They didn't. Canada didn't exist as a country.

That explains why I didn't know about it.

Okay, as an American I have to say to your "full might of the American military" ******** :
The UN.
That is all. The UN
**** your dreams.
****** .

Not sure where you're going with that the U.S. was the driving force behind the U.N.
Elaborate?

Are you being serious?

If so, then allow me to break down a few things for you.

1. The U.S. created the UN and sits at the head of it.
2. Countries around the world are in more debt than the U.S. even countries that would have you believe otherwise (i.e. China)
3. Our govt. WAS shutdown. Was meaning it's not anymore. There are countries in Europe on the verge of collapse/bankruptcy last I checked. So all things considered a 2 week shutdown=not that bad. (not saying it's good, but not as bad as it could be)
4. Other countries are constantly asking for U.S. involment in their conflicts or asking for solutions to their problems. Don't pretend otherwise.
5. I'll give you the whole "retarded government officials" thing. This whole pissing contest between Rep. and Dem. has gotten old. Hopefully that changes next election or sooner. Either way though we still manage to sort our things out. Even with our problems.
6. We aren't going to war every two years. This wraps right into 4. with other countries asking for help in their conflicts wether it be asking for troops, Air support, Naval support, or for weapons. We are dragged into a lot of these conflicts simply because of our spot in the U.N. and G.B., France, and the U.K. are usually right there with us.

And even with my points that I made, none of this even matters because if this is what the world turned to, there wouldn't be a world left for us to fight on if we did win. We'd crumble at the result of our own actions, and we'd be to blame for it all.

1. Yes, because the U.S. can kick everybody out and disband it, correct?
2. Of course they are, but are you forgetting about the countries that aren't? Those countries that are in debt likely wouldn't care if it meant they had to defend themselves if our country went to those extremes (You're a fool for even putting that in a hypothetical situation.)
3. Our govt. shutdown, when compared using more relatable numbers, did a smaller job of clearing the debt than you realize.
4. Will we still have their support if we were to abandon them in their time of need to become just like NK, or Cuba, or any of the plenty of other countries that hate America? Do you think they have the strength to take other countries on if they need our help?
5. It won't change until our citizens stop being just as retarded as the officials.
6. I won't argue with that, but in this situation we don't have the U.N. backing us up.
7. Out of the entire world, we make up 316,999,690 of it. Americans make up just under 4.5% of the world population. We could be a memory in a matter of hours if the rest of the world was that pissed off at us.
8. We have 1,429,995 active personnel and 850,880 reserve personnel. This adds up to 2,280,875 people, or .72% of our population. If you expect .72% (I'm not dumb, I know it would grow if we needed more troops, but so would every other nations, if they needed more troops.) to take on the rest of the world's militaries, then you're dead wrong.
9. The U.N. is about fighting for world peace, which means that even some Americans would be fighting us.
10. How much support would we have for our own country? Do you think our citizens would support a corrupt nation's corrupt war? How much support was there for Vietnam, we were helping in Vietnam, were we not? Trying to get rid of communism was a good thing, right? But we were out-matched by soldiers with inferior weaponry. One of their most effective weapons were bamboo sticks with **** on them.

[Char Limit.]

Not like a pretty big part of the world make up the U.N. or anything.
I'll let you in on a secret: even if we were able to use nukes, which I hope we would never resort to, it's been proven that we couldn't even wipe all of China off the map.

With miitary forces combined such as China, Britain, France, Russia, Mexico, Germany, and... you know... a **** ton of other military forces out there, not only are we outnumbered, their combined wealth would **** us over as well.

Finally someone who makes sense.

Our spending is more than all other countries combined on the Military, plus England, Canada, France, Japan, and South Korea would probably all ally with us since they are our bitches.

Jesus, are you listening to yourself? "The full might of the U.S. military"? Stop pretending military might is anything even remotely worth merit, admiration or even respect anymore. It's ******* primitive.

SO you're saying that militaries don't mean anything?

I'm saying that it's a backward thing to be proud of or to speak of in such a context, i.e. "Do any of you Canadians or Brits honestly think you could stand a chance against the full might of the U.S. military today?"

Military power means something in that it gives control over one's population, weaker allies and enemy nations. Thing is, that may have been considered prestigious in the 16th century, but these days it's more a frustrating factor that many feel is in the way of the world actually getting anywhere that isn't clogged up with rivalry, power-play and ego-tripping. Consider that some countries haven't been at war for about 200 years. That's pretty much the longest stretch of peace for any people in human history; war and military might is something that should be of the past, or at least the value some people put in it.

I posed it in such away given the topic at hand. As long as people have different oppinions wether it be religious, political, etc...there will always be conflict. I agree that we should all find a way to be at peace, but I don't believe that it can be done.

I think GB has not won a war since WWII(with everyone else(even if US takes the credit)), because, they are peacefull, they defend do not attack, US only makes war with undeveloped countries, it is almoust like a bully, and today I am pretty sure, nobody could win against US army, too many forces and money on it.

we won the Falklands war

haha sorry forgot about the argenti(ns/nians?)

Argentinians. I think

I'm sure GB has won more often than it's lost in a majority of it conflicts even the ones with out the US. Also, it's not like we start things with these "undeveloped countries" there's always someone doing something that causes the U.N. to call on the U.N. leaders. Besides there aren't to many things we get into that some part of, if not all of, the EU is involved in.

Not being an arrogant douchebag. I was simply reffering to the people who just want to look at that certain aspect (buring the capital building) and nothing else. I don't care if people disagree with me or even debate me. As long as they can do so intellegently. If someone does then I'll gladly jump into specifics and what not.

We don't have to withstand the full might of the USA
1 - The USA can't use chemicals weapons or nukes on any major population centers, considering 90% of our population is within 100 miles of the border, making it so the USA would be shooting themselves in the foot
2 - It would quickly go from USA vs Canada/Britain to USA vs The World
3 - A large portion of the US military is Canadian

The topic is sort of dumb.

The US and Canada would never every consider fighting each other. Our relations are fantastic.

Assuming there was a war SOLELY between the US and Canada, it's honestly pretty clear that the US Military has a massive advantage.

Though, in a real world situation, this would never happen.

The British wouldn't toss their lives away for Canada. C'mon be realistic.

Inb4 treaties, treaties are only as good as the nations signing them, and let's face it, Britain really is the ********* ally to ever ally in the history of alliances.

It isn't a day in the UN if the English isn't trying to backstab you for personal gain.

You really want to trust the safety of your country on ENGLAND? And no, it wouldn't become a US vs the world scenario because the US runs the Seas with it's glorious Navy made of freedom and **** . There is no plausible way for the English (or anybody excepting the Russians to land near the Americas. Also the close proximity of Canada in concentrations would just make it easier for us to keep you guys in check, given that it means there's less ground to cover.

why is Britain a **** ally?

I guess burning down a relatively significant government building isn't pretending to be hardcore but more of a huge middle finger or mooning somebody.

why bring modern day warfare into the equation? i like how old wars could be won through grit and determination, whereas nowadays its whoever spent the most trillions of taxpayer money that wins. if war was then what it is now, this wouldnt even be a conversation, considering that at that time britain was even more powerful in comparison to to other countries than the states is now, meaning the revolution would have just been another quelled rebellion. just be glad that at some point down the line, it was the americans who scoffed at how fat, greedy, and corrupt other countries were instead of vice versa.

We should revert back to trench warfare.

nah, im just saying leave the past past and the present present. the states could probably defeat any one (possibly two) army in symmetrical warfare, but for the difficulty of fighting a transcontinental war in the 1800s? give people their props.

It wasn't just Britain. France, sort of, helped in the Allied cause, and you can't ever forget America.

Because america doesn't let you forget

WW1: USA didn't have a huge role, the canadian and australian regiments are what really helped us out on the british front. But they were still necessary for our victory.

WW2: USSR had the largest role in the defeat of nazi germany. Most german forces were diverted east and yet the red arny still advanced the furthest and the fastest. However americans were pivotal on the western front.

U.S.A. did not lose the Vietnam War. U.S.A never went to war with Vietnam. It was a conflict, because the US Congress didn't actually declare war. Instead the US President used his "constitutional discretion" calling it a "police action." U.S.A just went in there and killed a lot of men, women, and children, because Vietnam was negatively affecting neighboring countries.

Furthermore, the whole hippy-woodstock-peace movement came about because U.S.A's involment in Vietnam was so uncalled for, and so un-war related.

When we went to make a grab for Canada, it was more of a " **** it, why not. Let's try and take more British land. That'll really piss 'em off."

And it did.

The Americans actually lost land, but it was given back to them.

Yet the US also gained some land.

If I remember correctly, America was fueling patriotism to make an attempt at taking Canada for America, solely for the reason of being able to take more British land. There was a British commander, for the life of me I can't remember his name, that used brilliant scare tactics to route us out.

Canada wasn't really involved, they were just getting pushed around the entire war being like, "What's going on, eh?"

The invasion of canada had something to do with the US trying to stay neutral and Britain trying to stop us and America saying "We do what we want, bitch!"

It's not that we don't want to remember it, we just don't deem it important enough to remember.
I'm afraid we never consider it as a huge part of our history, Americans fighting for their independence is a mere spec in our history.

This comic sums up the comments from the Canadians.

"OMG, America just rename the war, "Canadian Independence War" cause the sole purpose was to invade Canada WHICH FAILED HAHAHA and the war ended after the White House burned down and was never rebuilt again cause it's a Tim Hortons. The End.

I don't understand the hate lol. That was literally a Canadian comic strip.

Me either.

I'll be honest. I don't care about who's better. I like Canada. I have no issue with them.