If there is a "war" between the United States and Canada it's going to be extremely short. There would not be a need to conscript anybody for it.
The United States would simply roll tanks and troops across the border, making it to Ottawa in fairly short order. Canada would then surrender, and the Stars and Stripes would be raised across all the provinces and territories. From there, Canada could consider itself officially annexed.
Please identify the storage facilities in the US where this equipment would be mobilized from. To note, state national guards report up to governors. The Sierra Army Depot is located in California. It's a hike from the Lima, Ohio tank production facility to Ottawa (~600 miles). Lots can happen on the way.
It isn't the US vs Canada. It is the part of the US willing to wage war against everyone else.
Would you go to fight Canada if you thought you might not have a home to come back to? This is my point: less than half of Americans voted for this. There are, as of this comment, roughly 1.3 million active duty troops and 762,000 reserve troops. They won't be welcome in Canada, and they certainly aren't going to be welcome here.
Think what happened to troops returning from Vietnam, not looked upon kindly. Now think of that happening during the conflict. You will, rightfully so, be considered the enemy for participating in this. Certainly, some must touch the stove to know it is hot, I admit this.
I think you're making a couple of shaky assumptions. You're assuming civil society will stand up to Trump. This seems increasingly unlikely to happen.
Also, in the military, there are really serious consequences if you don't do what you're told. It's not the same world as the civilian world. So if an enlisted soldier gets told to suit up for a mission, they'll do it.
Think of the Ukraine war. Many of the Russian soldiers thought they were on an exercise that day, they didn't realize it was a for-real invasion until they got the order.
Lastly, invoking that less than half of Americans voted for this just doesn't mean very much. Trump could have been kept out of office if enough people had gone and voted for Kamala Harris...but they didn't. The people who voted for Trump, hey, say what you like about them, but at least they went to the polls.
I did my part and voted for Harris, I thought maybe she had a chance. I knew it was very likely that Trump would win. That said, couldn't we all have done more?
For example, Trump and Obama have a few interesting things in common. They both became President. And they both defeated Hillary Clinton in order to get there. In 2008, the real race was between the Democrats - Bush was so unpopular it didn't matter who the GOP ran, the Dems were going to take it (in my opinion that's why McCain was allowed to get the nomination). America had the chance to do something really different multiple times and put a woman in charge but it never happened. Now it will almost certainly never happen.
In terms of voting to burn the place down, I think that's really the point a lot of folks have missed. When the existing system doesn't serve you at all, why vote to preserve it? Governments have failed us, totally. Both parties have kowtowed to corporate interests for years and things like NAFTA have had the effects that were warned about in the 90s. Now we are reaping the results.
I agree that the governments of both parties have underserved most people.
Some of the reason for that is structural. The president has limited power, and congress has been too evenly balanced for decades to really get anything significant done.
If you look at what Trump is doing now it's all things that bypass congress- he knows at least half of them will toe the line and that's enough. When you set a violent mob on a group, and they give you a pass, well, that tells you what you need yo know.
For voters who believe that "it doesn't matter, they're all bad", well I guess we're about to find out. Seems to me there's a difference between the parties, but what do I know...
To the Palestinian supporters who voted for Trump 'cause they didn't like Biden's approach, well let us know how that turns out for you.
The reality is that a lot of Americans like Trump policies - like tarrifs, deportation, gutting govt regulations and so on. Clearly at least half think this is the road to be on.
It's a pity the other half is going along for the ride.
Once Canada is annexed, the fun (insurgency) will start.
Former Canadian citizen will be US citizen with the right to buy weapons, AR-15 and grenade launchers included.
Police and out of duty soldiers will be mowed down in random places all over the country. Martial law may be declared. People's freedom of movement will be restricted. Economy will take a bad turn.
Imagine IRA (Ireland), ETA (Spain) or PKK (Turkey) but with legal ability to get a lot of deadly weapons. I don't think Americans are ready for this.
Only an American would get excited with the possibility of going to war with their closest ally. Second closest, I guess, since Russia is now the closest.
My analysis should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the idea. I think the US annexing Canada is pretty high on the list of dumb things to do. Total waste of time and energy for very nebulously defined benefits.
If I put on my realpolitik hat though, it makes sense why Trump & friends want Canada, same reason they want Greenland: access to the Arctic. Look at a world map and how Canada and Greenland are placed relative to the US. Trump is a real estate guy and lots of land is always the best thing to have.
For Greenland, the United States has no need to flex its military muscle if they want to take it over. The Greenlanders want to be free from Denmark and this is a great opportunity for them to achieve that.
Possible timeline of events:
* Greenland leaves the Danish Realm
* Greenland becomes sovereign nation
* Greenland enters Compact of Free Association with the United States (similar to Kiribati and Micronesia) - boom, best of all worlds for the USA. Juicy real estate, military boost, a local indigenous population that will be able to do nil about it.
* With Greenland secure, the United States finds a pretext for NATO withdrawal.
* The United States either pressures Canada into joining the US or invades outright. European partners do not come to Canada's defence and NATO is officially over. Maybe a European version of it rises in the aftermath.
From there, hard to say what will happen. I would be worried if I was an Icelander.
Good point - these could most likely be exploited as well. That's another way for the US to get there. Break up Canada. The Quebecois get to be their own mini-nation. Not sure what would happen to the Maritimes or Newfoundland. And it's not like Western Canada is uncontroversial, look how much people bag on Alberta.
The thing that would for sure not happen is Canada becoming an actual state in the US. Way too liberal for that and logistically it wouldn't make sense.
Greenlanders don't want to become part of the USA afaik, but they know that in the current situation becoming independent means being invaded, sooner or later, by the USA, Russia or China, so I think that the scenario of Greenland trying to become a sovereign nation is less likely now.
As for Canada, although there are a number of Trump supporters that foam at the idea of invading their neighbor, I think that the invasion would be deeply unpopular (a number of people voted for Trump because he was supposed to stop the wars, not start new ones), especially if the Canadian population offer some kind of resistance although who knows, it is just a matter of enough propaganda...
Short until Chinese and Russian drones arrive and irregular forces based in the mountains and forests begin reigning death down on American infrastructure and cities.
War in Ukraine: tanks rolled and stopped 1h outside Kiev. I have served in Artillery (EU country). I have seen what the Russian MLRS have done to Grozni some years back. Russians could have flattened Kiev in a week. I assume the move was to push Zelensky to quit. When they saw that this is not happening (the gamble didn't pay out) they fell back to the oblasts/regions they wanted to 'obtain'. This way they avoided a bloodbath (DDG's AI tells me Kiev had approx 2.9m population in 2022). Also if they would have flattened the capital (and killed or maimed 2m civilians in the process) then any 'moral justifications' Russians had would be eliminated. Also most (everyday people) in Russia feel Ukrainians are like brothers to them and they wouldn't forgive/forget Vlad the bloodsucker.
War of 1812 vs today: There are very few countries that have been in wars non-stop for decades. Yes, it's the USA. Maybe they don't call it "war with X country" but once you got military and they walk on foreign soil, packing guns, killing locals, yeah.. that's war alright (plus missiles, plus artillery, plus drones, plus warplanes, plus battleships, plus aircraft carriers). So imho the only country who is R-E-A-D-Y for war within a minute is the USA. Canada has Trudeau, and policemen wearing red, and horses, and snow. Sorry.. no chance. (I am leaving nukes aside as they guarantee M.A.D.)
Besides, all NATO countries participate in missions all over the world, which includes Canada. Americans seem to have nation-wide amnesia forgetting how many allied soldiers died fighting side by side with them.
> I’m not even sure what we are trying to extract from Canada at this point.
Their energy, their focus, their attention. Your attention. All the time people spend in stress / outrage / fear / whatever in reaction to these events, that's time and energy not available to look at the news that get less coverage (which are usually the more important).
It also sucks all the air out of other internal political discussion - US trade relations take #1 priority and so everything else either gets forgotten or put on hold.
Easy way to set your opponents back when you have the upper hand like the US does.
“How can I decouple from the US as fast as possible?” is what this leads to.
Diplomacy is the art of saying “good dog” until you make it to the rock. The US will apply pressure for short term gain against allies while they move away long term.
Prediction: soon we will see the first vibes based billionaire. They'll have no idea what they did, what their product does, how it works, or any possible ethical implications of having developed it.
Very cool and fun project! I am a total dummy when it comes to this kind of hardware stuff and always admire people who do it.
A couple of questions:
* How / where did you get the inspiration for this? To me it's one of those things that seems "obvious" once I see it, but I wouldn't have thought of it on my own first.
* What does that thermal imaging camera "see?" Just heat? Could it detect a person vs. robot vacuum vs. house cat? (relevant for kitchen monitoring especially!)
* From the article, it looks like you're using Python? Are there good libraries available for other ecosystems as well?
I have been interested in this since I was in college. I was building a capacity counting system for our gym. Our gym used density.io and seemed like a waste of money and I though how about if we could have our own solution homegrown by students. But I couldn't get people on board, but I was able to prototype something.
The thermal camera is just a pixel array, which each pixel is denoting its temperature. Kitchens are tricky, since hot items can gravely affect the temperature readings. I use it at the entrance to check if my roomie is in or not/.
you have drivers for amg8833 in rust and c I believe, but adafruit stuff is good in python so I would say its a good place to start IOT projects! You can write your own drivers, which is quite fun!
I would suggest against it, I feel handicapped using AI sometimes. its helpful in a lot of cases eg repetitive work, but drivers feel like you need to be very careful so I would use AI to learn concepts and write things myself! Good luck!
Trust me, us Europeans are not exempt from the "everyone should see a psychologist" trope blasting social media the last decade. We are not blind to every Hollywood actor having a personal therapist either.
I think the main difference (speaking as a northern European) is that when you Americans speak of therapy you seem to mean the stereotypical "talk therapy" where as basically every therapy here is cognitive behavioral therapy.
Can cognitive behavioral therapy help someone who has a bit of existential dread about his tech job? Maybe. I don't think it's silly on it's face though to say "really?" if the poster's life is in order otherwise.
I guess it's like Prolog in the same sense that Rust is like C? It's a modern functional programing language that also supports logical programming. I never got a chance to actually code with it though.
