HAPPY CANADA DAY!!!!

 

TRADE UPS AND DOWNS!

Trump just broke off trade talks with Canada so I went to my personal A.I. SAL-9000 and asked:

Sal, with the current trade deal negotiations between Canada and the U.S., would it be a better idea to remove all trade barriers and tariffs? What would be the advantages and disadvantages of that?

SAL said:

Completely removing all trade barriers and tariffs between Canada and the U.S. would be a bold shift—here’s a nuanced look at the advantages and disadvantages of such a move:

---

✅ Advantages of removing all trade barriers

1. Economic efficiency & consumer gains

• Without tariffs, the principle of comparative advantage allows each country to specialize, increasing output and overall welfare heritage.org+15en.wikipedia.org+15m.economictimes.com+15.

• Canadian consumers would benefit from lower prices on U.S. goods (and vice versa), reducing inflation pressures. The Bank of Canada noted that tariff-induced cost increases could significantly feed into consumer prices reuters.com.

2. Boost to trade and growth

• Canada is the U.S.'s second-largest trading partner, responsible for ~75% of Canadian exports barrons.com+15m.economictimes.com+15facebook.com+15. Removing tariffs could increase export volumes, helping GDP and supporting jobs.

• The Bank of Canada estimated U.S. tariffs alone could shave 1.1% off Canada’s GDP; elimination would help avert this downside bankofcanada.ca+15m.economictimes.com+15reuters.com+15.

3. Supply chain stability

• Integrated supply chains—especially in sectors like automobiles, energy, metals—would function more efficiently, boosting competitiveness axios.com+15energypolicy.columbia.edu+15blackbuckinc.com+15.

4. Strengthened bilateral relations

• A barrier-free regime would ease tensions over digital‑tax and dairy conflicts, reducing retaliatory threats and fostering cooperation.

5. Attracting investment

• Predictable, open markets are a magnet for investment. Businesses are more confident planning cross‑border operations without trade frictions.

---

⚠️ Disadvantages and challenges

1. Loss of protected sectors

• Industries currently shielded—like Canadian dairy, poultry, and eggs under supply‑management—would face intense competition from U.S. producers ft.com+7ft.com+7wsj.com+7en.wikipedia.org.

• Similarly, U.S. steel, aluminum, and manufacturing sectors could suffer.

2. Adjustment costs

• Freeing trade could cause short‑term dislocation in sensitive industries, requiring job retraining and social support. While in the long run gains offset these effects, the short‑term pain can be politically challenging en.wikipedia.org.

3. Loss of revenue and policy tools

• Tariffs currently provide some government revenue and can be used strategically, for example in negotiating digital‑tax concessions. Removing them limits flexibility.

4. Political backlash

• Sudden liberalization could provoke backlash in regions with vulnerable industries, triggering populist or protectionist pushback (as seen with Trump’s 2025 “Liberation Day” tariffs) theaustralian.com.au+1axios.com+1.

5. Strategic leverage lost

• Tariffs are a bargaining chip in broader negotiations. Without them, it may be harder to secure concessions on issues like digital services taxation.

---

🌐 The bigger picture: the USMCA and WTO context

Under USMCA and WTO, most goods already cross tariff-free—exceptions include autos, dairy, steel, and aluminum (where tariffs were imposed in early 2025) ft.com+4apnews.com+4axios.com+4ft.com+3en.wikipedia.org+3en.wikipedia.org+3. Complete removal would likely require treaty renegotiation (e.g., USMCA review due in 2026). However, full free trade would maximize the economic benefits from integrated markets.

---

🧩 Summary

Pros	Cons
Consumer price relief, inflation control	Disruption to protected and strategic industries
GDP growth, trade volume increases	Short-term job losses & adjustment costs
Streamlined cross-border supply chains	Loss of policy flexibility and revenue
Stronger Canada-U.S. partnership	Potential political backlash

---

👥 Is it a “better idea”?

Economically, yes—the consensus among economists favours free trade for its efficiency gains and growth benefits. 

Politically and socially, the reality is more complex:

• You’d need transition policies: training programs, targeted support, and phased liberalization to ease industry adjustment.

• Negotiating side agreements could protect genuinely vulnerable sectors (e.g., supply‑managed agriculture) while opening others.

• Both governments must manage domestic political pressures to avoid backlash.

---

🔄 Bottom line

Removing all trade barriers could unlock significant economic benefits, including stronger growth, lower prices, and deeper integration. But success hinges on managing the inevitable disruptions and crafting compensatory policies to support affected sectors. If both countries are willing to negotiate thoughtfully, a phased, strategic removal could ultimately be a win-win

LET'S INVADE SOME PLACES!!!!

Or at least have a referendum on them joining Canada!

And if Drumpf doesn't behave... we will take Michigan's 'Upper Peninsula...' and Pt. Roberts too!

Canadian Star Trek!

It might not be quite as smart as "The Enterprise" ...but it's getting there!

AI-Powered Gripen: Saab's Leap into Autonomous Air Combat

June 2025 — In a groundbreaking fusion of aerospace engineering and artificial intelligence, Saab has successfully tested an AI-enabled Gripen E fighter jet, featuring a reinforcement-learned AI agent named Centaur. Developed in partnership with the German AI defense company Helsing, this new capability is positioning Sweden as a leader in the race for autonomous air combat systems.

Centaur: The AI Copilot with Decades of Virtual Training

The Centaur AI was embedded into the Gripen E’s open-architecture avionics and trained using advanced reinforcement learning. In simulation, it rapidly gained experience equal to tens of years of human pilot training in mere weeks. During a series of real-world flights, it autonomously executed air combat maneuvers including beyond-visual-range (BVR) engagements, threat tracking, and simulated missile cueing.

Human–Machine Teaming, Not Replacement

Saab emphasizes a model of human-machine collaboration, not replacement. The pilot remains in control while Centaur acts as an intelligent decision-support co-pilot—boosting situational awareness, responsiveness, and resilience in complex engagements. This approach reflects the broader trend in 5th and 6th generation fighter design.

What Makes the AI-Enabled Gripen Unique?

• ✅ Modular, open software architecture
• ✅ No physical redesign required to integrate AI
• ✅ Can simulate degraded communications or lost links
• ✅ Future pairing with uncrewed drone wingmen envisioned

Implications for the Future of Aerial Warfare

This successful integration of AI in an operational fighter suggests a significant paradigm shift in air force doctrine. Unlike older jets requiring hardware upgrades, the Gripen’s digital backbone means it can evolve through software updates alone, keeping it tactically relevant far into the future.

What’s Next?

Saab and Helsing will continue test flights throughout 2025, gathering data to refine Centaur’s capabilities. Although production deployment has not yet been confirmed, the technology is ready for export if demand arises. Expect further experiments involving AI-led team combat with drones and networked sensor-sharing systems.

Final Thoughts

The AI-powered Gripen may not be a “killer robot,” but it is certainly a herald of what’s to come. The fusion of machine learning and fighter aircraft is no longer science fiction—it’s in the air right now over Swedish skies.

For more on this story, see: Reuters' coverage.

Published by Children of the Divine | Tagged under: AI in Combat, Saab Gripen, Military Innovation, Future Warfare

It's time to take the gloves off!

It’s Time for Canada to Play Hardball on Trade – Starting with Our Natural Resources... Because Trump is Playing Us!!!!

By Allan W. Janssen

As Donald Trump floats back into the political spotlight with talk of a renegotiated U.S.-Canada trade deal "within 30 days," Canadians would be wise not to hold their breath. We've been here before—empty deadlines, bluster at the podium, and a looming threat of tariffs aimed at our industries, jobs, and sovereignty.

But what if—for once—Canada were the one to lay down the terms?

Let me be clear: Canada is not a vassal state. We are a resource superpower. Our hydroelectric dams light up American cities. Our oil keeps U.S. refineries humming. Our lumber frames their homes. Our potash grows their food. And our rare earth minerals will one day power their electric vehicles and smart bombs.

If Trump and his entourage of economic nationalists want to weaponize trade again, it's time Canada responded in kind—with something they can't ignore.

The Power We Hold

Imagine a 50% export tariff on Canadian oil, gas, electricity, potash, lumber, and rare metals headed south. Overnight, fuel prices rise, construction slows, and Midwestern farmers feel the pinch. The American supply chain, already fragile from global shocks, would be hit squarely where it hurts: inputs.

This isn't about starting a trade war. It’s about defending ourselves in one that Trump has already signaled he's willing to reignite.

Canada has long played the polite partner. We've endured steel and aluminum tariffs, Buy America schemes, softwood lumber disputes, and thinly veiled threats to our dairy sector. We’ve met these provocations with reason and compromise—sometimes too much of it.

But what if we flipped the script?

Retaliation Isn't Reckless—It's Rational

The World Trade Organization may frown on unilateral export tariffs. Fine. Let’s build strategic pricing mechanisms, carbon border adjustments, or export quotas that achieve the same goal. Let’s use climate goals, energy security, and market stability as the rationale—because they are.

And let’s not just prepare these measures quietly behind the scenes. Let’s signal them publicly. Because the mere threat of retaliation—when backed by real economic muscle—can be more effective than the act itself.

This isn’t economic brinkmanship. It’s economic realism.

Diversify, But Don't Disarm

Yes, we must accelerate LNG terminals to Asia. Yes, we must strengthen our internal east-west pipelines and transmission infrastructure. Yes, we must decouple from American overdependence wherever possible. But we must also be prepared to use the power we already have—now, not 20 years from now.

Let the Americans know: if no trade deal is reached within 30 days, Canada is prepared to impose strategic export controls. We are not begging for fairness. We are demanding it.

A Sovereign Country Acts Like One

To be a serious country in today’s world, you need more than resources—you need the courage to use them. Just as the U.S. uses its dollar, military, and markets to enforce its interests, Canada must be prepared to use its natural resource dominance to protect its own.

Let’s stop being polite. Let’s start being powerful.

Trump the Madman!

Donald Drumpf is upset!!!!! 

 Apparently... by not inviting Putin to the G7 meeting in Canada this week... they hurt his feelings!

Alaska and Maine want to join Canada... and so does Greenland!

Now all we need is for the Turks and Caicos Islands to get on board... so we don't have to go to Florida or Arizona in the winter anymore!!!!!!

HEY... Let's all join the United States!!!!!!!!!!

Canada has a lot of issues as a nation. Is the solution to join the United States and form an even stronger nation?

Joining a failing republic is hardly the road to strength. The biggest ‘issue’ Canada has is that its closest ally is suddenly turning against it like a mad dog. So, you think Canadians would give up their universal healthcare and embrace being ass-deep in guns and paranoia like the Americans? Sending their kids to school with bulletproof backpacks, subjecting them to the trauma of shooter drills as if school is a warzone? When the US right-wingers have just elected their first openly fascist Hitler-quoting president? Pfft, as if.

Tolerate unlimited anonymous political donations so the government can be bought and corrupted? That's wacko. I'm over 60, and in my lifetime, I've only met two people who wanted to be American. One was a crazy Russian immigrant, and one was a far-right extremist nutcase. I have NEVER encountered a single normal Canadian who wanted to join the rotten 19th century backwater shitshow to the south that blithely buries shredded schoolchildren and does nothing about guns, where hundreds of thousands go medically bankrupt every year, where countless thousands die of treatable ailments, where people would happily starve a hundred just to avoid feeding one freeloader, where women are dragged back into the dark ages. Uncivil and uncivilized.

The US is loud and full of itself, but not viewed as the ‘strongest’ anymore. It doesn't even rank in the top 20 when it comes to health, longevity or freedoms. It's become just a degraded plutocracy, existing only to enrich its 1%. The Trump Reich will accelerate its decline. The fact that Diapered Donald thinks he can just absorb sovereign nations because the United States wants them is insulting and megalomaniacal. (Although he'll likely drop the idea when someone finally gets around to telling him that most Canadians would be Democrats.)

If it ever did happen, I would be a hardcore resistance member and fight to the death to avoid becoming American. 🇨🇦

***

Let Canada Fix the United States of America!

Fixing America: 10 Bold Reforms to Heal a Broken Democracy

By Allan W. Janssen | Allan's Canadian Perspective

It’s no secret that America is struggling to recover from the political and institutional chaos of the Trump era. But Donald Trump didn’t cause this crisis alone—he simply exposed the cracks that were already there: money in politics, broken representation, rampant misinformation, and growing inequality. If the United States wants to reclaim its promise, it needs a bold, comprehensive roadmap to repair the damage and reimagine a more resilient democracy.

1. Restore the Rule of Law and Institutional Integrity

• Hold bad actors accountable: Prosecute proven crimes—no more immunity for elites.
• Protect the DOJ and courts: Shield the justice system from political interference.

2. Overturn Citizens United and End Dark Money

• Reverse the Supreme Court’s disastrous Citizens United decision, which allowed unlimited corporate money to flood the political system under the guise of “free speech.”
• Enact full campaign finance reform, including real-time transparency and strict donation limits.

3. Eliminate Lobbyist Control and Legalized Bribery

• Ban corporate PACs and lobbying by former officials, especially ex-members of Congress and cabinet members.
• Institute lifetime bans on lobbying for federal regulators and senior government advisors.

4. Break the Two-Party Monopoly

• Adopt ranked-choice voting and open primaries to allow third parties to thrive without becoming spoilers.
• Support fusion voting to allow coalition-building across ideological lines.

5. Deliver Universal Healthcare

• Implement Medicare-for-All or a public option to guarantee healthcare as a human right.
• Lower prescription drug prices by giving the government negotiating power.

6. Reform Elections and Representation

• End partisan gerrymandering through independent redistricting commissions.
• Abolish the Electoral College and shift to a national popular vote.
• Grant statehood to DC and Puerto Rico to fix representation disparities.

7. Make Voting Easy and Universal

• Automatic voter registration and national vote-by-mail systems.
• Election Day as a national holiday to ensure everyone can participate.

8. End Political Polarization with Civic Renewal

• Invest in civic education to fight disinformation and empower critical thinking.
• Create a national public service program for youth to serve and learn together across political lines.

9. Tackle Economic Inequality

• Raise the minimum wage and protect labor unions.
• Tax wealth fairly by closing loopholes and implementing a billionaire tax.

10. Rebuild Global Credibility Through Values

• Rejoin international agreements like the Paris Climate Accord.
• Lead with diplomacy and democracy, not brute force or autocratic alliances.

Conclusion: The Time for Boldness is Now

This isn't about politics anymore—it's about democracy itself. If America wants to survive and thrive, it must overhaul the systems that led it to the brink. The Trump era wasn’t a fluke—it was a symptom. But symptoms can be treated, systems can be reformed, and a better future can still be written.

Let’s not waste the warning.

Published on Allan’s Canadian Perspective. For more essays on politics, democracy, and reform, subscribe to the blog or follow Allan on social media.

Why is there no big outcry from Americans?

Answered by David Shapton:

Why is there no big outcry from Americans for what Trump is doing to Canada's economy? 

Do the majority of Americans not care about their northern neighbour?

This is one American’s take on this debacle.

By Robert Meadows (Circuit Court Judge, Florida).

"Have you ever stopped to consider how lucky we Americans are to have the neighbours we have? 

Look around the globe at who some folks have been stuck sharing a border with over the past half century:

North Korea / South Korea

Greece / Turkey

Iran / Iraq

Israel / Palestine

India / Pakistan

China / Russia

"We’ve got Canada! 

Canada. About as inoffensive a neighbour as you could ever hope for. 

In spite of all our boasts of “American exceptionalism” and chants of “America first,” they just smile, do their thing and go about their business. 

They are, on average, more educated, have a higher standard of living, free health care, and almost no gun problems. 

They treat immigrants respectfully and have already taken in over 35,000 Syrians in the last two years.

"They’re with us in NATO, they fought alongside us in World War I, World War II, Korea, the Gulf War, the Bosnian War, Afghanistan, the Kosovo War and came to our defense after 9/11. There was that one time when Canada took a pass on one of our wars: Vietnam. Turned out to be a good call.

"They’ve been steady consumers of American imports, reliable exporters of metals and petroleum products (they are the biggest importer of U.S. products from 37 states), and partnered with NASA in our space missions.

"During 9/11 many aircraft were diverted to Newfoundland, an island province off Canada's east coast where Americans were housed in people's homes for two weeks and treated like royalty. In return for their hospitality, this administration slapped a 20% tariff on the products of Newfoundland's only paper mill, thereby threatening it's survival.

"And what do Canadians expect of us in return? To be respected for who and what they are: Canadians. That’s what I call a good neighbor.

"But the King of Chaos couldn’t leave well enough alone. Based on his delusions of perpetual victimhood, out of the clear blue, he’s declared economic war on Canada. On CANADA! And he did it based on Canada being a national security risk to the US! For no good reason, other than the voices in his head that told him it was a war he could win. So why not do it, then?

"Again, we’re talking about Canada. 

Our closest ally, friend and neighbour!

O H... C A N A D A !

Saturday Morning Confusion: G7 meeting in Canada!

 Trump... when he tries to come to the G7 meeting in Canada!

OH... BY THE WAY!

Here's a smuggled photo of a rehearsal for Drumpf's military parade on his birthday!

C A N A D A !

 

Only in Canada!

U.S. States That Almost Became Part of Canada!

 The map of North America could have looked very different today. 

Many U.S. states nearly flew the Canadian flag instead of the stars and stripes due to border fights, land deals, and political battles that happened long ago.

The shared border between the United States and Canada wasn’t always clear, and both countries fought over land for years. 

These States were caught in the middle of these fights and almost ended up on the Canadian side of history, changing what both countries would look like forever.

Maine:

Big toss-up on whether Maine should go with the "Americans" or the British... decision still up in the air!

Vermont:

Vermont existed as an independent republic from 1777 to 1791 and considered joining British North America. Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain Boys held discussions with British representatives about Vermont potentially becoming a Canadian province. Vermont officials negotiated with both nations to determine the most beneficial arrangement. The territory ultimately became the 14th U.S. state in 1791, though historical records indicate this decision was not unanimous.

Minnesota:

The northern Minnesota territory was disputed, with Britain seeking the mineral-rich Mesabi Range for Canada. Initial boundary proposals placed the northern shore of Lake Superior under British control. This resource-rich area became an important consideration during negotiations following the War of 1812. The boundary established by the 1842 treaty placed Minnesota’s northern border at the 49th parallel, securing these natural resources for the United States.

Montana:

Northern Montana was claimed by Britain during multiple border disagreements throughout the 19th century. The Hudson’s Bay Company established trading posts and developed relationships with Native American tribes across the region. British diplomats attempted to secure territories south of the 49th parallel, particularly focusing on areas with strategic water routes. The Oregon Treaty of 1846 established Montana’s northern boundary at the 49th parallel, though the physical border survey wasn’t completed until the 1870s.

Michigan's Upper Peninsula:

British forces occupied Mackinac Island and influenced the Upper Peninsula region following the War of 1812. Military authorities requested that the entire Upper Peninsula remain under British control as part of Canada. Their territorial claim was based on military presence and established commercial networks throughout the region. The Treaty of Ghent in 1814 returned the peninsula to American control, though the final Great Lakes boundary wasn’t fully determined until the Webster-Ashburton Treaty of 1842.

North Dakota:

The border placement along the 49th parallel created territorial uncertainty in North Dakota for several decades. Hudson’s Bay Company established trading operations while Métis communities developed settlements near the unmarked boundary. Survey errors regarding Fort Pembina’s location contributed to geographical misunderstandings about the exact border. The boundary was officially designated in 1818 but remained unmarked until surveys were conducted in the 1870s, creating an area of jurisdictional uncertainty.

Alaska:

Russia approached both Britain and the United States when seeking to sell its Alaskan territory. Canadian representatives showed interest in acquiring the territory to extend their western territories to the Pacific Ocean. Secretary of State William Seward completed the purchase for the United States in 1867 for $7.2 million. This acquisition prevented Alaska’s substantial natural resources from becoming Canadian assets.

Wisconsin:

The fur trade made northern Wisconsin strategically important during early boundary negotiations between the United States and British North America. The Great Lakes watershed boundary was contested, with Britain claiming areas farther south than the current border. British commercial enterprises had established trading networks that they sought to maintain through territorial control. The Treaty of Paris in 1783 created a preliminary boundary, though disputes continued until the Webster-Ashburton Treaty established the final border in 1842.

New York:

Northern New York remained under British military presence for years following the American Revolution. The regions surrounding the St. Lawrence River and Lake Champlain were considered strategically significant by both nations. British military forces maintained control of forts despite treaty obligations to withdraw from American territory. The Jay Treaty of 1794 finally secured British military withdrawal, though border questions continued into the early 19th century.