Canadian Parliament Votes Against Support for Bush' Missile Defense Program
 

I just watched our Prime Minister on TV saying that our parliament has just Voted against support of the American Missile Defense program, (No news in Print yet though).

Was this a good decision?

PM Paul Martin said that Canada's sovereignty must be protected and therefore our airspace is OURS to protect. It defensive action is to be taken "over" Canada we must be the ones to initiate it.

If you find this in print please give us a link or correct me as I have only seen this once early this morning.

at the CBC site:

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/natio...ada050224.html

It may not be an easy decision, but then, when you have to contend with the American gov't, no decisions are easy.. they are they elephant to our mice...

!~~~~~~~~~

OTTAWA - Canada has said no to the U.S. missile defence program, Prime Minister Paul Martin announced Thursday.


INDEPTH: Ballistic missile defence


Foreign Affairs Minister Pierre Pettigrew in the Commons, Thursday.
The prime minister said the decision was made following extensive discussions with Foreign Affairs and National Defence.

"Let me be clear: we respect the right of the United States to defend itself and its people," said Martin.

"Indeed, we will continue to work in partnership with our southern neighbours on the common defence of North America and on continental security."

Earlier, Foreign Affairs Minister Pierre Pettigrew told the House of Commons about the prime minister's decision, which Pettigrew said was based on policy, and not emotion.

Pettigrew said he informed U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice of Canada's decision on Tuesday during NATO meetings in Brussels.

"Of course, the U.S. is disappointed. They recognize and respect our decision," said Pettigrew.

NDP member of Parliament Alexa McDonough praised the decision.

Canada's new ambassador to Washington, Frank McKenna, said earlier this week that Canada is already taking part in the program through Norad.

And the outgoing U.S. ambassador to Canada, Paul Cellucci, said Americans don't understand why Canada doesn't want to be responsible for its own sovereignty on the issue.

In the months leading up to the decision, Martin had repeatedly said he believed Canada should be at the table when it comes to any discussion of the defence of North America.

I think if Canada waits to take defensive action against missiles then so be it, but if it waits until the missiles are coming, it might be too late.
kevin

Well done Canada, but what does it matter? It's like North Korea voting about American Missile defense...:?

They tried this years back as well just after the cold war. The US was still paranoid about Russia launching missles from the arctic, or traveling over the arctic to get to the US since the boarder would be the least patrolled area. Well the US's plan was to shoot the missles/planes down. That's fine, but the debris would have fallen on the busiest parts of Canada.

I completely support my government in this decision.

Because, imo, the more missles the US has at to use at their disposal, the more power they can push on others.

They are powerful enough. The US government doesn't need our government's help with anything.

Well if anything, The United States needs to have a defensive procedure in place. Not so much for the USSR, but because of China and N. Korea.

But, if they don't want the defense in Canada, then the U.S should put it in its own territory. As far as it goes living in the United States, I want a missle defense program. I want my safty insured, or at least it I would be a lot safer than if there was nothing in place. WIth N. Korea and China building up arms, there is already and arms race going on. Let's not slack off now and allow a hostile country to try and disrupt the world now.

ID have to say, that as it stands the missile deffence system is not ready. all tests in which the enemy missiles trajectory was not well known has misserably failed. now i dont think in a real situation anyone will know the missile trajectory.

But as you said, something is better than nothing, if only a token gesture

Let me understand what you're saying: That you'd rather have a plane successfully drop whatever type of bomb (from convential to nuclear) for sure into whatever city or target in the US, then have the debris from that wreckage fall into Canada? Be aware that a nuclear warhead wouldn't even detonate if it just fell; granted, it would give off radiation, but that's a lot less damage then a detonation.

It's a sketchy issue, I'll agree, and if Canada doesn't want the US screwing with their airspace, I think we should respect that, at least during testing. However, if it comes time for the missiles to start flying (and I hope that that time never, ever comes), I hope that Canada might let us defend over thier airspace.

Personally, though, I'm against the whole thing, unless we can, for sure, prevent every missile from coming through. And I realize that's the goal, but progress really isn't being made in that direction. So I guess it's more like "I'm not sure where I stand".

OK, please, don't take my opinion as gospel, because I'm Canadian and not fully up to speed on the issue, BUT....

The issue isn't one of defence in our borders, as I see it. If push came to shove we would be right next to the Americans, you're our closest neighbors and allies. The issue is more one of dropping a ton of money into a system that barely works on a good day, with a booster start and a tail wind.

Other Canadians may disagree with me. But in my personal opinion, if the Americans came to us with a system that worked MOST of the time (hell, perfection not an issue, I'll take most of the time), I would vote to support it.

What a concidence, I was just talking to my MP at lunch about this, that and the missle defense program. It really makes no difference as we are in it already. Regardless of wether we commit further, the 'mercans will not wait until missiles are over thier soil before attempting to shoot them down, they are going to take pot shots at them as they pass over Canada.

I've wrote a response to this thread about 4 times now, each time deleting it because it was it would probably taken as bashing. so i'll add that the plan would probably never work anyway, and that lets hope a missile never gets launched. bravo martin. odd that he got some balls.

I'll bet Chretien is pissed now that Martin hasn't failed miserably. Up until last summer, I couldn't stand Martin or the thieving Liberals. But something is happening. I'm starting to think Martin might actually be the real deal and give a shit more about his country than his ego. Certainly more than that asshole Chretien. But I'm not holding my breath. His turn to bury Chretien not with politics like Chretien but with a legacy, that seemingly has forgone Chretien, at least in a positive light, as a man of vision and direction for a liar and thief.

Let's see. Martin stands up to the U.S missile program and is cheered. Sides with gay marriage and equality. Impressive. Seriously looking at decriminalizing pot outright. Bonus. And I think is trying to be a leader rather than a follower, or at least a wagging dog on a tail.

Stephen Harper. Has the bible in his back pocket, speaks of change for the equality and betterrment of all while, discriminates against gays and gay marriage. Saw great things for him as a player but now he just looks like an under experienced micro manager.

Lord help me, I'm turning into a liberal.

Just keep in mind that martin is doing alot of this to please the other parties so he can stay in power. Though i must say i enjoying this minority government thing.

I would have no problem with this statement if developing the missel defense program which has so far been a miserable failure was free, but it's costing billions of dollars and the majority of scientests and engineers whose opinions i've read seem to think that the program is unlikly to be successful anytime soon. I'm not comfortable with so much money being invested in a program with such a poor record or chance of success.

Additionally I would be more comfortable with this program if the USA were also doing more to stop the threat of nuclear missels by working with the global community to reduce the number of missels that all countries (including the USA) have.

I know the feeling, I'm still not the biggest fan of Mr. Martin, hell I didn't vote for him last election, but he is changing my opinion of him slowly. I'm impressed he's actually showing some stones and not just following the US and Bushy.

I understand the minority government is playing a big factor in his decisions, but hell at least he's putting his country first, even if he does have to watch himself with the opposition waiting in the wings to bring down the Liberals.

But the thing is, if China or N. Korea would (let's forgett the why here) like to nuke the USA and if they succeeded to launch a missile and get it to hit the USA, the retaliation from US would be massiv; complete destruction of N. Korea. If they would use their nukes on anybody they would be stuffed with plutonium. Not even wacko Kim-Il-Sun would want that. So they can really use their nukes without committing suicide. Now, I think the real nuclear threat to the US are smuggled-in bombs by terrorists/rouge nations.


It might just happen that the US may trigger the arm race with its missile defense. It would be better to work for a nuclear-free planet that building new min-nukes and missile defenses instead.

I agree, but I also think that the Military needs to be ready for both types of bombs. Our issue now is that we are all set up to fight another World War and not gurilles ( i know i spelt that one worng). We should be able to do both. That way we are safer than we are now. Adressing one type and forgeting about the other does no good in the long run. Too bad our military leaders tend to wear blinders.



I whole-heartly agree. But, I think like Reagan did. So, you can have an Idea on where I was coming from.

The US HAS assumed absolute control over Canadian Airspace, when we deem it necessary.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...BNStory/Front/

In other words, "F you Canada, and F what you think. We'll do what we want."

Bingo. need anybody say more???

They've assumed absolute control, when they deem necessary, and just how do they assume control over a countries airspace? Seems like it's a big problem to the US for any other country in the world to have a mind of their own, they just want a bunch of puppets running around or something. At least that's the way it appears to me.

USA did something like that before, they don't care for other nations airspaces and sovereignty.

That makes my blood boil for 1 reason..what silentjay said...

I have no problem with the US using Canadian airspace to intercept an enemy missile..But what i do have a problem with is, The US being told that Canada is to be in on the decision of anything happening in canadian airspace..and this is the reply we get (Taken from the news article posted above)

WTF

I don't have any problems with the american people..But the leaders of america thinking that they can do whatever they want wherever they want..That's what i have a problem with.

The American government wants Canada onboard so they can say to other countries "Hey it's not just us wanting a missile defense system; even reasonable, moderate Canada is onboard!"

Whatever, at least they're not starting another war...again.

Wait for it, I'm sure they will again before Bushy's second term ends.

heheh, I'm not sure anymore. Bush has just been in europe on a "let's be friends again"-tour and he seems to revaluate his own previous agressive war style. They actually talking about diplomaty when it comes to Iran. :hmm:

But you never know, mayby he's just covering up an attack on Yurop!!! :D