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.
Making an educated guess, I would think Canada was taken less seriously than Mexico or Brazil and probably around the level of Australia or South Africa. It wasn't even an independent country yet, as Canadian citizenship and a split from the British Empire only came in the years following the war. I understand that many want Canada to have a glorious military past, but hopefully we can keep this within the realm of reality.
Well as opposed to making an educated 'guess', why not back up your assertion that Canada was taken 'less seriously' than Mexico and Brazil and around the level of Australia or South Africa with something sustantive.. What is the basis of such an assertion? In what context? Please, details...
If it wasn't for Canada being attached to USA , Canada would not be able to hold their own.
Actually the exact opposite would be true.. Irregardless, instead of playing what if how about what is and the truth is the defense of Canada and the U.S are so intertwined there is zero likelihood that Canada or the U.S would have to defend this part of the world solo...
When I was young and living in Ontario there was this "national pride" thing among young men that the Canadian military might be a bit of a joke when it came to equipment, etc. but that its soldiers were the toughest in the world physically.
I also often heard this line allegedly from someone famous (but never named if I recall) once saying: "Give me American technology, British officers and Canadian soldiers... and I'll rule the world!"
I can assure you that nobody believes this outside of Canada. Canadian nationalism is a strange thing. It is like a small guy who needs to remind everyone how tough he is. The joke is on him.
Well as opposed to making an educated 'guess', why not back up your assertion that Canada was taken 'less seriously' than Mexico and Brazil and around the level of Australia or South Africa with something sustantive.. What is the basis of such an assertion? In what context? Please, details...
Most German soldiers didn't know what Canada was, and the more enlightened just thought it was a region of the USA. Canada's most well known contribution of WWII was a catastrophic defeat at Dieppe in 1942. Canadian soldiers were just part of the British (like Australia, South Africa, New Zealand) and used British equipment and tactics. In WWI the Germans thought that the Canadians were American volunteers in the British Army, and they thought the French-Canadians like the Royal 22nd were Frenchmen wearing British uniforms. Different countries had reputations. The British and French were seen as weak. The Russians were feared and known to have huge numbers and courageous soldiers. The Americans were respected as being generous towards civilians and prisoners, and were known as being very smart quick learners and having excellent equipment, technology, morale. Contrary to propaganda like "Passchendaele" the Canadians weren't even on the map and were nothing more than minions to the British. Canada didn't even become independent until the 1980's.
You truly believe that Canada could "hold it's own" against the US? Is this some sort of joke? I think that patriotic fervor and petty nationalism are getting the best of you.
Most German soldiers didn't know what Canada was, and the more enlightened just thought it was a region of the USA. Canada's most well known contribution of WWII was a catastrophic defeat at Dieppe in 1942. Canadian soldiers were just part of the British (like Australia, South Africa, New Zealand) and used British equipment and tactics. In WWI the Germans thought that the Canadians were American volunteers in the British Army, and they thought the French-Canadians like the Royal 22nd were Frenchmen wearing British uniforms. Different countries had reputations. The British and French were seen as weak. The Russians were feared and known to have huge numbers and courageous soldiers. The Americans were respected as being generous towards civilians and prisoners, and were known as being very smart quick learners and having excellent equipment, technology, morale. Contrary to propaganda like "Passchendaele" the Canadians weren't even on the map and were nothing more than minions to the British. Canada didn't even become independent until the 1980's.
I see a lot of claims here - little in the way of supportive evidence re how Canadians soldiers or Canada was perceived in WWII... Any credible sources to back up the claim? Even if we make the assumption that you are correct doesn't address actual contributions of Canadian soldiers and only so called 'perceptions' - they are two different things.
You truly believe that Canada could "hold it's own" against the US? Is this some sort of joke? I think that patriotic fervor and petty nationalism are getting the best of you.
Read my post again and understand the message and context please. I'll elaborate further, if Canada is bordered by a superpower and because it is in the interest of that Superpower to defend a nation right beside its border (for obvious strategic reasons) - an attack on us - a country that not only shares a border with them, but many shared values would represent a direct threat and attack against them.. If any nation questions this i'd welcome them to directly attack Canada and see how the response will be by the U.S - willing to take chances anyone?
Canada and the U.S are part of shared defense organizations like NORAD, not to mention the NATO relationship making the U.S more intertwined militarily with Canada than any other nation. Having said that, If not for this relationship, I do think Canada would hold its own because it wouldn't have that relationship to rely upon that both nations currently enjoy.. The U.S always has and probably always will prefer Canada as a junior partner but under their protective wings... They wouldn't have it any other way really - geopolitics and influence..
I'm not really sure how you would come to the conclusions you did regarding my post and make unnecessary accusations about petty nationalism getting the best of me. In no way did my posts make any inference that the Canadian military could compete with the worlds only military superpower - no nation can.
In the link below you can see that Canada in 2012 was ranked 14th in the world for military expenditures so for a country with its population - it isn't too bad actually and double that of the Netherlands btw.
I can assure you that nobody believes this outside of Canada. Canadian nationalism is a strange thing. It is like a small guy who needs to remind everyone how tough he is. The joke is on him.
Do you have any evidence that Canadian soldiers aren't well regarded and respected as soldiers? Again you are speaking along subjective lines instead of anything factual.
I would hate for Canada to have a reputation for having a bigger, better, badder, meaner military. I would never want Canada to be known as a military super-power or an arrogant bully that can intimidate others because of being a super-power that can hold others in the thrall of fear. None of those things are anything for a self respecting peace-keeping nation to be proud of or to boast about and they're not the way for a nation to gain sincere, genuine respect and friendship from other nations.
.
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.