The US/Canadian militaries are very closely intertwined. NORAD and Five Eyes both come to mind. We also have hundreds of military members stationed on US bases, and they have people stationed on some of our our bases as well.

Besides, if the US chose to attack Canada, there's not a godamn thing our miliary could do to stop them. Fully operational or not we simply are no match for the American military, nor could we ever be. We have 1/10th of the population.

So why waste money on preparing for something that would 100% result in us losing anyways?

[–] a4ng3l@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It is nevertheless better to steer away from those dependencies instead of being complacent.

[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I disagree, there's always a balancing act between being dependant and what you have to give up in order to do it yourself. In this case, I think being dependant is the better choice.

The thing is, this is just the tip of the tech iceberg. We're also dependant upon the US for high-end computer parts, they can ban the sale of chips from Intel, AMD, and Nvidia to Canada if they wanted. And in turn, the US and Canada are both dependant on Taiwan and other countries for the actual chip production from those companies.

Does that mean Canada should also invest in developing our own microprocessor design and manufacturing? Currently, the only two countries even trying that are the US and China, and China is still a ways behind. Those are the two largest countries by GDP in the entire world, Canada's GDP is tiny in comparison. Anything we invest in isn't simply going to be inferior, it's going to be pathetic in comparison and leave us at a significant disadvantage in terms of operational capabilities.

We have to recognize the reality of the situation, and that is that being dependant here is the only realistic path forward given our size.

[–] a4ng3l@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

It should for sure strive to find additional partners to reduce as much as possible those dependencies as well. Also the immediateness of distribution interruptions in sourcing CPU isn’t comparable to cutting critical services in the cloud. The later being instantaneous while the former has a long time to impact.

You apply balance within the framework that allows you to be more resilient. Not in absolute.

We are talking about a country, not your local SMB.