If France, Israël, Pakistan and India got it then why not Canada? You may say why? For the same reason as other countries to protect us from invasion.
2007-08-28 12:41:08 · 12 answers · asked by Joseph Binette 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
The US and Canada have a defense agreement. If one gets attacked the other aids. That is why the Canadians are in Afghanistan. That's why both countries man NORAD.
2007-08-28 12:49:33 · answer #1 · answered by Coach 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I submit that every state should have access to nuclear weapons. After a few small nuclear weapons are used on some cities over some BS concern the devastation these weapons can cause by even limited use would become much clearer to our generation.
It puts a whole new perspective on mutually assured destruction , since there would be multiple mutually assuredly destroyed parties and their aftermath in short order.
Recently I think everyone in the middle tier of nations outside of China/India/US/UK has got it in their head that nuclear weapons are new national version of the I-Phone, the new summer accessory everyone's got to have.
Perhaps Mr. Jobs at Apple should produce the I-Nuke, your own personal nuclear weapon, starting at 200,000,000 dollars, Donald Trump can really mean it next time he tells someone "Their Fired".
People suggest they are there to prevent invasion, I submit that unless you live in Africa , some Middle-Asian mini-state or some smaller country in South America, you are pretty much safe from full on invasion. By that metric, The US have just enough weapons to secure Manhattan, Hawaii and Alaska but Panama, Guatemala, Sierra Leone, Liberia and Lebanon & Israel should get the rest.
2007-08-28 19:58:14 · answer #2 · answered by Mark T 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Sure why not? Sooner or later the Americans are going to muscle Canada for the resources that they don't already own. Knowing that an H-bomb might land on Washington would make them cool their jets a little.
2007-08-28 19:48:49 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sure, why not. Nobody wants to invade Canada though. Brrrrr. Way too cold you know. Remember Hitler in Russia.
2007-08-28 19:45:19 · answer #4 · answered by LG 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think they should, theres some prettly large moose up there. May be the only thing that takes them down.. and what about Big Foot?
2007-08-28 19:44:21 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
How would they deliver it? They would need some Naval or Air assets and they are basically shutting those down, they don't have much power projecting ability as it is.
2007-08-28 19:47:03 · answer #6 · answered by Yo it's Me 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah sure,
I will drop a few off next time I fly over. Anywhere inparticular?
How about the French sector?
2007-08-28 19:45:14 · answer #7 · answered by goatslunch 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If you can afford one, and can do it consistent with existing treaties, go ahead.
It might take some of the pressure off of the US for your defense obligations.
2007-08-28 19:52:28 · answer #8 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nuclear weapons are not defensive weapons.
2007-08-28 20:08:03 · answer #9 · answered by St. Bastard 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
not really because the radiation could affect us since it is quite close
2007-08-28 23:06:45 · answer #10 · answered by marine corp forever!!!! 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋