June 21, 2005

Blame Canada?
  • That the critical areas of Canada are: (4) The Winnipeg Area. Come get some.
  • ... the dark side of American isolationism.
  • Well, did we actually invade in 1935,or thereafter? What's the point here? Jerry,I think you need to go find other issues which don't involve strawmen. Or, just go away and leave us alone.
  • I just spent an entire day filling out forms and whatnot for my first year of college. I say this because the college I'm going to is within an hour of the Canadian border. If we're ever stupid enough to pick a fight with Canada, I want my day back.
  • ladynight - look at the date (1935.) Do you really thing this is an issue? Take a couple of really deep breaths and go on with your life.
  • Hey, we've almost got the bugs worked out of these plans. Who spilled the beans? CHARGE!!
  • It's not like I hid the date, path. Move on. And yes, it IS an issue if you are Canadian and take two looks at the intelligence...
  • They use the codeword "Crimson" for Canada all through the document, but on Page One they say that Crimson is Canada. WTF?
  • I guarantee that we also have a plan for invading Mexico...big deal. I'd go farther to say that Canada may have made plans at one time...heyyyyyy!!!
  • What's the point here? The point here is wasted tax dollars. And insane protecionism. And current US foreign policy. I've been outed!
  • Wasted tax dollars in 1935. I'll bet that most countries have plans for going to war with their neighbors...except France(j/k).
  • *sigh*
  • I'm always happy to hear tropes running in West Wing episodes turn out to be based on fact.
  • See, we build this giant wooden moose....
  • I read what you posted, but it's from 1935, for pete's sake. I know you don't believe it's a threat, and your attempts to make it one are pretty puerile. And, what "intelligence?" You presented none. What a travesty. Are there any other Canadians out there who think that the US government wants to invade your country?
  • >Wasted tax dollars in 1935. In 1935? What about the present day?! Look at the money we spend on our military- and TO THIS DAY we have not invaded Canada!! What the hell is going on here?
  • I just don't get the history lesson posts.
  • It's early day still, Stan the Bat. Give it time.
  • I just don't get the history lesson posts. - George W. Bush ;-)
  • Ok, ok, this is fun. But seriously. The U.S. has invasion plans for Canada TODAY. And Mexico. And probably 40 other countries. That's what military intel does: come up with scenarios and simulate them. What, like those sneaky Russkies get in here and the U.S. has to come up with an invasion plan from scratch? I find the 1935 date very interesting, but the motivations for it make it more or less so to me. Today, it would just be another routine failsafe.
  • Ohhhh, I get it now...America evil, rest of world benevolent. Jerry said it so it must be true.
  • Some context for War Plan Red.
  • I shoulda stayed in the closet.
  • Thanks for the link goetter.
  • yup. With that wooden moose.
  • The Caroline affair of 1837 involved the destruction of a private American ship of that name by Canadian authorities in U.S. waters near Buffalo. It was being used by the supporters of William Lyon Mackenzie, the leader of a rebellion against British authority in Canada. One U.S. citizen was killed. A Canadian deputy marshal was later arrested and tried by New York state for his part in the attack, but he was acquitted Hosers! Despite the, ah, historical significance of this document, I am yet fully prepared to march on Montreal to liberate your Molson.
  • Dibs on the Kokanee.
  • Grover, you fool! A two front war??
  • I figure when we are done we could split it up, ala a Potsdam Agreement type of thing.
  • The Americans aren't the only ones with plans.
  • I hate it when documents are prepared with indented paragraphs and extra whitespace. It should be one or the other, for Christ's sake!
  • LOL
  • as a canadian, i'd like to say that should the USA attack us, i am prepared to complain and do nothing with great bravery
  • I found it interesting, from a historical perspective. Nice post, Jerry.
  • People constantly deny this kind of stuff. Then when it eventually surfaces, their reaction is "So?"
  • Good post.
  • I think it's a good post, it's a really interesting historical document. While intellectually I know everything's online now, I don't always really think of that, and so I'm intrigued to find documents like this and am going to go looking for more. Well, not today as I'm too busy, but this is going straight in a bookmark for future reading. So, thanks, JJ, for pointing this out. Oh, and Fes, don't bother with the Molson, focus on grover's war first, or head east for the Alexander Keith's. I mean, Molson's just isn't worth dying for.
  • Wow, defensive much, path? One would almost think you have something to hide, no? Actually, these documents are more than just neat, they're historically important. For example, in the National Archives of Canada, there are US/Canadian joint intelligence assessments documenting what might happen if the Soviets were to invade North America. By comparing these documents to Crimson we could pose all sorts of questions about the relationship between intelligence and operational planning, and US/Canadian intelligence cooperation.
  • I should have mentioned that the intelligence assessments I mention above are from the immeditate postwar period. However, if Crimson was the last invasion plan of Canada they had, there might be an interesting comparrison to be drawn.
  • Actually, where I am is a fort built for defence of said invasion. It was still active during WW11 when POW's were kept there. Not stated, but I knew an old-timer who was stationed there. And just to keep an eye on things, since we are a mere hop from New York state.
  • Dreadnaught - "offensive" is probably more like it.
  • I'm sure our southern neighbours will arrive, some day. When their sources for water and oil are depleted I don't think our long border will be much of a deterrent. And neither will the RCMP. I, for one, will welcome our American overlords. And shortly after that I will join the resistance insurgents terrorists.
  • Fes: I am yet fully prepared to march on Montreal to liberate your Molson. You can start marching now...
  • Blech. You know what'll make Coors more competitive? Making drinkable fucking beer, that's what.
  • Perhaps the tetchiness here is due to the unstated reason behind the post: is it simply an intersting historical artifact? Or was this posted as a sort of passive accusation that the US has somehow has had designs on its neighbors since time immemorial? As the showcasing of an artifact, the post has a certain merit - historical artifacts are cool; as a mute commentary on what some people consider American foreign policy aggressiveness, it seems not only dated but also inapt. Without context, the document (which has been public, iirc from the links, for several decades now, as has the explanation for why it was created, and its sense of historical place) simply stands as an odd sort of broadsheet. So the point is, I suppose: what sort of impetus prompted you to post this particular document, Jerry Junior?
  • I honestly don't understand the hostile reactions to this document. I thought the contingency plan was interesting; it would never occur to me that the U.S. could even contemplate invading Canada. Or Mexico, for that matter. But I've been naive about this type of thing before.
  • Blame the inflammatory tripe prepended by crank Floyd Rudmin, cynnbad.
  • The Fenians (Irish Republican Brotherhood) actually did invade Canada in 1866 and 1870. The basic plan was to capture Canada and offer to swap it back to the British in return for Irish independence.
  • I think this is a fasctinating post, but I agree with Fes in that I detect some subtext, and suspect that's what path found offensive. Aside from all of that, I think it would be remiss of ANY nation not to have contingency plans for battle with any foe in any theater. Paying the cost of a bunch of military officers to read research material and look at maps and decide on invasion and defense strategies isn't a waste of money as it serves two purposes: first, it's valuable training for said officer corp and general staff, and second, a military should never, ever be caught flat-footed. Though the details and even the existence of the planning shouldn't be shared, I think it would be remiss of Canada, Mexico, any country in central america, Britain, France, Germany, Russia, and pretty much any nation with any decent size military to not plan for both invasion and defense from anyone and everyone else. That's what the military is for. I'd say that there's not been enough creative what-if genuine out-of-the-box thinking on the part of the US military and intelligence groups. That lack of real creativity resulted in 9/11 being a bigger surprise than it should have been.
  • I'm currently drawing up a strategy to respond if my neighbor neglects to mow his lawn for JUST ONE MORE WEEK.
  • I am drawing up strategies to deal with all the strategies being drawn up, plus plans for pre-emptive strategies in case someone draws up a strategy to deal with the strategies I'm drawing up.
  • Paying the cost of a bunch of military officers to read research material and look at maps and decide on invasion and defense strategies isn't a waste of money as it serves two purposes: first, it's valuable training for said officer corp and general staff, and second, a military should never, ever be caught flat-footed. The main idea behind it is that you are paying them anyways, what else are you supposed to do with them?
  • I wouldn't call an invasion a defensive act but an offensive act. But hey, that's just my opinion.
  • I don't know if you were referring to my post, mare, but if I was ambiguous, I meant offensive/invasion AND defense (in case of being invaded) plans should always be in work.
  • I suppose it makes sense to have proactive plans for both offensive and defensive conflicts in place. But the government should make sure that the very notion or existence of such plans never sees daylight. Not even 70 years after the fact.
  • I'm inclined to disagree, cynnbad. Primarily because I don't believe any piece of governmental information should be held secret or classified indefinitely. I can see that these sorts of data could be sensitive, but unless there's a compelling national security interest, I think all governmental data should be public domain, at least no longer than 50 or 100 years.
  • But the government should make sure that the very notion or existence of such plans never sees daylight. Not even 70 years after the fact. Why? I kind of prefer the idea that the government shouldn't keep anything secret without a sound tactical need to do so. And on preview: I'm inclined to agree, chimaera.
  • OH GREAT now "o canada" is stuck in my head yet again, reason enough to invade right there
  • This is a neat post, but it's suffering from fallout from some of Jerry Junior's earlier "work". A good example of why posting bad things intentionally is not a good idea, we tend to remember the trainwrecks and not the decent links he's provided. No one seriously thinks the U.S. is going to invade Canada any time soon, but it's kind of cool to think about the guys whose job it was to draw up plans for such a boondoggle.
  • I'm against invading Canada, on principle, but I would like to see if we could organize a big round of laser tag.
  • This is all really academic. The U.S. will never invade Canada because they are afraid of our Giant Panda Army.
  • ...not to mention the Beavertail Bazooka Battery.
  • That last one sounds dirty. Like in-the-grotto-at-Hef's dirty.
  • >The U.S. will never invade Canada because they are afraid of our Giant Panda Army. Man, I'd invade just to SEE a Giant Panda Army.
  • chimaera and flongj: Ordinarily I would agree, but an "invasion plan" seems like the type of thing that might come back to seriously bite, the minor furor over this Canadian plan notwithstanding. Plus, I think that there are a number of military work products that we will never know about. They have ways, you know.
  • I cannot concieve of a governmental secret that should be kept after twenty years, let alone fifty or a hundred.
  • I was thinking on a cold-war scale. I think it would be safe to say that certain plans made or data gathered in 1949 might still have been relevant enough to national security in, say, 1989 to not want to release them...
  • But I also hasten to add that my example above is probably an aberrationally long time. 20 is probably more like it for practically everything.
  • I don't believe any piece of governmental information should be held secret or classified indefinitely. I can see that these sorts of data could be sensitive, but unless there's a compelling national security interest, I think all governmental data should be public domain, at least no longer than 50 or 100 years. Most places actually do that, including the US. However, there are reasons why they might want to hold certain information absolutely indeffinatly. For example, lets say you agree to spy for the Phantasians on the grounds that no one will ever know, ever ever ever. Are you likely to strike such a deal if the Phantasians are releasing documents about people who spied for them even a century ago? Human Intelligence (HUMINT) people have to be very careful about declassification due to issues relating to the psychology of current agent recruitment.
  • *hops around with glee* Are all the southern monkeys coming to Canada? Sidedish, stay away until the national holiday is past to miss that singing. /we kinda cringe at 'Jose, can you see'? There's lots of accomodation just down the street from the fort.
  • Again, I maintain that you can't discuss what you never know about. The "government" has on many occasions skirted the Freedom of Information Act. But beyond that, what on earth makes anyone think that things can't just disappear or be concealed in perpetuity?
  • ...and I know I am beginning to sound like a conspiracy theorist here, so I'll qualify. My dad did top-secret government weapons contract work during the Vietnam War. We used to play Viet Cong commandos in our back yard, snaking among the bushes, trying to outfox the little cones dad set up around the yard. My mom found out we were posing as "enemy combatants" and put a halt to the whole thing. Years later, I mentioned this to my dad (because it was a game!) and he just basically said to shut up about it. So I did. Until now. So will the spooks come get me? I doubt it. My point is that much of what goes on in military planning is a secret. For a country that purportedly believes in free speech and open communication between government and citizenry, the U.S. pretty much snows the populace. But in a caring way.
  • MCT: Please explain this to me. So, like, they don't mow their lawns in Canada? I'm sure Canada is well protected by the RMPC and the Poutine Line
  • Oh, I'm sure they do up there. But my neighbor is uncharacteristically refusing to mow his. For roughly three weeks now. I WILL KILL HIM AND KIDNAP HIS DOG AND TAKE HIS WIFE AS MY CONCUBINE.
  • I'm pro-invasion for two reasons: 1. My previously stated love of Kokanee 2. To stop having to hear "Oh, Canada" when my beloved Mariners play the Blue Jays.
  • You know, mct, I'd personally like monkeyfilter to be a place where a non-mowing neighbour could share opinions with me. I think we're getting a little intolerant here, and might be offending some people.
  • Anyone who fails to mow his yard for three weeks is either dead or a piffling anarchist who should be fed through a chipper.
  • We shall sing "O Canada" to ye, if ye do not appease us!
  • I like long grass. I'm rooting for your neighbour. (Sorry!) But Dreadnought makes a good point about identity of intelligence sources that shouldn't be revealed, not for a long time and maybe never, to protect them and their families. (And I'm not just saying that because I think he's cute :) I've seen his sources, CIA documents that have been declassified, sometimes from as early as the 1940s, and they are full of whitedout areas where the information is just still too sensitive.
  • I'm rooting for your neighbour. *snickers*
  • Anarchists! *revs up the chipper*
  • Where is all this grass, anyway, mct? Is it any good, do you think? Mine's not doing well, due to a two month drought? Wolof, watch those roots, if Fes gets too close.
  • Just had the idea of pitting Jerry and ActuallySettle against one another in a bad-FPP steel cage match. Not in reference to this post, which I think is interesting. But. Just. You know.
  • ATTENTION: HE IS MOWING HIS LAWN AS WE SPEAK. CALL OFF THE ATTACK FERRETS AND THE POO GAS, I REPEAT, CALL OFF THE ATTACK FERRETS AND THE POO GAS.
  • Too late.
  • *revs up the chipper for the inevitable tragic 'accident'*
  • I'm rooting for your neighbour. *snickers* I can send you a Roots Canada t-shirt, if you want.
  • *raises hand* I'll take one, thanks. And re dxlifer's comment re cringing: it's not the song so much as the clutching of giblets that's found to be uncomfortable, I suspect.
  • Sounds good!
  • Interested to read some of the background, like the Fenian stuff which was new to me. Why didn't they get on a ship and invade Ireland? It seems most of the time Canada was really being used as a proxy for Britain. The Brits raid Washington, and the US invades Canada in retaliation. A bit rough on Canada - sounds like my kind of fight though.
  • Yeah, the Fenians were pretty wacky. What a scheme, "Trade you Canada for Ireland". They didn't get a ship was because they didn't have the resources to do that. On the other hand, they thought Canada would be a push over. One of the Fenians (it is said though not conclusively proven) was also responsible for Canada's only political asassination: The shooting of Thomas D'Arcy McGee, one of the Fathers of Confederation, ten blocks away from where i live. (hey, don't look at me, i didn't do it!)
  • *sings* "Ooooh Ken-a d'uh..." /reaches for giblets
  • *whistles a few bars of Pomp and Circumstance* *scratches rump*
  • *joins in with dx* "...our huome an naytif lan.."
  • *puts hands over ears* "How shawl we extawl thee, Who ah bohn of thee? Wida still and wida..."
  • Plegmund asked:
    Interested to read some of the background, like the Fenian stuff which was new to me. Why didn't they get on a ship and invade Ireland?
    Well, that'd be the great split of the Philadelphia Convention of 1865. One faction wanted to and did try exactly that. As usual, both factions were betrayed by a spy within their midst.
  • Fes: Perhaps the tetchiness here is due to the unstated reason behind the post: is it simply an intersting historical artifact? Or was this posted as a sort of passive accusation that the US has somehow has had designs on its neighbors since time immemorial? Indeed, I confess to an intense antipathy for much of American foreign policy present and past, but I just found this document fascinating because of the timing (1935) and detail and because it deals with my local geography so to speak (I live in the capital of Canada). I do think past and current American military planners have tried to cover every possible contingency, and I really wish they didn't have to. It's not possible and they are obviously a thoughtful and imaginative bunch whose talents would be much better expolited, er, more locally. I really should have come up with a more benign title for the post and I might have avoided the early self-derail. And I'll always do well to remember the posting/drinking maxim, but, eh? So you're right both ways, Fes. I'm glad the thread turned out interesting despite myself. And thanks, Nickdanger. Well phrased and certainly taken to heart.
  • *throws uneasy glance at fishtick* * in a louder voice* "tru paytrit luv in all thy suns comman with gloewin hartz we see thee rise"
  • *adjusts busby* *roars* "MAKE THEE MY-Y-CHA YET!" *dabs at spittle with freshly-pressed hanky*
  • /ducks flying spittle.. We stand on gourd fo~or Theeee... *flees quickly
  • *ahem* YOU'RE A GRAND OLD FLAG, YOU'RE A HIGH-FLYING FLAG AND FOREVER IN PEACE SHALL YOU--OW!! All right, I'm going, quit throwing things ...
  • *retrieves busby*
  • *pulls out poutine from the line* /gets distracted by munchies
  • God damn, Koko. With Ethel Merman on our side, those Canucks won't stand a chance. *squints at wooden moose plans* Moose bites can be veri nasti.
  • *Fills mouth with Poutine* *continues singing* OHH CHNADA, WE STANDTCH ON GUARTH FORRR THEEEEEEEE! *sprays everyone with chewed poutine*
  • *delicately removes spittle-covered piece of poutine from hair, continues to enjoy the lovely singing*
  • ...with glow-worm arts we seethe ear. eyes...
  • *opens sporran, retrieves strap-on cephalopod*
  • I miss poutine.
  • MAke it!
  • Calling the_bone. You REALLY NEED to get the Canadian chorus into shape. My ears are bleeding, and I can't help but fail to understand their vowels. And consonents. So, maybe you should lead them in all the verses of "God Save the Queen?" And demonstrate now the vowels and consonents should be sung? Maybe they could learn Proper English and apply that to their anthem? But, please, let's not go into a tutorial on the "Star Spangeled Banner." None of us in the US know all the words, and we certaintly can't keep the tune. I mean, I haven't seen anything further than "Jose, can you see..." in pronunciation guides. Anything more would make it too foreign.
  • *thought the_bone was a merkin* *realizes it's after 2 A.M. on the eastern bit of North America* *considers sleeping, loads poutine catapult instead, just in case*
  • OoooohhhO, say can you screec<>/strike>seeeeeeee by the dawn's errrrrly liiiiiight. What so prouuuuudleeeee we held... *adjusts nipple piercing, ducks thrown beer bottles
  • *grabs soggy old curds, gravy and spuds* /lurks in sideline, awaiting screeching equine.
  • Calling the_bone. You REALLY NEED to get the Canadian chorus into shape. My ears are bleeding, and I can't help but fail to understand their vowels. And consonents. Oh, geez. I'm a damned good choral director, but not a miracle worker. I will say that I have a deep appreciation for the Canadian national anthem... it's really pretty. I vastly prefer it to the unsingable junk that is my own country's theme song. The only saving grace of "The Star-Spangled Banner" is the grim third verse, which ends up sounding ghoulishly jaunty when sung. Try it, you'll like it! And where is that band who so vauntingly swore That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion, A home and a country should leave us no more! Their blood has washed out of their foul footsteps' pollution. No refuge could save the hireling and slave From the terror of flight and the gloom of the grave And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.
  • Well, the band was composed of cowards, anyway, no doubt.
  • I always felt that AC/DC's "If You Want Blood, You Got It" ought to be our national anthem. Yes, I know they're from Australia.
  • Well, no wonder most of us don't know the third verse. I need a download sung by the_bone to get its jauntiness, though.
  • I spent some time in the studio where AC/DC recorded their early hits -- it smelled like guitar players' farts.
  • /reaches for clothes-pin. Oh no. Granma has them all. *swoons from hard rock fumes.
  • *sets up large fan to keep fumes safely south of 49th parallel*
  • By chance, heard this song again, and just had to refresh some old memories. /runs from room post haste.
  • *ponders whether dxlifer also enjoys whacking hornet nests*
  • *sprays Raid along 49th parallel* We're safe now, eh?