Maple Leaf Rag

Image

From the Globe and Mail today.

Military models Canadian response to hypothetical American invasion

The Canadian Armed Forces have modelled a hypothetical U.S. military invasion of Canada and the country’s potential response, which includes tactics similar to those employed against Russia and later U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan, two senior government officials say.
It is believed to be the first time in a century* that the Canadian Armed Forces have created a model of an American assault on this country, a founding member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and a partner with the U.S. in continental air defence.
A military model is a conceptual and theoretical framework, not a military plan, which is an actionable and step-by-step directive for executing operations.
The Globe and Mail is not identifying the officials, who were not authorized to discuss the military’s thinking on this matter publicly. The officials, as well as a number of experts, say it is unlikely the Trump administration would order an invasion of Canada.
The Globe reported this week that Canada is considering sending a small contingent of troops to Greenland to join a group of eight European countries that are holding military exercises as a show of solidarity for Denmark, of which the self-ruling island is a territory.
U.S. President Donald Trump has been challenging NATO allies with repeated calls for the U.S. to acquire Greenland and threats to impose tariffs on European countries who oppose the takeover. Those threats escalated after his attack on Venezuela and capture of President Nicolás Maduro earlier this month.
Mr. Trump has also repeatedly mused about Canada becoming the 51st state. On the weekend, NBC reported Mr. Trump has been increasingly complaining to aides in recent weeks about Canada’s vulnerability to U.S. adversaries in the Arctic. Steve Bannon, the former Trump chief strategist who remains close to the President, said Canada is “rapidly changing” and becoming “hostile” to the United States.
The two senior government officials said military planners are modelling a U.S. invasion from the south, expecting American forces to overcome Canada’s strategic positions on land and at sea within a week and possibly as quickly as two days.
Canada does not have the number of military personnel or the sophisticated equipment needed to fend off a conventional American attack, they said. So, the military envisions unconventional warfare in which small groups of irregular military or armed civilians would resort to ambushes, sabotage, drone warfare or hit-and-run tactics.
One of the officials said the model includes tactics used by the Afghan mujahedeen in their hit-and-run attacks on Russian soldiers during the 1979-1989 Soviet-Afghan War. These were the same tactics employed by the Taliban in their 20-year war against the U.S. and allied forces that included Canada. Many of the 158 Canadian soldiers killed in Afghanistan from 2001 to 2014 were struck by improvised explosive devices or IEDs.
The aim of such tactics would be to impose mass casualties on U.S. occupying forces, the official said.
The modelling provides the keenest insight yet as to the level of threat assessment now being actively discussed by Canada with respect to the Trump administration.
One of the officials noted, however, that relations with the U.S. military remain positive and the two countries are working together on Canada’s participation in a new continental defence system, or “Golden Dome,” to defend against Russian or Chinese missiles.
The military has also run models on missile strikes from Russia or China on Canadian cities and critical infrastructure.
Military planners envision an American attack that would follow clear signs from the U.S. military that the two countries’ partnership in NORAD, the North American Aerospace Defence Command, was ending, and the U.S. was under new orders to take Canada by force.
Conscription has been ruled out for now, but the level of sacrifice that would be asked of Canadians remains a central topic, the officials said. General Jennie Carignan, Chief of the Defence Staff, has already announced her intention to create a 400,000-plus-strong reserve force of volunteers. The officials said they could be armed or asked to provide disruptions if the U.S. becomes an occupying power.
A senior Defence Department official said Canada would have a maximum of three months to prepare for a land and sea invasion. The first indications that invasion orders had been sent would be expected to come from U.S. military warnings that Canada no longer has a shared skies policy with the United States, the source said.
This rupture in the joint defence agreement would likely see France or Britain, nuclear-weapon states, being called on to provide support and defence for Canada against the U.S.
The Globe is not identifying the senior defence official, who was not authorized to discuss Canadian war-modelling scenarios.
Retired major-general David Fraser, who commanded Canadian troops in Afghanistan alongside the United States, said Canada could also use drones and tank-killing weapons like the Ukrainians used against the Russians to blunt their invasion in February, 2022.
Mr. Fraser said it is unthinkable that Canadian planners have had to draw up a U.S. invasion scenario. Whatever Mr. Trump does with Greenland and possibly Mexico would weigh into any Canadian scenario, he said.
But Canada can count on support from European countries, Britain, Japan, South Korea and other democratic nations.
“You know if you come after Canada, you are going to have the world coming after you, even more than Greenland. People do care about what happens to Canada, unlike Venezuela,” Mr. Fraser said. “You could actually see German ships and British planes in Canada to reinforce the country’s sovereignty.”
Mr. Fraser said Canada should immediately place more military assets in the North to claim its right to the region.
If the threat from the U.S. became serious, he said Canadian soldiers would be placed along the border even though there is no realistic possibility that Canada could defeat the U.S. militarily.
Insurgency tactics would be the best way to deal with U.S. invading forces, he said.
“There is a quantum difference between defending another land like Canadians did in Afghanistan versus defending Windsor, Ontario. You do not walk across that border because everybody is your enemy then,” Mr. Fraser added.
Retired lieutenant-general Mike Day, who headed Canadian Special Forces Command and served as chief strategic planner for the future of the Canadian Armed Forces, said it was “fanciful” to think the Americans would actually invade Canada.
But he acknowledged Canada’s armed forces could not stand up to the world’s biggest and most sophisticated military. He said, however, that the U.S. would have great difficulty occupying a country the size of Canada.
“We wouldn’t be able to withstand a conventional invasion. We would, for a limited period of time, be able to defend a very small civilian population, like the size of Kingston,” he said.
“Notwithstanding the size of the American military, however, they do not have the force structure to occupy, let alone control every major urban centre in Canada.”
“Their only hope would be a Russian-like drive to Kyiv and hope that works and the rest of country capitulates once they seize the seat of power in Ottawa,” he added. “Like Ukraine, it would inconceivable to me that we would give up if they seized our capital.”
Gaëlle Rivard Piché, executive director of the Conference of Defence Associations, said she did not see a situation where the U.S. would attack Canada. But she also said it’s crucial for Canada to significantly build up its defence capabilities.
“Clear signalling to our neighbour to the south that we want and we’re willing and able to rapidly be a credible ally that is capable of defending itself, ensuring our own national security, our national defence, will play a deterrence role towards a potential willingness by the United States to control some of Canada or to invade a portion of Canada,” she said.
University of Toronto political scientist Aisha Ahmad said Canada needs to drastically boost its homeland defence capabilities, regardless of the potential U.S. threat to the border.
“The better Canada can embrace this approach to homeland defence, the less likely all of these horrible scenarios that nobody wants will ever come to pass,” she said.
U.S. generals would be aware that Canadians would fight back against an invasion, using whatever tactics would be the most effective, she said.
“I do believe that there are intelligent generals south of our border who could very easily identify that risk environment.” ❞

 * “first time in a century”: This is of course a reference to COL Sutherland-Brown’s “Defence Scheme No. 1” a plan created in the 1920s by while he was working as Director of Military Operations and Intelligence for the Canadian Army. Basically, it was a scheme for a pre-emptive limited incursion into parts of the United States to disrupt an imminent full-scale invasion by the US, in order to win some time for British forces to make their way across the Atlantic to defend the country. 

Anyway, as interesting as drawing up this model might have been, it does point out the obvious: there is no way the United States could militarily occupy or administer this country without crippling its own defence, unless its inhabitants were completely supine. Which they won’t be, I’m fairly sure.

Maple Leaf Raggregator

Canada: Higher education and defence preparedness

Image

Some of you may know, and likely none of you will care, that my day job involves research, writing and some program development or administration in or rather adjacent to the BC public post-secondary system. 

One news source that crosses my path nearly every day is  a blog entry or other item from Higher Education Strategy Associates or HESA, led by one Alex Usher who is the usual go-to guy fo rthe big picture on post-secondary education in Canada. If you are interested in this topic, you should certainly subscribe to his “One Thought To Start Your Day” blog. 

Today he gave an account of a “National Defence Research Roundtable” that was held in Ottawa on December 15, 2025. About 77 representatives of universities across Canada met to discuss the new security situation, the new alignment, priority and above all spending on the part of the federal government concerning national defence, and how post-secondary education could contribute to this urgent issue.

Usher presented the notes and proceedings of the roundtable:

https://higheredstrategy.com/report-back-on-the-national-defence-research-roundtable/

Certainly there was a lot in there about how miserably fragmented and seemingly hopeless the situation is given the pace of current events, but a certain amount of optimism too, if enough people would wake up. Much of the discussion also centred around pure and applied research and technical points, and I zipped through it in search of anything that might related to professional military education or civil defence, since this sort of thing is related to professional wargaming and training. One passage stood out for me as a model we might follow (p. 8):

 

In discussions, participants identified components of international models that were best suited
to the Canadian context, namely Sweden’s Campus Total Defence model and the Australian
Defence Science and Universities Network.


The Swedish model is rooted in an expansive whole-of-society definition of defence that encompasses civil preparedness and emergency response in addition to military capabilities. Participants felt this was an apt culture fit for Canada and would align well with the needed culture shift
in post-secondary towards a whole-of-society readiness framing of defence and security. This
model is also rooted in a coordinated network of 30+ Swedish universities (civilian and military)
oriented around providing upskilling education for the total defence mandate and developing
specialized research hubs reflecting each member university’s areas of strength. This coordination has largely been bottom-up and organized by universities themselves, which resonated with
post-secondary leaders and representatives from funding bodies. Participants felt that the
Canadian post-secondary sector could self-organize and coordinate in similar ways, enabling
them to proactively develop strategies and solutions in response to governmental priorities
rather than awaiting top-down instruction.

Again the Swedes are helping to show us the way, I think. 

I’ve written before about a “Canadian Civil Defence Corps” on the Swedish model, and the amount of training and skills development that could be quickly and hopefully efficiently be done at our universities and colleges has great potential. 

Ditto also, for the professional military education needs of the instructors, analysts, officers and NCOs of an expanded Canadian military (regular and reserve). This is where wargaming and wargame thinking comes in!

I hope something concrete will come of this roundtable. Meanwhile, let’s keep thinking about this. 

Click to access Presentation-on-International-Defence-Research-Funding-Models.pdf

Click to access 2025-01-14_2025-NDRR-Report_web.pdf

Cons: SDHistcon Online, 31 January 2026

Image

https://tabletop.events/conventions/sdhist-online-2026-winter-quarters

COMRADES!

It’s time for the annual online SDHistcon again!

One day only, Saturday 31 January 2026!

The event schedule hasn’t been filled out yet, but there will be lots of demonstrations, presentations, and panel discussions.

I can verify that I have been tapped to have a nice interview/chat with the affable Andrew Bucholtz about my recent work.

It will be at 1500 Pacific time, 1800 on the Right Coast.

But if you are reading this blog regularly you may have heard it before so other events will feature Mark Herman, Volko Ruhnke, John Butterfield, David Thompson (showing a mystery new game, what could it be?), Dan Bullock, and more.

Tickets are $10 and all events are free… pretty cheap buzz if you ask me, and no Con Crud virus to take home.

Free game: The Chair Is Empty

Image

[Cover image: La Legende des Siecles by Rene Magritte, 1950.]

The Chair is Empty

A card-based game about political tensions and power vacuums, for 3 or more players.

This is a much cleaned-up and streamlined version of Caudillo, a power politics game placed in a thinly disguised post-Chavez Venezuela which I first designed in 2013 (before Chavez was post-Chavez).

It is basically similar in its semi-cooperative and semi-competitive nature, and it plays up the constant tension between these urges. As players vie to create the largest and most durable personal power base (scored periodically throughout the game), the card deck delivers more and more crises that players must deal with collectively (and collect small rewards immediately) or become overloaded. Coups d’etat provide another quick way to score, and the office of El Presidente has its own perks too.

The free PnP version consists of 108 cards, 88 counters, and the usual rules and play aids. Several scenarios are supplied, including a 2-player variant.

The game rules say it is for 3-5 players which seems to be where it scales best, but certainly more than 5 can play simply by adding sets of player markers.

I started work on this during lockdown in 2020; David Turczi was involved in early development and I am very grateful for his help. I kept at it over the post-COVID years and it’s in a state I feel okay to release for free print and play, especially with the uncertain situation in Venezuela now (though this is in no way an attempt at a simulation of the actual situation there; the stupid Spanish language puns will tell you that).

I plan on self-publishing a physical version of this later, since in the course of locating resources for O Canada I found a good card printer in Canada (The Playing Card Factory of Mississauga ON: https://theplayingcardfactory.com/ ). But I would like it to have better art than the janky free clip art I am using now, and no damn generative AI will be involved. So it might take a while.

Meanwhile, here are the files:

Chair rules 10 Dec 25  rules

Chair PAC 5 Nov 25  player aid card

Chair variants 5 Nov 25  scenarios, including a 2-player method where El Presidente is a dummy and a “Gringo” piggybacking variant that is perhaps applicable right now.

Chair group cards 2 Aug 24 Group and Agent cards

Chair crisis cards 2 Aug 24 Crisis and other cards

Chair card lists 30 July 24 Card lists for perusing

Chair ctrs 13 Nov 22  double set of counters

[PS: Thanks to friend of the blog Roger Leroux for the title, replacing the functional but less ambiguous “Strongman-2”]

The view from there

Image

On the last day of each year I like to take a hike in a large park nearby that is centred on a really big hill or really small mountain, depending on which part of it you are climbing.

Today it was sunny, the best weather in days and I took this picture looking north from the top.

I live in a remarkable part of a remarkable country and I’m hopeful that 2026 will see us continuing to do the sorts of things we need to for our long term survival, if not prosperity.

This is too good to lose.

Happy New Year to everyone.

QUICK: files for new version posted

Image[illustration of a section of the new map, from QUICK Junior.]

I have posted new print and play files for a new version of the game: The QUICK Page

This will not be news to some of you, but unfortunately August 2024 was the last serial of the Urban Operations Planner Course held by the US 40th Infantry Division, California Army National Guard. I decided to keep the QUICK game available to everyone on this blog as it has attracted interest by civilians and military members from a variety of countries.

But I’ve made a big change to the approach used for the map, based on some work I was doing on another urban combat system. The map is divided into large hexagons called Areas, scaled at 750 m or more per hex, depending on the general situation shown in the module. Inside each Area is a further subdivision of 1 to 6 Locations, denoted by dashed lines within the hexagon like sections of a pie.
All Locations within an Area are mutually adjacent, but are adjacent to a Location in another Area only if they share a section (not a vertex) of Area boundary. The number of Locations denotes the relative “complexity” of the terrain in the area: that is, how challenging and canalizing the terrain is to fight through and the terrain type remains a modifier for the robustness of construction there.  So an open field or park would have 1 Location and Open Terrain, but a section of an older city with small alleys and stone buildings would have 6 Locations and Closed Terrain and would be very difficult to dominate and fight through. Yet both represent the same amount of physical distance. I don’t think anyone has done exactly this kind of thing with a hex map before. I’d be interested to hear your reactions; so far everyone I have demonstrated this to has been quite positive.

Like the earlier version, the set of files here are for a game that takes place in downtown Manila but it has a new pattern map that covers a larger area. Opposing forces are the US 1st Marine Expeditionary Force and the Olvanan 17th Group Army, plus North Torbian forces that could be on either side.

I have also made a module with I MEF advancing on Kuala Lumpur but will post it at a later date.

Optimistically, I have also kept the teaching materials and files giving instructions for a simple method of remote play on the page. The refer to the earlier (2024) version of the game but the mechanics are largely the same and can be adapted.

Thanks for your interest.

Free game: Gravel

Image

Yeah, a bit like this.

A new abstract game I wanted to put out before the end of the year:

Gravel, a game about missing the (Schwer)punkt.

Gravel 20 Dec 25

Years ago I had an idea for a Go variant where the single stone played each turn could be broken up into smaller bits with lesser power (stones make gravel, see) and played on other points of the Goban so captures would be probabilistic: you would make a capture by generating a random result equal to or less than your cumulative strength differential.

This is not quite that of course but in their turn a player may place and remove a total of friendly and enemy pieces (respectively) that is equal to or less than “X”, an integer agreed upon at the start of the game. A player loses through attrition (losing more than half of their starting pieces) or inadequate territory (spaces occupied < pieces lost).

The idea of “control” over a space relying only on occupation of its flanks and rear (which permits capture in it, no matter how strong it is) is inspired by games like Ki (Corey Clark, 2010) and Control (Takuro Kawasaki, 2024) though those games forbid placement in an enemy controlled space.

Placements and removals in the game must be balanced, especially early on, and there is a crucial difference in placement between pieces that are already on the grid versus those that are coming from the pieces not yet placed. The choice of whether to place or remove first can be important; a player might want to first build up to attack a swath of territory or they might want to clear some points of enemy then follow it up with occupations.

Playing in the squares of an 8×8 checkerboard and setting “X” to 4 or 5 will give players a peppy 10-15 minute game if they don’t think too hard. The Tabletop Simulator module linked here is set up for that:

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3627753715

Perhaps you will give it a try!

Obligatory end-of-year post, 2025

Image

Another year creaks to a close.

Not a bad year for publishing, in the end, and I seem to have made a few speeches.

Here is the roundup but I have learned my lesson: I will not post any links here, since 2 years ago I put in too many and my blog got suspended for a couple of weeks when an algorithm noticed and thought I was a ‘bot or something, I guess… one part of the dead Internet talking to another.

*****

Game publishing and publicity

January: Got a copy of the Bonsai Games reissue of Winter Thunder! Unfortunately the SS counters were the usual white on black, not the frou-frou hot pink I wanted. But no one asked me.

June: Got an advance copy of China’s War to look over! No complaints except that I wanted a darker reddish orange for the Warlords than the yellow-orange they went with, about like the ARVN In Fire in the Lake. But they still show up OK and are distinguishable from the khaki Japanese. Also, I learned that a Computing Science student in Finland had used Guerrilla Checkers for his degree thesis in machine learning.

July: After its being featured in the Australian Defence Force’s “Army Battle Lab Professional Gaming List 2025”, I thought it was time to make 91 DSSB Staff Game available for free print-and-play. No idea how many people may have actually looked at it.

August: Compass Games launched a last-minute Kickstarter to squeeze the Brief Border Wars Volume II re-order lemon one last time… 114 people got wrung out, just as Volume I sold out too.

November: At last! Copies of first Brief Border Wars Volume II and then China’s War started thudding onto tables across the planet. All pretty positive reports so far. Also, I decided to finally pull the trigger on O Canada and assembled 50 physical copies: sold them all within 48 hours, but a PnP version is now up on Wargamevault and Vassal and Tabletop Simulator modules are there for anyone who does not want to do the crafting project first. And finally, I got copies of the FOURTH printing of A Distant Plain!

December: pulled the pin on Gravel, abstract game played on a square square grid of any size. It may or may not be a competitor to Guerrilla Checkers in brain-burny. Relies on attrition, territory and open flanks; how’s that for vague direction. Also published new version of the QUICK game (Manila module) that uses a new approach to map graphics to show the complexity of urban terrain, also designed a module for the Klang Valley near Kuala Lumpur but will not put that out just yet.

Game design work and future publication

Work and/ or testing began or continued on the following.

Houses of Cards/Il Treno di Carte and District Commander Briganti: Two games on the Grande Brigantaggio period immediately following the Risorgimento, set in southern Italy. The first is a simple and fast card-based game that will be sold through the National Museum of the Risorgimento gift shop, after final graphic production (images are stupendous, the Museum made its archives available to the publisher) and a history-background pamphlet is written by an historian specializing in the period. The second is an adaptation of the District Commander series with a few period-appropriate twists.

My first attempt at a Brigantaggio game, a four-player asymmetric game called Briganti! that I did in 2024 was not set up quite right but I think the framework of it is good for another game set in another time and place. The hobby needs some games that are not strictly about war but also about enforcing reform and a difficult peace. I am still waiting for a good game on the Reconstruction period in the US and how it went off the rails.

Scaleable Urban Simulation: Got back to work on this and have made some changes to it. Two modules of it are now complete: a brigade-level one set in Daugavpils and a division-level one set in Hsinchu in northern Taiwan. However, given this year’s forced meld of Army Futures Command and TRADOC-G2 and other bits and pieces, the time may have passed where this could have been adopted.

Strongman: Title now changed to The Chair is Empty (thanks, Roger Leroux). A good test and lots of suggestions by knowledgeable parties at Spring Bottoscon and Class Wargames, this one is also a candidate for publication in the next year or two, now that I have found a good card printer in Canada. I’d like that.

Game Conventions

February: At the end of January I posted that I would not go to ConsimWorld Expo for reasons that are now all too obvious less than a year later. I don’t think any Canadians went this year, and maybe this will continue. Anyway, do online cons count? I was on two panels at SDHistcon Winter Quarters Online. One on portrayals of terrorism and counterterrorism in modern board wargames (no audio or video) and another where I joined the authors of the Eurowargames anthology, which was just then appearing.

June: Went to Spring BottosCon in New West, Rob Bottos thought this one up for the benefit of the Canadians who would not be going to CSWExpo this year and others. Good fun! Though the Curling Club where it was held was a bit dark.

November: Went to (fall) BottosCon in New West. No COVID this time, not even the usual con crud. Got in some games of O Canada and discussed its physical production, test games of Gravel which is I think one tweak away from being good but I am not sure where to tweak it.

Conferences and professional wargaming stuff

February: The Connections-North conference, a one-day event was held at CFB Kingston. I was on a panel about urban warfare, along with friend Major Jayson Geroux of the RCR who is still busy rewriting the Canadian Army’s urban doctrine. From Kingston I went back to Toronto, to participate in the “Simulation Summit”, another short event held at the Royal Canadian Military Institute and sponsored by Zeroes and Ones Inc.. My main contribution was helping to facilitate a rapid game design workshop, after which I was interviewed in the aptly named Sword Room for some of my thoughts on games and game design. Amazing how short my talks can be once the umms and ahhhs are edited out.

April: At Connections-Online I made a presentation on “Gaming-Neglected Aspects of the Operational Environment”, an adaptation of the presentation I made at the Mad Scientist event at Georgetown University the year before but of which there are no audio records.

June: I made an online presentation on “Urban Warfare and Crisis Management” to a wargaming workshop at the Centro Alti Studi Difesa in Rome: trends in urbanization, the city as a system of systems, urban warfare as a slow- or fast-motion disaster with progressive damage to those systems, a few illustrative games, and eight points for attention and design in making a really good game about this subject that relate to principles of disaster management.

September: Another extended trip abroad: just two weeks this time. First Connections-UK at Brunel University where I made no presentations but ran games of QUICK Junior (Scaleable Urban Simulation and 91 DSSB also on display but no takers), Gravel and The Chair is Empty; then to Turin to do some work on the Italian Risorgimento and Resistance games, and give a lecture on irregular warfare game design at the University there; then to Lausanne for Connections Suisse, which had mostly urban warfare themed presentations – I talked about my recent urban warfare work and ran some more games of QUICK Junior. Then I went home with a nasty cold to a dead computer and a union on strike.

Writing and ‘casting

February: Got my paper copy of the Eurowargames anthology, containing my chapter on analog newsgames. Maybe now I can shut up about it.

October: On an episode of Mentioned in Dispatches with Brant Guillory, where I talked about the three games coming out in October/November and Quadrigames generally.

November: Interviewed by Grant Linneberger for his Pushing Cardboard podcast. Should be out early next year.

December: Presented “Idiosyncrasy in Motion” online to the Georgetown University Wargaming Society, about my general body of work – family-based designs and one-offs, how I design, why I do it. Not my best presentation but it made me think about how much paper I’ve defiled over the last 35 years.

Near-meaningless digest of site statistics:

Overall traffic seemed to be about the same as 2024. I seem to be cruising still at around 1,700 views per month, for a total of about 21,200 views. About 8,500 visitors in all. The five most curious countries were: US (by a very wide margin), Canada, UK, and Spain. One visit each from 22 different smaller countries, with Albania bringing up the rear (no visits from Afghanistan this year, but that may be the Taliban shutting down the Internet there).
Besides the then-current post, popular pages included Free Games, BTR Games, the QUICK Page and Scenarios and Variants pages like always.
The most downloaded documents were items for free PnP games: mostly items related to QUICK, Ukrainian Crisis and 91 DSSB. By the unequal numbers of downloads for the different game components I cannot help but think that a lot of these downloads are just grabs by ‘bots… whatever for, I don’t know.

O Canada: Tabletop Simulator modules available!

Image

Okay here goes, not entirely sure I know what I am doing in Tabletop Simulator but here are modules I have made for play of O Canada’s four scenarios for anyone who has the physical or PnP versions.

I did the best I could with the displays of the Event Cards but there are some pretty tight margins, no words got cut off completely but you can always check against your actual cards.

Tabletop Simulator:

Maple Leaf Battalions

Image

Card from O Canada game.

https://charlieangus.substack.com/p/canada-mobilizes-a-peoples-army

Well, this is kind of interesting.

For those who don’t recognize the name, Charlie Angus is one of Canada’s more interesting political commentators with an interesting pedigree. Born in northern Ontario (Timmins), in the 80s and 90s he was a punk rock musician and community activist in Toronto then went back to northern Ontario to write books and produce a magazine. From 2004 to 2025, he was the Member of Parliament for Timmins and an important figure in the left-wing factions in the New Democratic Party. He left politics and broadcasts on the Meidas Touch network and writes some good Substack.

I’ve written before about the Department of National Defence’s proposals for building a supplementary reserve force of up to 300,000 members (though they realize that it is not going to be easy! https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/army-mobilization-canada-troops-9.7009323 ).

A Canadian Civil Defence Corps

&#8220;Canadian military wants mobilization plan in place to boost reserves to 400,000 personnel&#8221;

Personally I believe it should be called something like the “Civil Defence Corps” with only a minority of its members trained in weaponry (I’ve long since come to the conclusion that most people are more useful without a rifle in their hands, nor do they necessarily want one) but here are his ideas for the “Maple Leaf Battalions”:

  • Choose an inspiring name rooted in Canadian pride and patriotism – perhaps the Maple Leaf Battalion.

  • Build from the bottom up. Decentralized local networks of resistance will foster esprit de corps and can respond quickly in the event of a local emergency.

  • Equip members properly with a uniform and access to a weapon so they can carry out their responsibilities confidently and safely.

  • Draw on the expertise already in our communities: involve health care and front-line workers, community planners, retired military and police.

  • Invite the Canadian Rangers to play a role in establishing local training programs and consider a Junior Rangers-style program for our young people.

  • Prioritize training in first aid, communications and logistics that can be used at the local level in case of emergency.

  • Bring in Ukrainian trainers to help with drone skills and civilian-defence expertise.

  • Give the battalions a strong social media presence to highlight local service and build national unity.

Again, I’m of two minds about giving everyone access to a weapon but there are some interesting touches here… I like the one about bringing in Ukrainian trainers, a fair trade since so many Ukrainian soldiers were trained by Canadian soldiers before the current war and who helped turn that military around quickly. And by all means, train everyone possible in first aid, communications and logistics to help deal with inevitable and real-world disasters and build community resiliency and a sense of belonging, protection and pride.

Again again, I do not at this point believe that the United States wants to literally occupy this country still less make it some kind of formal territorial acquisition. But they do want formal and informal acquiescence: a vassal state that poses no threat or alternative, gives unfettered access to anything the United States wants, and retains a performative government of Quislings that will keep the lid on while the looting and asset-stripping continues. The methods used to obtain this state of affairs are not so crude as an armed invasion and resisting them will take organization and intelligence (in both senses of the word).

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started