Paul Martins actually being doing some good lately.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/02/25/martin-missile.html

OTTAWA - Prime Minister Paul Martin said Canada must be consulted before the U.S. decides to fire on missiles that enter Canadian airspace, despite Ottawa's refusal to participate in America's missile defence program.

"I don't think that anyone expected that there would be any other finger on a button than the Americans," Martin said Friday, a day after his decision not to join the program.

"But in terms of Canadian airspace, yes we would expect to be consulted. This is our airspace. We're a sovereign nation. And you don't intrude on a sovereign nation's airspace without seeking permission," Martin said.

Martin also rejected claims by U.S. ambassador to Canada Paul Cellucci that Canada has given up its sovereignty by saying no to the missile plan.

Cellucci had said the U.S. was surprised by Martin's decision, saying "we simply cannot understand why Canada would, in effect, give up its sovereignty, its seat at the table, to decide what to do about missiles that might be headed towards Canada."

"We did not give up sovereignty," Martin responded. "We affirmed sovereignty."

Martin repeated that the nearly $13 billion allocated for the military in Wednesday's budget proves Canada is committed to taking its share of responsibility for national and international security.

"I think the other important thing is the other affirmation of sovereignty is the very large defence budget, which is designed to protect our coast, borders and Arctic sovereignty and also make sure we can play a role in the world. That is also an affirmation of our sovereignty," he said.

When he first took office, Martin suggested he supported joining the plan, saying he believed Canada should be at the table when it comes to any discussion of the defence of North America.

"I think our sovereignty depends on us being at the table when discussions are taking place about the defence of North America," Martin said in 2003, before becoming the Liberal leader.

Not that you really need to worry about this, but if there were an ICBM approaching the US over Canadian airspace, we aren't going to waste time getting your permission to shoot it down regardless of what your government says. You can sue us for trespass later, m'kay?

--PunkDavid

I wouldn't support it either. Hell if someone tries to bomb Canada, they're still our ally. We'll shoot down the missle even if they didn't pay into the system. So they get all the benefits of missile defense with none of the negative politics of supporting it.

So essentially, you are actually proud of the open defiance advocated by Martin even though it accomplishes little beyond undermining the security of your fellow citizens? This is not the U.S. being imperialistic, our military is simply offering to assist in the defense of your nation from ballistic missile attack. Yet you are telling them to get fucked? I'm confused, how is this the proper course of action for any party involved. It is a chickenshit move that benefits absolutely no one, it is merely limiting cooperation and strengthening animosity between these Governments and their inhabitants.

Agreed, and thats why its chickenshit. Unnecessarily complicating the political discourse between our countries over something that is trivial at best and completely benign.....

..and suck it.

Nice!

I kinda wonder though who would want to even launch missles at Canada. They don't even do anything up there, do they?

It's not about someone shooting a missle AT Canada. Practically any missle shot from the Eastern hemisphere at the US would come from the north over Canada on it's way here. The Candians don't want us violating their airspace to shoot down those missles.

I wonder how they might feel about the missle itself violating their airspace.

--PunkDavid

I see.

I'm glad Canada didn't buy into this US terrorism shit Bush was selling.

EXACTLY.

What? I need evidence of this. I am busy so please show me where he said that Al Queda was going to launch missiles at the U.S. through Canada.

I need evidence that ANYONE will launch missles at the U.S. Who IS Bush defending us against? This is such a fucking huge waste of taxpayer money.

Bush is such a Don't-Tax-But-Spend Conservative!

Evidence of the existance of ICBMs in hostile or possibly hostile hands? Yes. (China, Russia, North Korea, and in the future Iran).

Evidence of intention to use them if the shit hits the fan? Yes.

Likely? No.

I'll add,

I'm not opposed to the idea of missle defense, provided there is a viable and feasible option (which at the present time, there is not). I would be less interested if said funds were going for more nuclear warheads.

I think it would be easier some f-22s at 1.6 mach launch some aim-120s at 4.0mach intercept the missile. but i really dont know about missile interceptation

Nyet.

Nyot posseeble.

I think we should just get Superman to chase down the missle and push it off into space.



--PunkDavid

Won't work.

China employs kryponite warheads.

Precisely.

How many millions should we spend? Isn't the fact that we could erase every country on Earth 8 times over enough to defend us against this imaginary scenario?

I also find Punk David's plan acceptable, as Kalel landing on Earth is about as likely as Russia launching their weapons at us.

I don't think the "no" is so much against an offer of help from the US as it is a "no" against the idea of being complicit in the weaponization of space.

Mel Hurtig has written an interesting book on the subject -- the title of which I'll find later.

Welcome to a new arms race...