bush_cheney2004

So yet again, the question about what Canada should do about China returns to a focus and obsession on what the United States is doing about China. Canada seemingly won't do anything about China. Sure...any day now...total collapse of U.S. dollar hegemony. Canada has already experienced a fallen empire...that's why it now clings to the United States for economic and military survival. Canada can remember the good 'ole days of empire...including parts of China...just look how big and important Canada appears on this postage stamp !

I did....don't ask questions that you don't want answered. Clearly you do not have any practical experience in such matters. Keep reading American history for more entertainment. False conclusions, and not Canada's current China dilemma anyway. Military responses do not require nuclear weapons unless engaged in kind...Canada doesn't have such leverage and probably never will. It is no longer a "middle power" or "honest broker", and doesn't have a "seat at the table"...or any other cute euphemism that attempts to describe and rationalize Canada'

The U.S. can have both...leadership and a forward deployed, potent military...Canada has neither. Canada's government could have taken far stronger measures than just Meng's living quarters and extradition outcome (e.g. expulsions, 5G decision, consulates, air travel, student visas, etc.) but it chooses not too. Therefore no reason for China to budge. Should have worked out a trade long ago, instead of hiding behind the "rule of law".

What happens ? The U.S. will still have plenty of carriers...plus cruise missile platforms and forward deployed aircraft squadrons to join in the fun. The heavy bombers will take a while longer to get to the party. After the dust settles, Canada's weak government can get back to asking about the Two Michaels...again.

China has been following a path that seeks to duplicate the American military development narrative with domestic efforts...using ex-Soviet/Russian designs and methods are not good enough anymore to achieve CPC long range plans. However, there is one thing that China cannot create or buy for these advanced systems...experience. And that translates into training, tactics, doctrine, effectiveness, etc. Of course, they have 1MT warheads because they lack the (CEP) accuracy more than any 2nd strike posturing. China today does not have a robust defense suppression capability against Nort

Not my concern...your domestic politics and squabbles are your own, plus you seem to make time for worrying about American leaders and politics as well. Justin Trudeau is a failure in most any context, except for legalized cannabis and dopers.

China doesn't need a war to treat Canada like a chew toy....all it needs is Justin Trudeau.

Agent Orange and other defoliants were also tested and manufactured in Canada. ...back to China.

No me...the context was your claim of pending extinction from "climate change". Clearly this is just more alarmist rhetoric that actually undermines practical approaches to mitigation and adaptation, and has failed to date. The carbon cycle will continue regardless of "anthropogenic warming".

This point highlights several disadvantages that China faces...the West has several allied nations with more advanced nuclear warhead designs and more accurate delivery systems that can leverage those designs. The west also is deploying credible ballistic missile defense systems (with or without Canada). China is playing catch-up for land, sea, and air capabilities while trying to maintain a very large conventional army to fight a 20th century ground war that dominates its historical experience....transitioning to modern American/Western force structure concepts has not been without proble

Great...you are admitting that extinction events are natural occurrences, regardless of "anthropogenic warming". But...alarmists have to alarm.

Quite to the contrary, there will be no mass "extinction" and the very same economic forces that scare all the alarmists into spouting such hyperbole will be brought to bear on "climate change". Green is for the money...not alarmists.

There was abundant flora and fauna diversity on earth at much higher CO2 concentration levels millions of years ago, rising and falling for many different reasons.