comment: >
  
  Sorry, we didn’t realise you also had some terrible polling numbers to overcome. Of course you’re welcome to join, we’ll call it caukus.
context: Canada was the meat in the old Cold War sandwich, Australia gets that lucky designation in the new one. >
  
  Yeah, well focus on not being compromised by China and then maybe you get to go to the party. >
  
  It's not even that. It's that Canada criminally underfunds military R&D. If Canada was a member of AUKUS, they'd effectively offer nothing to the group. Canadian and Australian militaries are roughly the same size; 68K vs 60K. Yet, Australia's military budget is almost 50% greater, with much of that going into R&D.
  
  Australia is a world leader in loyal wingman UAVs. MQ-28 is probably the single most advanced loyal wingman UAV in the world that we know of, and it's entirely Australian.
  Australia is pumping billions into hypersonic weapons research, and is combining efforts with the US' programs. 
  
  Canada brings nothing to that hyper advanced R&D table, and doesn't even have money to simply sit on the sidelines and fund projects. Inviting them does nothing to really assist in any of the projects that fall under it unfortunately, which is why no one talks about inviting Canada, but Australia and the US have both discussed inviting Japan to join. That's because Japan will fund projects, and Japan will bring engineers. 
  That, and Canada's refusal to accept the rest of the world's consensus that the NW Passage is in fact, an international strait (still Canadian territorial waters where all resources within it are the rights of Canada, but it means it's a body of water that links to bodies of international water together, and that would allow ships of any nation to be able to sail through it under the right of transit passage). It's akin to if Turkey tried to say "well the Bosphorous Strait is within our territorial bounds, so no one can traverse it at all", which is very much illegal per Article 37 of UNCLOS. That's why the US vetoed the plan for the UK to build Canada nuclear attack submarines in the 1980s. That refusal to accept the NW Passage for what it is, and subsequently fucking the US east coast and Europe with tanker and cargo ship sailing times (going through the Panama Canal vs the NW Passage triples the trip duration), is another huge reason Canada got left out. >
  
  It’s true. We don’t fund our military. We just don’t take it seriously. >
  
  CANUKUS just doesn't have the same ring to it. >
  
  If NZ as part of the 5 eyes joins in would it be CANNZUKUS >
  
  WHAT they don't want our 4 submarines that can't go under the water! WTF!/s >
  
  Their loss. >
  
  This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 80%. (I'm a bot)
  
  
  The trilateral treaty, nicknamed "AUKUS" after the three countries involved, was announced in September 2021 in what many have seen as a bid to counter China's growing military presence in the Indo-Pacific region, where Canada has growing economic and security interests.
  Anand's spokesperson Daniel Minden instead referred to Canada's participation in the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing alliance, which includes Australia, Britain, the U.S. and New Zealand, as well as the North American Aerospace Defence Command and the NATO military alliance.
  American officials warned for years that they may withhold sensitive intelligence if Canada did not take a stronger position on China, particularly during the Trump administration and as the Liberal government repeatedly put off a decision on Huawei and 5G. "I work with my Five Eyes partners throughout the globe, and I haven't seen a change in terms of the information-sharing piece," Auchterlonie said.
  
  
  Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Canada^#1 military^#2 technology^#3 China^#4 concern^#5 >
  
  So what would Canada bring to this alliance? Moral support is all I can think of at this point . >
  
  He does have a valid point. Canada has guarded the top of the world when the Cold War started. As far as defense spending, Canada paid their share for NORAD projects. 
  Australia on the other hand has no big brother sitting right next to them waiting for a fight to start. Since before WW2 Australia has heard from the US and England is “we’ll get to you” 
  So Yes Canada should be included, as long as they pay their way. >
  
  Canada was the meat in the old Cold War sandwich, Australia gets that lucky designation in the new one. >
  
  WHAT they don't want our 4 submarines that can't go under the water! WTF!/s >
  
  Their loss. >
  
  Yeah, well focus on not being compromised by China and then maybe you get to go to the party. >
  
  It's not even that. It's that Canada criminally underfunds military R&D. If Canada was a member of AUKUS, they'd effectively offer nothing to the group. Canadian and Australian militaries are roughly the same size; 68K vs 60K. Yet, Australia's military budget is almost 50% greater, with much of that going into R&D.
  
  Australia is a world leader in loyal wingman UAVs. MQ-28 is probably the single most advanced loyal wingman UAV in the world that we know of, and it's entirely Australian.
  Australia is pumping billions into hypersonic weapons research, and is combining efforts with the US' programs. 
  
  Canada brings nothing to that hyper advanced R&D table, and doesn't even have money to simply sit on the sidelines and fund projects. Inviting them does nothing to really assist in any of the projects that fall under it unfortunately, which is why no one talks about inviting Canada, but Australia and the US have both discussed inviting Japan to join. That's because Japan will fund projects, and Japan will bring engineers. 
  That, and Canada's refusal to accept the rest of the world's consensus that the NW Passage is in fact, an international strait (still Canadian territorial waters where all resources within it are the rights of Canada, but it means it's a body of water that links to bodies of international water together, and that would allow ships of any nation to be able to sail through it under the right of transit passage). It's akin to if Turkey tried to say "well the Bosphorous Strait is within our territorial bounds, so no one can traverse it at all", which is very much illegal per Article 37 of UNCLOS. That's why the US vetoed the plan for the UK to build Canada nuclear attack submarines in the 1980s. That refusal to accept the NW Passage for what it is, and subsequently fucking the US east coast and Europe with tanker and cargo ship sailing times (going through the Panama Canal vs the NW Passage triples the trip duration), is another huge reason Canada got left out. >
  
  Canada brings an unlimited amount of cantankerous geese and I suggest you let that one marinate >
  
  marinating those geese does not improve their disposition. >
  
  Exactly. When they hit peak marination is when they drop them on the enemy. >
  
  dastardly.  let's get South Korea to contribute a million metric tons of kimchi.  they'll all be too busy farting to fight. >
  
  CANUKUS just doesn't have the same ring to it. >
  
  Not my CANUKUS not my monkeys >
  
  
  Canada could miss out on important technology
  
  Which we wouldn't use because Canada has collectively decided that, like, war is totally hecking lame, so we don't need a Military.
  We can't have this both ways. We can't criminally underfund our military to the point where we are on track to just drop the illusion and not even bother having one, then get upset that we aren't being included in military pacts.
  It's not that Australia/US/UK have some problem with us. We still have lots of cultural and economic ties with them.
  There's just no point to include Canada in a military alliance at this point. What exactly are we going to do there? Provide moral support?
  If we're so upset about that the gang isn't including us in their projects we should start taking our military more seriously. >
  
  I'm UK - General opinion of Canada is always positive. I don't think Canada has anything to worry about reputation wise by not being apart of it, and being part of North America + The Commonwealth means both the US and UK will jump to their defense - The boost in opinion their ruling government would get from defending a popular country like Canada pretty much guarantees this IMO. >
  
  I mean…it’d be pretty cool if they didn’t just mooch off of the defense capabilities of the US and UK >
  
  We absolutely do and should be called out for it more. 
  We can’t keep getting away with it. >
  
  As far as the US is concerned, Canada may as well be Minnesota or Alaska. If shit hits the fan, Canada is going to be defended as if it was domestic territory. >
  
  That’s laughable.  It’ll be defended of course, but no one is going to treat it like an invasion of the homeland. >
  
  It would be a cold day in hell before the US allows Russia or China a foothold on the North American continent.
  Edit: we would invade both Canada and Mexico before we allowed that. >
  
  I never said they would allow it, but no one is going to treat it like an invasion of South Carolina. >
  
  Canada needs to spend more on their military, it’s absolutely embarrassing. Australia is consistently far closer to 2% of GDP >
  
  Yes, but when you’re next to the world’s largest superpower and are on friendly terms, it is tough to convince your citizens to do so.  
  Australia is the “western” country in that part of the world.  If things go south, it needs to hold out until support comes from rhe US >
  
  
  Australia is the “western” country in that part of the world. If things go south, it needs to hold out until support comes from rhe US
  
  This implies that Australia is ever at risk of being invaded. It is not. It is too big, too sparsely populated and too far away. China does not have a blue water fleet, I doubt it ever will for a loooong time, so being blockaded isn't a possibility and even if it was, no power can currently blockade all major ports with the exception of the US. Australia has train connections across cities to bypass a blockade. Lastly, Russia is a non threat.
  IMO, the only risk to Australia is Pine Gap, or any other US base in Australia, being nuked or struck with missiles. >
  
  In WWII, when the Japanese controlled much of Asia, Australia was definitely under threat of invasion.  Bombers hit Darwin and subs were in Sydney Harbour.
  Yes, that’s not recent history but Australia is def not too far away. >
  
  Their was a perceived threat of invasion from Japan, but it was never a possibility, nor planned by Japan. By the time you get to Australia from East Asia, supply lines are already stretched very thin before even stepping foot on land. >
  
  So what would Canada bring to this alliance? Moral support is all I can think of at this point . >
  
  Long delayed and disputed procurements that get rescinded and then back to the original start point when, lo, despite politics the original was as good as it got? >
  
  This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 80%. (I'm a bot)
  
  
  The trilateral treaty, nicknamed "AUKUS" after the three countries involved, was announced in September 2021 in what many have seen as a bid to counter China's growing military presence in the Indo-Pacific region, where Canada has growing economic and security interests.
  Anand's spokesperson Daniel Minden instead referred to Canada's participation in the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing alliance, which includes Australia, Britain, the U.S. and New Zealand, as well as the North American Aerospace Defence Command and the NATO military alliance.
  American officials warned for years that they may withhold sensitive intelligence if Canada did not take a stronger position on China, particularly during the Trump administration and as the Liberal government repeatedly put off a decision on Huawei and 5G. "I work with my Five Eyes partners throughout the globe, and I haven't seen a change in terms of the information-sharing piece," Auchterlonie said.
  
  
  Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Canada^#1 military^#2 technology^#3 China^#4 concern^#5 >
  
  The entire point of AUKUS is to boost Australia and for them to have next-gen submarines in Asia. Canada has no business in that domain, and our existing alliances are appropriate for our goals. >
  
  He does have a valid point. Canada has guarded the top of the world when the Cold War started. As far as defense spending, Canada paid their share for NORAD projects. 
  Australia on the other hand has no big brother sitting right next to them waiting for a fight to start. Since before WW2 Australia has heard from the US and England is “we’ll get to you” 
  So Yes Canada should be included, as long as they pay their way.