this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2026
151 points (94.2% liked)

Canada

10881 readers
486 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. 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 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Was a pipe dream to think Carney would stand up to the orange menace.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 6 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

It doesn't really make sense to. The idea of a sending a token force is to act as trip-wire. A trip-wire force is there so if they're attacked, it means war. In that case, those soldiers would be reinforced. They're the tip of the spear.

If Canada sent a trip-wire force in Greenland, those soldiers would not be be expecting reinforcements if attacked by the US. Because Canada is on the border with the US there would be fighting much closer to the aggressor than where the trip-wire forces are. So it would be sending soldiers to Greenland and telling them if attacked by the US they will die with no hope of reinforcement.

You put trip-wires on your outer defenses between you and your enemy. You don't put them far away from the front-lines of a potential conflict. Doing that is just telling soldiers to either die or surrender if attacked.

Remember they're soldiers not some pawns on a chessboard that you sacrifice for a phony political statement. Really what would be the plan to reinforce Canadian soldiers sent to Greenland if they were attacked by US forces?

It's called a show of solidarity and the reason Carney won't do it is because he's a squealing little piggy begging to get topped.

[–] AGM@lemmy.ca 7 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

The Carney government had been good on diversifying economically, but not so much on security. Also, Carney backed Trump's plan for Gaza, and essentially backed the actions taken in Venezuela. Carney wrote an article in the economist a couple of months ago that basically said goodbye to universal multilateral institutions, which are the foundation of having international law. I don't know what to expect from Carney on continental security vs NATO violations, but he has certainly not drawn a clear line in the sand against US imperialism.

[–] lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Maybe Carney is buying time. The economy has to be on good footing first; he has a minority government and needs to keep his support up. Only about 1/3 of Canadians are currently awake to the threat posed by Fascist America, but everyone cares about jobs and prices. A military buildup is underway in Canada but it will take time. As Canada gets stronger and breaks away economically from the USA, the Americans will get weaker. Trump is squandering resources threatening countries on every continent. The US navy doesn't know if it should be in the middle east or the Gulf of Mexico or the North Atlantic. His government is totally incompetent on economic matters - his trade war will ultimately hurt the US worse than the rest of the world. When the AI bubble pops, the US economy is gonna be fucked. I think that Carney doesn't want to interrupt Trump as he is digging his own grave. Still, though, I would like Carney to be unequivocal in his support for Greenland and our remaining allies.

[–] AGM@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 hours ago

I hope there is a long game being played, but it's not clear to me just yet how he sees Canada-US relations in that long time horizon. Where Carney has been consistent is in his characterization of the old world order being done, a new world order being shaped, and the shape of that new world order not being defined by universal multilateralism but by smaller networks of overlapping and perhaps non-permanent interests, whether that be referred to as variable geometries or patchwork alliances.

[–] jimd@lemmy.ca 15 points 22 hours ago

we need a troops here to defend against American Invasion

[–] ArmchairAce1944@lemmy.ca 24 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Eat shit Carney. At least Trudeau had the guts to publically say that there won't be a snowball's chance in hell of Canada being the 51st state.

[–] rattyrat@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 hours ago

And you're the guy that's volunteering to go out and die for this, I'm presuming.

[–] HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

As part of NATO’s enhanced Forward Presence in Latvia, Canada has more than 2,000 troops deployed under Operation Reassurance.

Maybe do a bit of research before screaming.

[–] ArmchairAce1944@lemmy.ca 7 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Maybe the guys who wrote the article should.

[–] HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 23 hours ago

This why google/firefox/waterfox etc exist. Go look up facts to support your stance before whining.

[–] kbal@fedia.io 48 points 1 day ago

"Sweden, Canada, and the Netherlands have confirmed deployments as part of the same multinational operation" according to Newsweek, citing "multiple outlets." I'm pretty sure I heard about it on CBC radio news.

I don't know, but it would be pretty strange for Canada to be left out.

[–] HeadfullofSoup@kbin.earth 39 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Im not against helping if we can but we are mostly the next in line for that demented ghoul empire dream so preparing here could be a good idea for our troops

[–] lemonySplit@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Who tf do you think is next after Greenland? We need to stand with Greenland

[–] lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world 4 points 6 hours ago

100% agree. Each remaining democracy in the world is weak on its own, but even without the US, NATO is a superpower. We need to stand with Greenland.

[–] Typotyper@sh.itjust.works 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)

But are we preparing?

Drawing the line at Greenland would be better for us. The US economy need to know the world will turn on it.

Also all of this is good for China. Trump hates them and then through stupidity does everything to help them

[–] ashughes@feddit.uk 4 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I would also think defending Greenland would be good training/rehearsal for Canadian troops and equipment.

[–] lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world 3 points 6 hours ago

I think that if every non-US NATO country put boots on the ground in Greenland, Trump would stay the fuck away. He is a coward - he knows that if the rest of us stand together, it would be an ugly fight that would benefit no one. On the other hand, the only way the US wins cleanly in Greenland is if we fail to stand together. It would be good training too, but I think sending (a few of) our troops to Greenland could prevent the war.

[–] lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

What a disgrace for Canada. Once again, my country makes me feel ashamed.

[–] Aragaren@lemmy.world 3 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

So you would rather Canada send its troops away and leave itself vulnerable to US action?

[–] lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

50 troops to show solidarity with non-US NATO members would not leave us defenseless. Presenting a united front would do more to deter the states than actual violence.

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 5 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

American here. We're #1 with shame.

[–] lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

I'm watching Minnesota every day. Americans are starting to wake up. There are more people opposed to Trump than supporting him - this will end when the opposition stands together.

[–] darcmage@lemmy.dbzer0.com 34 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Operation Arctic Endurance - military exercise in Greenland organized by Denmark. From what I can find online, which is very little, Denmark sent invitations to other countries to participate. We don't know if Canada was invited. What we do know from the article:

Canada’s Foreign Minister Anita Anand is set to open an official consulate in Nuuk, Greenland’s capital, in the coming weeks, and has expressed support for the island’s sovereignty in recent public statements and bilateral meetings.

Other countries know where we stand. Let's wait and see if we get invited.

[–] Mongostein@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

They’re probably thinking “Canada’s got the arctic training covered” and so don’t need to invite them for it.

And/or, Greenland understands that Canada’s proximity to the US makes sending troops before something actually happens dangerous.

[–] streetfestival@lemmy.ca 28 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

I thought we were invited. To me, this is a Carney L for Canada until demonstrated otherwise (edit: sorry, I realized I'm talking in sports clichés: an L is a loss, like a W is a win)

[–] justOnePersistentKbinPlease@fedia.io 27 points 1 day ago (1 children)

As I understand it:

We already have a contingent going for a preplanned exercise.

What we are not doing is stationing additional troops there indefinitely. Probably because we need them here for when that orange moron listens to Navarro or Miller again.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 23 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There are those people - deranged from a lack of coastline and mountains - who would slag Carney no matter what he did here.

Ah, the same people that dont know that Canada lost five refineries(at least!) When Conservative Mulroney signed NAFTA.

And now, Washington state has no income tax because of that, because they gained said refineries.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Feeling strongly about whether this is an L or a W is insane, on top of the inherent problem of being that black and white simplistic.

First of all, you are basing your knowledge off of random news articles you read. Assuming the PM is competent, they will be making decisions based on intelligence reports that both include everything you know, and a whole crapload of stuff you don't.

He's literally playing a game of Diplomacy, against a mad man backed by demons. Give him some space to cook.

[–] TipsyMcGee@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 22 hours ago

While it's not clear from the article why Canada is not joining its allies, it certainly doesn't look very good. If Canada does not have veey good reasons, it's essentially defecting from the alliance and thereby siding with the aggressors.

[–] grte@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (7 children)

No. This is a democracy and I reserve the right to criticize leadership, thanks.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 day ago

Criticism isn't inherently a bad thing.

Uninformed criticism is.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kreskin@lemmy.world -1 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

Sounds like the US has Canadas permission.

[–] lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

Not the people's permission. Canadians overwhelmingly disapprove of Trump's actions towards Greenland. I think Carney is being cautious, but if he fails to support Greenland he will be removed from power. He only has a minority government.

[–] Aragaren@lemmy.world 5 points 10 hours ago

No, it sounds like Canada needs its troops at home to also defend itself against the US.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Science has yet to uncover what it is about Trump that makes liberal politicians so weak in the knees.

[–] grey_maniac@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

Whatever it is, it certainly seems to make conservative politicians get on their knees.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago

The substance known as capital.

load more comments
view more: next ›