U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-10-2012, 12:47 AM
 
Location: British Columbia ♥ 🍁 ♥
7,235 posts, read 6,581,911 times
Reputation: 14203

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by PostSecularist View Post
If, God forbid, the US does take over Canada, I think it's only prudent that Canada be able to preserve itself as a nation, rather than become a simple state of America.

I don't think a voluntary union with the US would benefit Canada either, but if political pressure came to bear making a voluntary union involuntary, I think autonomy is a better option for Canadians than simple statehood.
Not wanting to be a harpy with you, but the above statement is what's called an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms. If a union was involuntary and against the will of Canada there could be no autonomy for Canada. The definition of autonomy is self government, independence or freedom, as of the will or one's actions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PostSecularist View Post
Well, I mean the United States was going invade and conquer Canada as late as 1940 as detailed by the US War Plan Red. Only WWII got in the way of that and put those plans on hold.
During the 1920s and 1930s, the United States Military Joint Army and Navy Board developed a number of color-coded war plans to outline potential U.S. strategies for a variety of hypothetical war scenarios. The plans, which were developed by the Joint Planning Committee (which later became the Joint Chiefs of Staff) were officially withdrawn in 1939, in favor of five Rainbow Plans developed to meet the threat of a two-ocean war against multiple enemies. * See list of Rainbow Plans below*.

War Plan Red - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:
Joint Army and Navy Basic War Plan Red, also known as the Atlantic Strategic War Plan, was a war plan by the United States in the event of war with British Empire (the "Red" forces). The war was seen as "unlikely" and "highly improbable," but was used as a planning exercise to understand the United States ability to defend the Atlantic coast, as well as fight a two-front war with Japan and the British Empire simultaneously (as envisioned in War Plan Red-Orange).

It was developed by the United States Army following the 1927 Geneva Naval Conference; and approved in May 1930 by the Secretary of War and the Secretary of Navy and updated in 1934–35. In 1939 it was decided that further planning was no longer applicable but that the plan be retained. War Plan Red was declassified in 1974.

United States color-coded war plans - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

* Rainbow Plans *

Quote:
List of Color Plans

According to the public intelligence site, Global Security, the following plans are known to have existed:


War Plan Black A plan for war with Germany. The best-known version of Black was conceived as a contingency plan during World War I in case France fell and the Germans attempted to seize French possessions in the Caribbean Sea or launch an attack on the eastern seaboard.

War Plan Gray There were two War Plans named Gray. The first Central America and the Caribbean, and the second dealt with invading the Portuguese Azores.

War Plan Brown Dealt with an uprising in the Philippines.

War Plan Tan Intervention in Cuba.

War Plan Red Plan for Great Britain (with sub variants Crimson, Scarlet, Ruby, Garnet, and Emerald for British dominions)

War Plan Orange Plan for Japan.

War Plan Red-Orange Considered a two-front war with the United States (Blue) opposing Japan (Orange) and the British Empire (Red) simultaneously. Ultimately this analysis led to the understanding that the United States didn't have the resources to fight a two front war, and it would make sense to focus on one front, probably in the Atlantic. Ultimately this was the decision made in the Plan Dog memo.

War Plan Yellow Dealt with war in China - specifically, the defense of Beijing and relief of Shanghai during the Second Sino-Japanese War.

War Plan Gold Involved war with France, and/or France's Caribbean colonies.

War Plan Green Involved war with Mexico or what was known as "Mexican Domestic Intervention" in order to defeat rebel forces and establish a pro-American government. War Plan Green was officially canceled in 1946.

War Plan Indigo Involved an occupation of Iceland. In 1941, while Denmark was under German occupation, the US actually did occupy Iceland, relieving British units during the Battle of the Atlantic.

War Plan Purple Dealt with invading a South American republic.

War Plan Violet Covered Latin America.

War Plan White Dealt with a domestic uprising in the US, and later evolved to Operation Garden Plot, the general US military plan for civil disturbances and peaceful protests. Parts of War Plan White were used to deal with the Bonus Expeditionary Force in 1932. Communist insurgents were considered the most likely threat by the authors of War Plan White.

War Plan Blue Covered defensive plans and preparations that the United States should take in times of peace.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-11-2012, 08:45 AM
 
Location: Pacific Northwest
353 posts, read 803,895 times
Reputation: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoisite View Post
Not wanting to be a harpy with you, but the above statement is what's called an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms. If a union was involuntary and against the will of Canada there could be no autonomy for Canada. The definition of autonomy is self government, independence or freedom, as of the will or one's actions.
Well, tell China that, because I think they missed that memo on Tibet.
All I'm saying is: Theoretically speaking, if Canada, voluntarily or not, happened to be subsumed into the American union, I think Canada should be able to maintain some historical and cultural distinctiveness inside an American union, instead of being merely assimilated into a "51st state"

Quote:
During the 1920s and 1930s, the United States Military Joint Army and Navy Board developed a number of color-coded war plans to outline potential U.S. strategies for a variety of hypothetical war scenarios. The plans, which were developed by the Joint Planning Committee (which later became the Joint Chiefs of Staff) were officially withdrawn in 1939, in favor of five Rainbow Plans developed to meet the threat of a two-ocean war against multiple enemies. * See list of Rainbow Plans below*.

War Plan Red - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




United States color-coded war plans - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

* Rainbow Plans *
Haha Orange and Black was awesome :P
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2012, 10:27 AM
 
3,806 posts, read 5,200,549 times
Reputation: 3294
I fail to really see the benefit to either nation much less some sort of synergistic benefit.

You'd resolve the three or four remaining border disputes between the countries (more or less really they'd just be shuffled around to disputes between states as well as creating new ones with regards to the three or four inhabited American exclaves surrounded by Canada). You might end up forming a country that is larger than Russia, but someone will have to check that. You would have a somewhat easier time creating and enforcing sustainable fishing quotas especially on species which are caught only by American and Canadian fishermen. You would probably improve the national park system a little bit over the the current system of two national park systems existing side by side. There are probably a few other benefits, but in the end that really isn't all that much.

Now if it did happen I think the Anglophone Canadians would end up having an attitude a bit like Texas on steroids. There'd still be RCMP just like there are still Texas Rangers. You'd see that with a lot of the Canadian institutions. The Canadian states in the short run would end up being another one of the handful of cultural countries within a country that are part of the US. I think long term in the anglophone parts you'd see the prairie provinces gravitate more towards the mountain west and plains states since they're already more similar than they are different. You'd see a similar thing with New England and the maritime provinces. I do think though that Canada would have to join as a series of states instead of just one if it happened.

What it might really do is recreate the idea of Acadia which would be like the Quebec separatists on steroids. The Francophone concentration would be spread out of several states many of whom are originally from Quebec. They'd agitate for Acadiana to be made a separate state from Louisina. They'd send French tutors and activists down to Acadiana to put the final nails in the coffins of Cajun and Creole and replace them with the French you'd hear in Quebec. Then they'd start agitating for people in Louisiana whose ancestors are francophones to relearn their old tongue and rebuild it as another Francophone state. Then who knows maybe try the same in the parts of Missouri and Illinois where French was spoken at one point or maybe try to take over Maine, New Hampshire, or Vermont since they already have large francophone communities. But maybe not too. Who knows?

In the end though in a US where states rights were more respected, there wouldn't be a great deal of difference if Canada joined as one state or several since each new state would have a wide latitude in how "Canadian" it remained.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2012, 10:46 AM
 
25,059 posts, read 23,172,752 times
Reputation: 11619
To a lot of the naysayers, look up the North American Union. Canada being under the same legal system as the US is a real possibility, along with Mexico. I have the same sentiments as the Canadian posters on here, our 2 countries combining with each other is enough to make me throw up in my mouth. This is why we should all hope the EU fails, as it is the precursor to North American integration
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2012, 04:11 PM
 
Location: Beautiful Niagara Falls ON.
10,024 posts, read 10,568,089 times
Reputation: 8908
I can really see some big pluses for Minnisota, North Dakota, Montana and Washington state joining Canada. They would together with Sk, Al and BC have so much oil, coal, grains and cow poop that they would be the richest region in North America.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2012, 01:13 AM
 
Location: Sandpoint, Idaho
2,897 posts, read 5,279,330 times
Reputation: 3073
Why the language need to be that of "takeover?" How about separation?

Greater Cascadia
----------------------
Washington
Oregon
Alaska
BC
Alberta
Saskatchewan
Yukon Terr
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Wyoming
Northern Utah
Northern Nevada
North Northern California
Idaho

Total Population: 28.3 million (Canada: 9.1m; US 19.2m)
Natural Resources: Incredible
Energy: Incredible
Vibrant Cities: Vancouver, Seattle, Portland, Salt Lake, Calgary
Nature: Incredible
Social Problems: Less than on average
Major Ports: Yes
Asia Pacific Focus: Yes
Lifestyle: Very similar
High Tech: Yes
Universities: Some very good ones.
Population Density: low
Need to spend on Military intervention abroad in countries that hate us before and after?: None

S.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2012, 06:48 AM
 
18,273 posts, read 10,374,392 times
Reputation: 13334
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandpointian View Post
Why the language need to be that of "takeover?" How about separation?

Greater Cascadia
----------------------
Washington
Oregon
Alaska
BC
Alberta
Saskatchewan
Yukon Terr
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Wyoming
Northern Utah
Northern Nevada
North Northern California
Idaho

Total Population: 28.3 million (Canada: 9.1m; US 19.2m)
Natural Resources: Incredible
Energy: Incredible
Vibrant Cities: Vancouver, Seattle, Portland, Salt Lake, Calgary
Nature: Incredible
Social Problems: Less than on average
Major Ports: Yes
Asia Pacific Focus: Yes
Lifestyle: Very similar
High Tech: Yes
Universities: Some very good ones.
Population Density: low
Need to spend on Military intervention abroad in countries that hate us before and after?: None

S.
So you think those States would welcome B.C. with it's history akin to Los Angelas mind set of entitlement spending, using credit they don't have, and it's burgeoning debt load?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2012, 01:41 PM
 
Location: British Columbia ♥ 🍁 ♥
7,235 posts, read 6,581,911 times
Reputation: 14203
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan View Post
So you think those States would welcome B.C. with it's history akin to Los Angelas mind set of entitlement spending, using credit they don't have, and it's burgeoning debt load?
Does the rest of Canada resent it?

.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2012, 05:32 PM
 
Location: Sandpoint, Idaho
2,897 posts, read 5,279,330 times
Reputation: 3073
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan View Post
So you think those States would welcome B.C. with it's history akin to Los Angelas mind set of entitlement spending, using credit they don't have, and it's burgeoning debt load?
Good question. Entrepots offer huge trade advantages and income flows. If BC wishes to be more socialist than the rest of the US or the fantasy Greater Cascadia, that is fine, as long as their choices do not seek to impose their model on the rest of the country.

It is this inability to sit on one's hands, bite the lip, or deal appropriately with White liberal guilt that becomes problematic, usually with a touch of NIMBYism.

BTW, the largest and most socialist cities in the US, are net contributors to the US economy, paying more in taxes than they receive in services. I guess it is yet another cost of pursuing the socialist agenda.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2012, 05:40 PM
 
261 posts, read 305,058 times
Reputation: 387
But I would miss your national anthem. O Canada, our home and native land.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top