Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
J4L

Climate Change and the Invasion of Canada

Recommended Posts

I predict the US invades us by 2035.  By that time, large areas of the Southwestern United States will become uninhabitable.  Arizona, Nevada, and California will suffer greatly, and millions of people will be displaced.  The displaced Americans will vote in a fascist regime, and since any kind of mass influx to other areas of the US would be troublesome, it will be easier to just invade Canada- a country along with Russia, may be the two sole beneficiaries of Global Warming.  Our population will reach 60 million within 20 years. There will be a shift towards right wing politics.  Canada will be powerless to stop any invasion.

 

I also predict the Mexican Wall will be built, since large areas of Latin America will become uninhabitable, and there will be a push to the north. Unlike Canada, the USA has the ability to repel any mass influx of immigrants by force, so that will not be a problem for North America, but may involve genocide in Latin America, as too many people will be competing for not enough land. As for Europe?  Climate Change will trigger millions to migrate to Western Europe, but by this time a country (perhaps several), will elect a Hitler-like character, and most likely eradicate said immigrants similar to what happened in the 40s. 

Climate change is real, and we have no idea how bad things are going to become in 15 years.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what you mean by "invasion".   Do you mean mass immigration from the United States to Canada, or military invasion and occupation ?

It didn't take any climate change crisis for the United States to become the #1 destination for emigres for over 100 years.....still is. 

Canadians have been "invading" the United States for a very long time....is this a bad thing ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Not sure what you mean by "invasion".   Do you mean mass immigration from the United States to Canada, or military invasion and occupation ?

 

Military invasion and occupation. We will just have to weather the storm.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, J4L said:

Military invasion and occupation. We will just have to weather the storm.

 

OK, but that framework and contingency has existed for many decades, regardless of climate change.   (Example: the U.S. Army was ready to roll from Fort Drum during the FLQ Crisis in 1970.)    The U.S. military has also operated in disputed territorial waters with impunity.

Operational plans were developed long ago and are tweaked based on geo-political circumstances and objectives.   Canada, being a bordering nation and NATO/NORAD ally, already has voluntarily surrendered at some levels because of mutual benefits and integration of resources. During the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, Canada's DND followed the U.S. Pentagon to DEFCON 3 before PMO approval.

Accordingly, I agree that the potential for an invasion of Canada by the United States exists for much older reasons than anything to do with climate change, including any risks and instability from within Canada itself (regionalism, separation, economic collapse, pandemic, etc.).

Some have suggested that many Canadians wouldn't even notice the invasion, as so much American media and popular culture are already consumed in Canada by choice.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

OK, but that framework and contingency has existed for many decades, regardless of climate change.   (Example: the U.S. Army was ready to roll from Fort Drum during the FLQ Crisis in 1970.)    The U.S. military has also operated in disputed territorial waters with impunity.[/quote]

I think you are missing the point.  None of those conflicts involved climate change. Look at what has happened over in Europe.  Millions of migrants fleeing, due to climate change.  The Arab Spring happened as an indirect result of climate change.  Some leading environmentalists have warned that global warming is accelerating, and we have 12 years to change the Earth, before a catastrophic event occurs. 

5 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, J4L said:

I think you are missing the point.  None of those conflicts involved climate change. Look at what has happened over in Europe.  Millions of migrants fleeing, due to climate change.  The Arab Spring happened as an indirect result of climate change.  Some leading environmentalists have warned that global warming is accelerating, and we have 12 years to change the Earth, before a catastrophic event occurs. 

 

 

Sure, and we have debated the topic on this forum for many years.   The panic over "12 years till doom" is just louder noise on a much longer continuum because the original climate change alarmist religion lost the battle, and is actually a disservice to what will be needed for adaptations regardless.

Yes, there will be more migration and disruption, but not nearly as much as that seen in the 20th century.

Canada is not special in this regard, with positives and negatives to be expected. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, J4L said:

I think you are missing the point.  None of those conflicts involved climate change. Look at what has happened over in Europe.  Millions of migrants fleeing, due to climate change.  The Arab Spring happened as an indirect result of climate change.  Some leading environmentalists have warned that global warming is accelerating, and we have 12 years to change the Earth, before a catastrophic event occurs. 

 

No, Europe was flooded with immigrants due to war. Syria and ISIS in particular. The Arab Spring happened as a result of dissatisfaction with being oppressed. As for the 12 year prediction, alarmists have been giving 12 year warnings since the 1950's. Albeit in those days it was a coming ice age. Today the alarmists amusingly base that 12 year period on a Heinrich event, which is when the earth cools by as much as 5 degrees in about a decade, give or take a year or two.

When I heard about the "97% consensus" crap I knew the whole thing was BS. Especially when you consider only 1/3 of scientists who were surveyed actually responded. Then you see the outright attacks on scientists (by their peers no less) who dare to question the claim and the methods used to arrive at the AGW conclusion. They've been censured, fired from their positions and ostracized within the scientific community. That's not how science is supposed to work.  But that is EXACTLY how leftists operate. They claim that a vast majority agree with them when the reality is they're lucky if it's even a simple majority.  They attack those who disagree with them and if they feel it's "necessary", dox them to really "send them a message".

Climate science has been usurped by leftist douche wheels and they will brook NO disagreement with their beliefs. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Armchairprophet said:

No, Europe was flooded with immigrants due to war. Syria and ISIS in particular. The Arab Spring happened as a result of dissatisfaction with being oppressed.

 

"

Severe droughts made more likely by global warming worsened conflict in Arab Spring countries early this decade, forcing people to flee, researchers said on Wednesday, publishing evidence they said proved the connection for the first time.

The study used data from asylum applications in 157 countries from 2006-2015, together with an index that measures droughts, as well as figures tracking battle-related deaths, to assess the links between climate change, conflict and migration.

The findings, published in the journal Global Environmental Change, showed a particular correlation between climate stresses and conflict in parts of the Middle East and North Africa from 2010–2012, when many countries were undergoing political transformation during the Arab Spring uprisings.

Those countries included Tunisia, Libya, Yemen and Syria, which is still mired in a bloody civil war.

The researchers said they also established a climatic link with conflicts that triggered migration in sub-Saharan Africa over the same three years - but not during other time periods."

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-conflict-arabspring/climate-stress-drove-wave-of-arab-spring-refugees-researchers-idUSKCN1PH23B

 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-change-and-rising-food-prices-heightened-arab-spring/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, J4L said:

The findings, published in the journal Global Environmental Change, showed a particular correlation between climate stresses and conflict in parts of the Middle East and North Africa from 2010–2012, when many countries were undergoing political transformation during the Arab Spring uprisings.

 

Correlation is not causation, and obviously the journal has a partisan agenda.

The United States is already experiencing "climate change" and political shifts (e.g. Trump), but there is no mass exodus to Canada.

Indeed, Canadian travel/emigration to the U.S. exceeds traffic going in the opposite direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Correlation is not causation, and obviously the journal has a partisan agenda.

The United States is already experiencing "climate change" and political shifts (e.g. Trump), but there is no mass exodus to Canada.

Indeed, Canadian travel/emigration to the U.S. exceeds traffic going in the opposite direction.

Can you prove climate change does not exist?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, J4L said:

Can you prove climate change does not exist?

 

Why would I want to do that ?

Climate change most certainly exists, and it has existed for billions of years.

I am not a climate change denier....the United States has invested more R&D dollars into climate change than any other nation in the world (e.g. NOAA, NASA, DoD, etc.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Why would I want to do that ?

Climate change most certainly exists, and it has existed for billions of years.

I am not a climate change denier....the United States has invested more R&D dollars into climate change than any other nation in the world (e.g. NOAA, NASA, DoD, etc.)

Climate change has been around forever, but nothing like we have witnessed for the past 50 years, and it is only accelerating.  If what you say is true, where all the large mammals in danger of becoming extinct?  Why are Polar Bears dying out? What happened to 75% of the insects in some countries in Europe?  How about frogs, bees, and other creatures.  If bees are eliminated, we are in deep trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, J4L said:

Climate change has been around forever, but nothing like we have witnessed for the past 50 years, and it is only accelerating.  If what you say is true, where all the large mammals in danger of becoming extinct?  Why are Polar Bears dying out? What happened to 75% of the insects in some countries in Europe?  How about frogs, bees, and other creatures.  If bees are eliminated, we are in deep trouble.

 

The "experts" estimate that about 98% of all species of the earth's flora / fauna went extinct long before the current drama over anthropogenic climate change.

We are not in deep trouble compared to all the challenges faced and overcome for many millennia.

Adapt...adapt...adapt...just as we always have.

As for those cute (killer) polar bears....

Canadian Government Reports Polar Bear Population Growing, Threatens Inuit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Trophy-Hunting-Woman-Shoots-Giraffe-Pose

MNpwoGbBWMzBRho-800x450-noPad.jpg?152338

A link from Safari Club International....the same group who, for the right price, will charge thousands of dollars to lure an endangered species out of it's wildlife refuge, in order for rich Americans to kill or poach them. 

https://globalnews.ca/news/3112257/polar-bear-population-to-decline-by-a-third-by-2050-study/

Edited by J4L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, J4L said:

A link from Safari Club International....the same group who, for the right price, will charge thousands of dollars to lure an endangered species out of it's wildlife refuge, in order for rich Americans to kill or poach them. 

https://globalnews.ca/news/3112257/polar-bear-population-to-decline-by-a-third-by-2050-study/

 

Canada and Russia still permit polar bear hunting....the United States doesn't.

If climate change is so serious for polar bears, why does Canada still permit this ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, J4L said:

Climate change has been around forever, but nothing like we have witnessed for the past 50 years, 

Bullspit. Every race of human evolved during rapid upswings in climate. Almost every empire and civilization came into being during rapid upswings in climate. And during every single one of those events the average global temps were warmer than they are today.

1100 years ago the Greenland ice sheet did not exist other than some glaciers in the far north of the island. Now idiots are freaking out about the ice sheet receding.  They freak out over sea ice extent. An extent that was first measured by satellite in 1979. 1979 saw an abormally high sea ice extent and that's the base line the alarmists are working from.  And the alarmist stupidity doesn't help things. Had one idiot try to convince me that AGW is real because up until the 1960's Lake Ontario would completely freeze  over. The problem with that claim (besides the obvious bullshit that it is) is that Lake Ontario has only frozen over completely four times since Europeans arrived here. Or how about Lenny DeCrapio freaking out over a chinook in Alberta and exclaiming he witnessed AGW first hand and "barely escaped with his life" or some such nonsense.

The problem with climate science right now is that it has become heavily politicized. And when stuff like that gets politicized, it becomes harder to trust. Especially when the AGW mouthpieces refuse to walk their talk. An access to information request revealed that the Groper household spends around $300/MONTH on bottled water.  Groper's family vacations have also created a larger carbon footprint than the average Canadian family does in a year. He's rented a total of 431 luxury SUV's during his annual trips to climate conferences.

The only inconvenient truth about Al Gore's movie is after all his piffle about AGW and rising sea levels, he goes and buys a nice ocean front home in Santa Barbara. The political stance on AGW is loooooong on rhetoric and hyperbole and rather short on actual science.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Armchairprophet said:

1. The problem with climate science right now is that it has become heavily politicized. And when stuff like that gets politicized, it becomes harder to trust.  

2. The only inconvenient truth about Al Gore's movie is after all his piffle about AGW and rising sea levels, he goes and buys a nice ocean front home in Santa Barbara. The political

3. ...short on actual science.

1. Yes, oil lobby groups and disinformation agents called the science into question and politicized the science in the 1990s.

2. Who knows ?  Maybe he has a 1M seawall ?

3. People repeat this a lot but it's damn hard to get specifics as to what they mean.  A lot of time they are just repeating what they heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think climate change is a real threat, and it’s not so much about non-human life, which will continue to evolve and thrive whatever happens to us as long as we live on Earth.  The question is whether we can reel it in to prevent a run away feedback loop that makes the planet uninhabitable for a lot of people, and how much that reduction in emissions will impact standard of living.  The reality is that lower emission technology is replacing higher emission tech, people are flocking to cities which use resources more efficiently, and urbanites have less kids — so do educated people.  Standards of living are rising in developing countries, and so are education levels, which will eventually flatten the population rise.  We’re already adapting to climate change and accommodating mass migrations, especially in places like Canada.  

As Canada’s population rises, so will its ability to support military and patrol of borders/waters.  Of course the US is already a far more powerful country militarily than Canada and will remain so for a very long time.  It’s already embedded in our trade agreement that the US has as much acces to Canadian resources as Canadians have, and they pay what we pay.  That’s the bargain we made to sell into the US market.  That’s a bit too dependent for my liking, but the reality is that, as the US rises or falls, so does Canada.  Americans do buy property up here and visit, and I can see more Americans wanting a quieter, less violent enclave up here if it gets too tumultuous in the US, but it’s in everyone’s interests to maintain order and rule of law.  I actually don’t see why we don’t just allow freedom of residency and employment between the two countries, such that there’s no longer a need for work permits or a six month limit on residency for citizens of the two countries.  However, we need to keep the violence out of Canada.  For that reason alone a border has value.  I know Americans want to keep bad actors out of the US as well.  

An American invasion probably wouldn’t change much because their Declaration of Independence requires government by the people for the people.  Canadians would ultimately be deciding how they want to live.  We probably wouldn’t see a sudden influx of Americans.  If we did, they would still have to adapt to the climate and society.  Ontario and New Brunswick were actually founded by American United Empire Loyalists before Canada became a country.  Americans would demand the same things most Canadians demand and would enjoy the same things.  

If you’re suggesting some oppressive form of subjugation of Canadians, that would be very hard to sustain because many Canadians and Americans have family on both sides of the border and there are many duel citizens.  

I think you’re worried about more people fighting over limited resources.  I’d say we’re already there.  That’s what the rise of populism is reacting to.  More and more people will be sharing the land and the cost of property and production will continue to rise.  Maybe right now the Chinese and other peoples will accept lower wages.  I believe eventually we’ll all have similar living standards and good international rules to protect air and water quality, curtail greenhouse gas emissions, maintain decent labour standards, protect human rights, and so on.  There’s no choice.  The world will be too violent and unmanageable otherwise.  I also think there will be periodic right wing reactions when people feel their ways of life are under threat.  How we manage climate change and the greater pressure on our land, water, air, and resources will determine how peaceful and healthy we will be, and I think that’s as true for Canada as it is for Europe or China or Africa.  

Edited by Zeitgeist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

The world will be too violent and unmanageable otherwise.

Look look look, we'll send you your new driver license in the mail. America should have annex canada and mexico along time ago. We'll wall off the rest of central america mmkay. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, paxamericana said:

Look look look, we'll send you your new driver license in the mail. America should have annex canada and mexico along time ago. We'll wall off the rest of central america mmkay. 

Do we get more professional sports teams and tax cuts?

kidding.  We’ve got something worth protecting up here. 

Edited by Zeitgeist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/13/2019 at 3:05 PM, Zeitgeist said:

Do we get more professional sports teams and tax cuts?

kidding.  We’ve got something worth protecting up here. 

We've always had something worth protecting  here, we are just to cheap and lazy to do that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Relax Canada, we will only be sending our urban elites who believe in AGW.  You'll be getting Al Gore, Bill Nye and Alexandria O Cortez.  Plus millions like them.  We will be happy to send them north.

 

Edited by Carlus Magnus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/15/2019 at 3:10 AM, Carlus Magnus said:

Relax Canada, we will only be sending our urban elites who believe in AGW.  You'll be getting Al Gore, Bill Nye and Alexandria O Cortez.  Plus millions like them.  We will be happy to send them north.

 

Don't make us send down the rest of Justin Bieber's family, thats our secret wpn....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We will also deploy Nickelback and Avril Lavigne, and have them tour 365 days/year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the event of catastrophic climate disorder the weak Canadian Confederation will collapse on its own, there won't be a unitary country here to invade, unlikely any of the regions would resist an annexation when the whole world is collapsing into disorder, it would be more of a rescue mission.

Thing is tho, just because it gets warmer here, doesn't mean it's going to be Florida, the weather will be more extreme, to include winter, so buckle up, because there's going to be ice storms n' shit,  it's still going to be six months of winter, but a warmer winter; is not actually nice.

It's warmer now, and already the weather is the shittiest I've ever seen in my lifetime, it was 4 degrees on the night of June 3rd and all it does is rain now.

The jet stream is breaking down, so what actually happens is the arctic air mass is coming all the way down from the north and sitting on us, all summer long.

Warmer winters, colder summers, is a recipe for non stop storms,  ice storms in winter, tornadoes in summer.

Meanwhile out west, that will all burn like California and Australia.

The nexus of heat is in the South Pacific, it's pushing up in the west, which is why they are cooking, while at the same time it is driving the arctic air down in the east, which is why it's becoming monsoon season here.

The only upside so far, is that with all this rain, my lawn is literally perfect, it's like Wrigley Field.

Also I live in the drumlins, so no tornado alley, no flood plain.

Edited by Dougie93

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...