You Short Sighted Goat Fornicating Pre-K DropoYou Short Sighted Goat Fornicating Pre-K Dropouts – Bob -The Frighteningly Sane*-Fool
Dear Officials of the Canadian Government,
I am an American. Additionally, I am no friend of Canada, or of Canadians.
Justin Trudeau, a senior official holding positions you are apparently endorsing, has said that a certain internal security issue is a result of American interference, and that as a result, all options will be on the table.
I would suggest that you reflect very carefully on how much risk you are willing to take in support of such policy.
Additionally, to the officials confident that they want to support Trudeau, fully and unconditionally; Are you out of your God D*mned minds?
Yes, sanity is maybe defined for a culture, and American culture and Canadian culture are very far from identical. Beyond that, I am not considered sane even within American culture.
It may still be quite defensible to wonder how in Hell this apparent plan of yours could possibly ever be a good sane idea.
Four relevant Bob facts:
1. I really do not like vaccine mandates. 2. I was in favor of this trucker protest when I heard of it. 3. I have donated no money or other physical resources to it. It is almost certain that Canadians have heard me speak approvingly of it, but the Canadians were mostly not my intended audience for the comments. 4. I am perhaps an expert on the difficulty of persuading Americans that there should be war with Canada; Canadian behavior just isn’t usually the sort of thing that makes Americans want to wage war.
As best as I can estimate, the truck protestor victory condition is taking their trucks, and returning to work, without being compelled to vaccinate. From this flows all of the conclusion that the Canadian government position in not tenable, and will collapse at some point.
I think you Canadians are barbarians, and don’t get too excited over how wrongly you behave with regard to one another.
Why is it of any interest to me? My calculation is that the vax would cripple me, and that my former employer did not set aside the funds for any sort of compensation for crippling me. If I am completely denied anything interesting to do with my time, I can devote the rest of my life to making the people responsible miserable. The truckers are doing what I would like to do in their place, but more intelligently, and more kindly. I am not doing that yet, because I still have opportunities that are more interesting than trying to make the likes of you miserable. I am still looking at what bureaucracies here may inflict on me. If your policies collapse, the similar policies here may collapse.
The first argument that you are screwed takes the additional assumption that you have wrongly estimated policy impact on the logistics of Canada. Do you actually know how many truckers you need? How many are available, will vax, and will not fax? Fraction that are owner-operators, and could not be easily replaced assuming availability of competent vaccinated drivers?
It seems plausible that you are stupid enough to have over looked this angle, in part because there are so many idiots here in the US being similarly stupid. America’s freight and passenger logistics are over a combination of rail (optimized for freight), semi-trucks, buses, and airplanes. The electric vehicle proposals in the US are probably evidence of the same level of incompetent disregard for the objective physical reality. First, we don’t have nuke plants, so EVs are basically fossil fueled, and possibly quite a bit less efficient than heat engine combustion once you do all of the energy bookkeeping. Second, we don’t seem to have EV semi-tractors, and California has apparently banned the conventional semi-tractors. Thirdly, we don’t have anywhere near the charging stations that would be necessary for interstate freight and passengers to be carried by EVs. Fourth, there was a proposal floated to have EV airplanes, and it seems our government is very enthusiastic in saying that it will be so. One serious problem with these EV proposals, is that they would have the consequence of limiting travel within the United States. The current apparent political consensus is a product of the level of travel, so limited travel could be expected to produce a different balance of power, and different consensus.
The second argument is that your spokesmen have seriously ruined the best chance that you had for a outcome that you would find desirable.
The nice for you path was letting the truckers get bored and feel like they were not accomplishing everything. If you could split off a hypothetical minority inexorably opposed to vaxxing, you might be able to get the rest to go back to work, take the vax, and not remain there supporting their fellows.
This has been mishandled pretty much from day one.
There were a bunch of loud idiots on your side mouthing off, because they had decided on violence, /before/ they actually confirmed that they had the shooters available and willing to carry out the violence. So, your status quo policy is continuing down that route, in lieu of resigning and retiring from politics. But, you didn’t have the shooters prepped before hand, so whatever premise you plan on using, you are planning to implement with very few people.
Furthermore, the Truckers are Canadians. Like the American population, the Canadian population seems to have produced good infantry. Infantry and the population that they are recruited from are rarely entirely different from each other. They don’t have /all/ of the psychological advantages that good infantry would have, but they have some, and you’ve made it clear enough that you intend to kill them, that they won’t necessarily be shocked into paralysis when the violence starts. At the very least, they have greater commitment to facing the threat together. This means that you need a lot of shooters, not a few. Trying to use a few shooters instead, makes it very likely that the violence will be much uglier than the plans call for.
Canadians will not be super happy about that. Perhaps your shooters will be the unhappiest. Long term, in supporting this going forward, you are risking personal consequences. Everyone and their dog will know that you were involved, that it was an avoidable mistake, and your fault will be very easy to see.
There are American idiots encouraging you to do very stupid things in order to ‘remedy’ this matter. Tires are a little bit useful in moving a semi-truck, without it getting wrecked in the process.
That would be forcing unwanted carnal knowledge of syphilitic camels, and metaphorically result in community spread of smallpox.
Getting rid of the truckers, but disabling the tractors in place is not a winning move for you. Setting the trucks on fire, would not be a winning move for you. Yes, you do have the weapons systems to destroy the trucks, and kill a lot of truckers; this is not a winning move for you. Your shooters have a very difficult problem in trying to capture the trucks intact enough to be removed, instead of setting them on fire and leaving the streets blocked with wreckage. Wrecking a strategic bridge, and setting your own capital on fire, is not a winning move in anyone’s playbook.
Getting the trucks out of the city alone may not be a victory condition. You may need to get them moving again. Okay, sure, Ottawa is close to the US that you could maybe still eat even if you managed to wreck the entire Canadian economy. Would not be good for having a political future. Getting them back into service needs truckers. Note: Automation is not the answer. Automation is hard, and does not appear ready to operate semi tractors. An accelerating tractor is a little bit stable for automation to operate, like a pendulum. A decelerating tractor, accelerating to a lower speed, is unstable like an inverted pendulum. This might be a quite difficult problem for automation.
Note: You have been trying to hire tow trucks. Basic problem 1: A tow truck company knows that if trucking firm A hires them to steal tractors, firms B, C, and D will have nothing to do with them, and then the tow truck company goes out of business. Basic problem 2: there may not actually be enough tow trucks. Companies buy tow trucks to handle an expected break down rate by their customers. These aren’t break downs, and are vastly greater than the expected rate. You might wear out every tow truck in the country just trying to get the semi tractors out of town.
One of your possible options is trying to have the police serve as shooters. One of the challenges there is that you can’t really promise them that you will protect and reward them for doing what you want. A cop who wants to be forced to retire, and possibly be criminally prosecuted can just go have a bad shoot against a junkie. You would have needed to not only have supported them when they had Good Shoots, but also in abuses of police power, in order to have police view being involved in this as anything but a career ender. Yes, you’ve asked for volunteers and loans, but I suspect that there are a great deal of unpaid parking tickets to investigate.
Another is the military. One problem, again, they know exactly how much trouble you are asking them to get into on your behalf. Two, shooting up a capital and setting it on fire is kinda how militaries take over the governments of countries. Asking your military to do so on the strength of your being the government, especially on pain of imprisonment for refusing, can result in no longer being the government. You are currently in power, and will be pissed off at them refusing. The population of your country will probably be the population of your country for some time, will likely be pissed off if they don’t refuse, and will long have some ability to see that people are confined to prison. You may feel that you have a monopoly on prosecutions, but political power is fleeting, and even if the cops or the military thought you could and would deliver on protecting them from prison, they would doubt that you could protect them forever.
Police and military seem to be the highest possibilities for which you may find only enough shooters willing to follow orders to get you into a lot of trouble. This is getting eaten by the sow that you are copulating with, in the illusion that kissing makes it romantic.
One risk that you should not be worrying about is what happens in the US if the US government does stupid things at your request. American stupidity is an American concern. You can’t have the information to judge which things are dangerous, and which are not.
Your remaining risk that you really should be careful about judging; Is the American ‘intervention into Canadian internal security’ worth a war with the US? This is probably extremely low probability. Still, would it be likely to end well?
Okay, America has not done an exceptional job of preparing for such a war, but it isn’t clear that Canada has the best strategic position either. Normally, I would suspect that a sane American government might be reasonably positioned to force peace negotiations to occur. However, the current Canadian policy makes me wonder if there is any way to force Canadian officials to negotiate sanely. We’ve been negligent in prepping long range artillery tubes and shell stockpiles enough to work over a lot of Canadian cities, but would it matter to you if we had? This doesn’t really matter, because after Afghanistan there is little reason to trust American power projection, or the sanity of American foreign policy implementation.
The real danger of a war between our nations is that we both see internal security risks, and our central governments may no longer be absolutely able to bind our respective peoples to peace. Again, infantry and the population infantry is recruited from can be similar. Our unofficial irregular forces could war against Canada, and Canadian unofficial irregular forces could war against America, and it could prove quite messy. From my perspective, if my folks kill off the Canadian government, and Canadians kill off the US jerks, that would be about the nicest possible outcome. Wars are never that convenient for anyone. Better that folks don’t get that agitated.
Your fundamental plan seems to be “these people we were leaning on aren’t doing what we want. We just have to lean on them harder, they will do what we want.” Sounds to me like seeking conjugal relations with a goat, in expectation of a happy marriage.
Why isn’t quitting the better option?
*Insertion by Sarah. You were warned.