calling people fascists is that it makes the reader think it's just the opposition screeching because they're pissed. If a conservative or right leaning politician called literally every opponent communists thats just babble and the same is true in reverse. I will say that I respect you (or I wouldn't bother responding), so if you have other points to make I will consider them with an open mind.
If not, I understand, I know how tedious discussing politics on the internet can become.
Bit odd to talk about free speech when Trump is known for going after political enemies and placing cronies in positions of power. And just a couple of days ago things like this occured: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgj5nlxz44yo
DeleteI am sure the Trump disinformation bubble will have its own spin on this, but this is clearly authoritarian and anti-freedom.
The lying moron just called two TV networks "illegal" because one of them doesn't lick his boots and the other only does so occasionally.
Delete@John Smith
DeleteSeriously? You mean the foreigner who gave out pro Hamas fliers and openly stated his goal was the destruction of western civilization is getting deported? Oh no, what a tragedy.
Yes, free speech has limits, there always have been, lots of people are now getting butthurt because those consequences are no longer applied onesided in their favour.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_They_Came
DeleteIt's a salami slice tactic.
You're the frog swimming in the water glass, and you notice nothing.
By that logic I could argue that criminals are getting locked up and since we're not crying out soon we'll be next. I mean if I travel to a foreign country and start calling for its downfall I damn well should be kicked out asap.
DeleteThis idea that anyone is entitled to live in any country he chooses regardless of behaviour is absurd. Personally I think it's high time that the west starts being a little more discerning about who they allow to live in their countries. That would also help reduce the increasing antagonism to immigration.
There are laws that work well in one country and are disastrous in another. "Stand your ground" is self-evident in German law, but it's abused by people who want to kill in Florida.
DeleteLikewise, the same political action is sometimes a slippery slope into dictatorship and rather innocuous in another context.
The Biden administration deporting such a guy would happen rather calmly as business as usual. The lying moron administration uses it as a step in desensitising, as a salami slice. First they expel some WH correspondents, then they crack down on a dissenter whom a lot of people despise. Then on some more dissenters, some more, some more, until there's no free speech and no free press any more.
BTW, the lying moron is so stupid and undisciplined that he's already giving away his desired end-state:
https://x.com/peterbakernyt/status/1900899455206879500
Yeah, I'm with you on the media thing (though a lot of corporate media is ludicrously biased and even outright deceptive), anyone should be allowed to write what they want. Even if someone else considers it to be misinformation. I would however say kicking out or denying press passes to media caught in blatant lies is understandable, though the criteria would have to be debated.
DeleteAs for the deportation, what's he supposed to do? Let foreign open terror sympathisers continue to stay? Maybe it's the start of a slippery slope but at least the start is perfectly fine. If he pushes too far, then you resist, I'm not going to oppose the deportation of some hostile scumbag just because in the future it might hit other people. When it goes too far, then you resist, until then think of the president what you will, at least he's not letting this kind of crap slide like so many other western administrations have for years. Like in germany where deporting convicted felons to afghanistan is just impossible except of course in the days leading up to an important election ^^
I hate that we've come to this. Everything is so broken that people will vote for anything to end the status quo. Meanwhile the preexisting political class just resists and tries to keep everything the same and doesn't realise or care that these parties/movements/people are not going away unless they actually start fixing things.
Just out of curiosity, is it normal that your more military themed posts (which are excellent by the way, glad I found your blog) get a lot less comment traffic than the political ones?
"As for the deportation, what's he supposed to do?"
DeleteA deportation of a single individual is a low key affair. Someone 5-8 levels below POTUS does that job usually.
They politicized it - that's what matters here, not the act itself. They're trying to normalise sanctioning speech.
"Like in germany where deporting convicted felons to afghanistan is just impossible"
Deportation is a state-level authority in Germany, not a federal one. That's because policing is almost entirely state-level. It's a minor design fault in the constitution. The 16 states have no means of pressuring countries into accepting their people back (a problem with Morocco and some other countries) and little means to argue in court that a certain country is safe enough.
I never figured out how to create traffic or how to get much comment engagement. I expected my recent AAM blog post to hit a nerve, but comments-wise it was a total flop.
I understand that me pushing back on some comments depressed comments engagement compared to for example Think Defence, of course. But then again, TD, get a lot more traffic with a lot more weird topics anyway.
Good point, it should be lower levels dealing with deportations. I'm still not entirely convinced it's really a slippery slope, that they'll really push to fullon authoritarianism but I guess we'll see.
DeleteI understood the deportation thing as a mostly federal affair, especially in tricky situations like Afghanistan. Didn't the Ministry of the interior request a list of criminal afghans from the different states and then select the candidates to be deported, hence the deportees from multiple different states? I saw a report to that effect (don't remember where though). Anyway, the point was less that it's impossible, thats just what the government pretends most of the time, only to flip 3 days or whatever it was before the state elections last year. If you believe the date was a coincidence and not politically motivated I have a bridge to sell you.
Yeah, I read the AAM one, I think the reason for low traffic would be that theres not really much to debate there, you just laid out a prefectly reasonable classification system, I'd only comment for debate or to ask for clarification, neither was necessary. And so the only comment is someone having an aneurism I think :D
The German federal level makes the laws about deportations (with consent of the Bundesrat where the state governments have their representatives), but the deportation has to be done by the 16 German states.
DeleteAnonymous15 March 2025 at 11:09
Delete@John Smith
Seriously? You mean the foreigner who gave out pro Hamas fliers and openly stated his goal was the destruction of western civilization is getting deported? Oh no, what a tragedy.
Yes, free speech has limits, there always have been, lots of people are now getting butthurt because those consequences are no longer applied onesided in their favour.
You clearly don't understand what free speech means. Free speech isn't free speech when you only allow free speech for the poltics you want.
And that isn't his openly stated goal anyways, that's just your disinformation bubble.
You seem strangely unconcerned about actual authoritarians threatening free speech and freedom.
Here's another example today, why aren't you concerned about this anti-freedom authoritarian behaviour threatening western democracy? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8j0vwpkwkxo
Also...butthurt? Is this how an adult mind should be thinking? Are you a kid or something?
@John Smith
Delete"Free speech isn't free speech when you only allow free speech for the poltics you want."
And he won't be imprisoned or fined or anything, he can say those things, doesn't mean you have to tolerate him in your country. He is a guest and should behave within certain norms or leave.
"You seem strangely unconcerned about actual authoritarians threatening free speech and freedom.
Here's another example today, why aren't you concerned about this anti-freedom authoritarian behaviour threatening western democracy? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8j0vwpkwkxo"
Yep, completely unconcerned about that. Said Judge wanted to stop the deportations of dangerous criminal illegals. Illegal immigration is just that - ILLEGAL! Weird how letting western countries get flooded by literally millions of illegals is fine, but god forbid someone tries to send even the worst of them back.
"Also...butthurt? Is this how an adult mind should be thinking? Are you a kid or something?"
Not a kid, thats just generally how I write in english, not my first language, since I rarely get to "speak" it and mostly practice by writing on the internet I guess I'm just used to using course language. So fair enough, I shall try to amend my language somewhat.
"@Anonymous18 March 2025 at 19:38"
DeleteYou can type in CAPSLOCK all you want, but you seemed to have mised the point. For all you talk about illegal, not the main point, you seemed unconcerned about the rule of law and judicial process.
When even Trump appointed supreme court judges issues such statements, perhaps you should be concerned about rule of law and actual freedom of speech.
When a judge can be called to be impeached for doing his job, that is a direct contradiction to freedom of speech. But again, you seem curiously most unconcerned by that, preferring instead to just chant some irrelevant culture wars stuff.
Maybe Canada should consider what the Poles plan on doing (universal military training).
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy83r93l208o
Welcome back, rare visitor.
DeleteOccupation and punitive bombardment may be deterrable with my proposal,
navsl blockade and punitive ground raids not so much.
Conscription for a regular army is useless, an invitation to disaster.
I like #3: Destroy petroleum refineries. Studying the bombing campaign of Germany in WWII, I became convinced it was the only thing that actually was effective. Bombing civilians probably lengthened the war as the population became angrier and angrier. Bombing industrial targets did little as industrial production went up throughout the war (until the refineries were finally bombed).
ReplyDeleteIt would be devastating.
The U.S. hasn't built a new refinery since 1972 IIRC.
DeleteOnly three factories in WW2 Germany produced the additives needed for high octane fuel.
Only two factories produced synthetic rubber.
Multiple components essential to submarines/torpedoes were produced in but one factory each.
WW2 showed the value of picking strategic targets well, which made the 1999 air war and the limitations on the Ukrainian cruise missile target selection even more egregious.