North Vietnam had 13 mil people, South Vietnam 17m. Afghanistan had 20m people at the time of invasion.
These were undeveloped countries with very low human capital. Their militaries did not hold up. And yet - how did it all turn out for the US?
Canada has 40m people, terrain ideally suited to guerilla warfare, a huge land border with the US, and a population that is not only indistinguishable from American civilians, but also enjoys much wider popular support in the US than the Vietnamese ever did.
It would be extremely foolish to think you could simply invade such a place at all, nevermind easily.
What a lot of commenters cheering this headline might not know is that there is only one single internal road connecting east and west canada which regularly closes. Most commercial routes go through the US. Don't believe me? Route Ottawa to Vancouver in google maps.
This move would amount to throwing rocks from a glass house.
Trans-Canada regularly closes? That's news to me.
The reason google maps goes through the US is that it's significantly shorter. We also don't haul things regularly across the country in the same way they do in the US, we use the trains, and the majority of things would go through ports. If you're on the eastern half of the country (which is the majority of the country) they use the great lakes.
The parent comment is likely referring to Highway 17, which is the only road connection between Manitoba and Ontario. A boulder once fell on this highway leading to its closure for a period of time.
I've seen this incident be the subject of hyperbolic clickbait articles and YouTube videos discussing the complete cutting off of East and West Canada (conveniently ignoring the realities articulated by your comment). Perhaps the parent comment is vaguely aware of incidents like this and is extrapolating to unfounded conclusions?
While you make a strong point, I'm not ready to cede it. Canada has winter storms that will close that road, albeit for shorter periods of time than the boulder situation. Being able to re-route through the US is critical during that time.
I don't really see how the Highway 17 situation is unique in the context of winter storms though. As per the comment above this, most transit of East and West goods occurs via other means, meaning the Highway 17 bottleneck is hardly some vital artery. A winter storm shutting down Highway 401 for example is much more economically chaotic, and has the practical impact of making travel through its corridor impractical (and in some circumstances just as impossible as if it were a single bottleneck). This scenario does periodically happen, and people manage just fine since the closures are expected to be short-lived.
So I don't buy the argument that Canada needs the US because of the threat of transit networks being completely cut off. I am much more amiable to the argument that reciprocal road tolls like this would be stupid because they'd increase the cost of goods for all of us (Canadians and Americans alike). As noted earlier, the fastest route between East and West is through the US due to geography. But or course things like this are stupid, and I doubt an argument as to why is required here. Maybe we should pull back and stop doing all this nonsense like arbitrary tariffs on close allied nations? Especially those who's explicit purpose as described by the elected head of state is to threaten the sovereignty of the other?
Your point is terrible though. How many people live in Kenora? 15,000? There's not a highway of trucks that are backed up from Kenora, anything that needs to be transported to Winnipeg will come from the West coast, and anything to Toronto will come straight down the St.Lawrence.
It's also not actually true there's only one. To get through northern Ontario, sure. But there's also the Yellowhead all the way from Winnipeg to Haida Gwai, and plenty of highways that connect to Hwy 2 from there.
Trans-Canada is a highway system, not a single road.
It's true that the stretch from Kenora to Sault Ste Marie is a vulnerability. It's tough terrain.
While the majority of the population and infrastructure is located close to the border with the U.S., Canada's East and West is not connected by a single internal road. People do not have to travel through the U.S. to get from one side of Canada to the other. People even have multiple options! I should know. I'm Canadian, and I've done the drive from Montreal to the Yukon and British Columbia.
My take is that you have never been to Canada, and if you have, it was only to a major city, like Toronto.
I'm not sure this is evidence of anything that you're claiming. Google routes based on criteria you choose, typically 'fastest' or 'most fuel efficient', that does nothing to prove that other routes don't exist.
> Don't believe me? Route Ottawa to Vancouver in google maps.
Default 44hr route goes through the states. If I click and drag the route up to go through winnipeg, it becomes a 47hr route that doesn't go through the states. I don't think this proves anything.
Listen Im all for smart reactions to dumb policies. This sounds like a dumb reaction to a dumb policy. Right now any article that does anything pro Canada anti US is going to get cheered in Canada because they are David against a mean Goliath (former best friend) situation.
Intelligent conversation and debate has no baring in this absolutely ridiculous situation.
This is truly one of the biggest unforced errors I have seen in a long time.
What intelligent options are you offering for Canada then? The US is going to tariffs us. They have stated that their aim is economic warfare focusing on collapsing our economy so that they may annex us.
It seems in the face of existential threats to our sovereignty, every option should be considered where we have advantage, and there are few.
It seems like a posturing thing that the party wants to do in order to get votes and it hurts individuals while not actually providing real value. Tariff goods etc fine but don't start arbitrarily charging some people road access - thats dumb policy idea which probably got it's idea from a not so smart politician.
You're using the pronoun "they" for the US. But this is by no means the case that there is a singular entity that has stated this policy.
Right now the US is in a political crisis. It has elected a weak, narcissistic man without coherent or sensible policy who is for the short term without serious opposition. (Mainly because its own neo-liberal elite has done a garbage job of running the country for the last 30 years and the population is desperate to try something else.) That man and the sycophants who travel with him is trying to use us as a whipping boy, a sacrificial victim, to rally his base.
In reality what is happening to Canadian workers via these tariffs are not in the interests of American workers, either. If they wake up they will eventually deal with Trump. Things will come to a head. The US will either destroy itself, or rescue itself. Unfortunately we're very much tied to this process because of geography.
Trump is not weak. He has more power then any other previous president and completely loyal party behind him. He does not have e to even worry about laws at all.
Plus, Trump will blame Biden, woke, women, democrats and especially Canada and EU for bad economy. And Trumps base will 100% believe him.
Powerful people "speak softly and carry a big stick". Trump spoke loudly, then swung the stick that was given to him and proved to the rest of the world that the stick was a lot smaller than they believed it was.
No, that was a movie gangster. Trump is a real one. The world is literally afraid. Foreign countries don't think he is weak. They think he is dangerous bully.
Au contraire. A strong leader does not need to rely on the kinds of tools Trump has been employing.
The rise of someone like Trump to power reflects I think a fragmentation of consensus and weakening of legitimacy of the government. He's a reality TV star, an entertainer. Yes he has what seems like a blank cheque, but it's likely to backfire on him eventually.
No, you are doing a value judgement. Or using strong as a term of approval.
I am using "strong" as powerful and "can push for what he wants". Trump is absolutely that. There is no meaningful opposition.
He has control over DOJ, fired everyone involved in suits against him, hired loyalists. He is destroying law company that sued him and everyone is taking notes. Less opposition in the future.
He breaks law, courts already judged he can and when they don't, he attacks judges. They will fall.
The opposition has security removed while fans are made to hate them.
He is not weak. He is powerful. And saying he is weak just makes him more powerful
Excited to see how this compares to Perplexity or Gemini. I remember that ChatGPT used to be able to search the web, but last I checked it it couldn't. I wonder why they removed that feature
About half my requests end up going to web search. But if you ask it for something specific like "find an X-ray image with an abnormality," then it refuses.
I'll tell you how I learned, I got thrown head-first into a network switch design. I knew almost nothing about networking.
The most useful resource while I was learning was RFC1812 "Requirements for IPv4 Routers" [1]
Its an ancient document written the same year I was born detailing how future routers should be built on this relatively new thing called the internet. The language is highly approachable and detailed, often explaining WHY things are done. It is an awesome read.
To be honest you don't need to finish it. I only read the first few chapters, but I googled EVERYTHING I did not understand. The first few paragraphs took several hours. Talk to LLM's if you need a concept explained. Take notes. In a few days you'll have a very solid grasp.
