Time For A Nuclear Canada?

[Moonbox]

I do try to take the time to make my posts as succinct as possible and to not "imply" anything.

Canada is already in an agreement where we could be the battleground in a nuclear war without the capability of being a participant. Therefore, we would suffer all the consequences of being an active participant without the capability of being one.

Why do you feel that anybody would desire other nations missiles flying in its airspace?

Please explain.

It doesn't need an explanation. Your lack of reasoning in even asking the question is worrying. First, if the USA is launching missile interceptors in our airspace, it's because someone across the pond fired a strategic missile into our airspace. Regardless of whether the US fires interceptors, we still have foreign strategic missiles flying over us, which is never a good thing.

Second, you clearly don't have a strong understanding of how close the Canada-US relationship is. Regardless of whether or not missiles are targeting Toronto or New York, Canada can't afford to let them hit. A nuclear attack on New York City would be heavy blow to Canada, just like a nuclear attack on Toronto would be a heavy blow to the USA. Neither countries can afford either to happen, and thus mutual defense agreements are no-brainers.

Edited June 23, 2014 by Moonbox

[Signals.Cpl]

I do try to take the time to make my posts as succinct as possible and to not "imply" anything.

Canada is already in an agreement where we could be the battleground in a nuclear war without the capability of being a participant. Therefore, we would suffer all the consequences of being an active participant without the capability of being one.

Why do you feel that anybody would desire other nations missiles flying in its airspace?

Please explain.

And what do we gain if we become a participant? Ultimately we lose the conventional capabilities in favour of gaining a nuclear capability that gives us no added strengths but multiplies our weaknesses. Us getting nukes does nothing to the balance of power, if nukes are needed as a threat the US has more than enough and us getting ten twenty or even 100 more would do nothing to change the balance of power either direction whereas right now our conventional forces are capable at a higher level than their numbers might suggest.

Soldiers, sailors and airmen serve a purpose to protect Canada from a multitude of threats whereas nukes do not protect us but the drain on our resources weakens us from being able to respond to any and all other threats without giving us any new capabilities.

[Wilber]

Daft idea.