CANADA is toast if there is WAR!
 

That's what these guys think.

TORONTO (AP) - Prime Minister Paul Martin said Thursday that Canada would not join the contentious U.S. missile defense program, a decision that will further strain brittle relations between the neighbors but please Canadians who fear it could lead to an international arms race.

The Bush administration has tried to make a public show of understanding that Martin heads up a minority government that could fall over such a contentious debate. But after the announcement, U.S. Ambassador Paul Cellucci told reporters he was perplexed over Canada's decision, which he said effectively allows Washington to decide what to do if a missile was headed toward Canada.

"We simply cannot understand why Canada would in effect give up its sovereignty - its seat at the table - to decide what to do about a missile that might be coming towards Canada," said the outgoing ambassador, who had vigorously urged Canada to sign on the plan.

Smart move? Or dumbasses?

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050225/D88F6QO01.html

We are toast with or without the contentious U.S. missile defense program.
We cant get a fucking helicopter in the air more than 5 minutes.

Even a bunch of 50 hamsters can invade and control the canada in 1 hour.. lol

Yes i have to agree!

We will be just fine...we have no real enemies..The states wouldn't let it happen..

Sorry was Canada attacked on 9-11-2001 or 12-7-1945? No. Who fucking attacks Canada? No one. When was the last time a war was fought in Canada? 200 years ago? Canada is 100X safer the futher they distance themselves from George W.

Think on a larger scale there, Einstein. Radiation knows no boundaries :2 cents:

Poor country. :(

They have no fear because their Navy will take care of business... :1orglaugh

http://www.code7r.org/Bintoons/canadian_navy.jpg

That's the Coast Guard MFer. Check yourself!!! :mad:

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh OMG! :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

hahahaha

"give up its sovereignty" - It really isn't like Canada would have any control or say in the whole system.. it'd all be US governed.

Matt

You yanks really have to get out of your neighbourhood
http://www.renegadetgp.com/headupass.gif

oh sorry I had the branch.. :1orglaugh

http://www.4osx.com/gallery/data/513...adian_navy.jpg

So that would mean a nuke missle hit the US. So what fucking difference does having a shield make if it doesn't work?

Who cares. Missile defence sounds more like an attempt to get support for the weaponization of space than stopping missiles. The Russians already have one that will beat the system so it's already obsolete.

What missiles????

There's a much chance of missiles headed toward the American mainland flying over Canadian soil as there is of Paris Hilton NOT being embarassed on the Internet for the next 12 months.

Ain't gonna happen.

You're right. Since Canada doesn't try to police the world or start wars for bullshit reasons, we don't have any enemies. It's a good thing!

OMFG!! CLASSIC! now that made my night! :1orglaugh

If there is a fucking war, then entire Ameircan continent would be toast! Really remarkable how the same race of people from different countries can hate one another because of what our idiotic, egotistical politicians do "AFTER" they are elected. Kinda like the Sunni's and Shiet war lords, huh? :2 cents: :(

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :thumbsup

Why waste our money on a navy/army..We have the resources that the american people need to survive and America will protect it like it was their own..Like the Americans are going to invade Canada..never will happen in a million years :1orglaugh

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

sadly, that's a fairly accurate portrait of our navy - except that we don't have guns that big.

Good point ;)

he he he :)

North Korea has to fly their missles over Canada if they want to hit the USA. Nobody know how accurate these missles are or even if they can fly far enough to hit the USA.

If you live in western Canada you may be fucked !

I may be wrong, but if that's an Browning M-2 .50cal, then we have at least 2. I've seen em up close and personal. Coulda been loaners from the bits tho. :1orglaugh

As for this rediculous money sink about trying to shoot down, in essence, big bullets with other big bullets Canada is absolutely right in not signing on. The only reason the US comes to us for any of that tripe is because we lend an air of respectability to their plans. King George didn't get the rubber stamp or the ducats from us on this one, sucks to be him. If his plan is so shit hot, let him sell it to the french, germans, japanese and whoever else on its own merits, and good fucking luck.

What amuses me greatly is how all the nattering nabobs piss and moan and talk about 'loss of work for canadian contractors'. Bullshit. Any canadian contracting that would have been done would have a) likely been done by a canadian subsidary of kellogg, brown + root and b) would have been paid for by canadian taxpayer money. We have enough problems with our government pissing away hard earned cash without having them piss it away on an expensive PR stunt and give it to one of the multinationals that'll soon have ALL our asses in their slings. :2 cents:

The missle shield is a good idea with all these little countries building nuclear missles.

If you track the 'great circle' from north korea to north america, the closet point to hit is alaska... but the more valuable targets would be LA or Seattle/Tacoma, and those ones would be pretty much the same distance regardless if the shot went polar or transpacific. Considering the thing would have to go over china and russia before it went to north america, I suspect NK would just as soon aim due east.

Of course, that presumes that they wouldn't rather do short-shots across the border and level that entire area, and then vaporize a big chunk of japan whom they've been a bit upset with since, oh, FOREVER... long before the US even existed. If you buy into that whole 'axis of evil' bullshit, then israel is a viable target and closer than crossing the pacific. :2 cents:

"Canada is absolutely right in not signing on. The only reason the US comes to us for any of that tripe is because we lend an air of respectability to their plans. King George didn't get the rubber stamp or the ducats from us on this one, sucks to be him."

Wrong, the US needs Canada because Canada is 50% of NORAD. The commander of NORAD right now is a Canadian. NORAD is the eyes for any missle defense system. You'll have to choose between a missle defense system or NORAD can't have any Canadian responsibilities any more?

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

What little countries, exactly?

In regards to the countries that have or are building nukes, do you honestly believe ANYONE is so completely deranged as to start a missile attack against the US? There is nothing to be gained by it except the total destruction of whomever is behind the attack. (Unless you a nice cave set up in the Pakistan mountains, apparently)

Don't believe your war-mongering administration: There are a lot of people that hate the US, true, but they aren't suicidal - which is exactly what a full-frontal attack on American soil would be.

And 9/11, sadly, has shown the world that the only feasible way to kill Americans on their soil is from the inside - and even that, as we saw, is suicide ... not a great long-term war strategy.

Brutal man.

The reason the US needed Canada for NORAD was to get authorization to dot the countryside with backscatter radar stations and, perhaps, SAM sites to take out incoming bombers (this being before the day of widespread ICBM use, for which it could do nothing but let people know maybe a half-hour before impact). NORAD and missile defense are two entirely distinct, though related, operations... I doubt that Canada will remove itself from NORAD any time soon because NORAD, unlike this opiate-induced cash-soaked delusion of projectile-vs-projectile antimissile defense, actually serves a purpose that benefits Canada.

Missile defense needs NORAD. NORAD doesn't need missile defense, except in the eyes of the greedy fucks who'd cash in on it. :2 cents:

There is no way of stopping these countries from building nuclear weapons in enough time every country with a flag with have access to them.

Many with less then adequate security to maintain such weapons. You never know which little country could have a weapon stolen or a base hijacked, corrupt governemt officals selling them to the black market, etc.

There can be a 1000 things that can go wrong, it takes just 1 to cripple the United States for decades.

If they have the ability to shoot missles out of the sky then they should implement this technology.

Right now we have zero defense against missle attacks.

We have MAD as the only deterrent

what an epic statement! :pimp

you really believe Martin didnt sign with the USA on this? of course he did, its just for press pruposes so people in Canada think "yay we are our own country".

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

hey tard, what you been smokin'? go fetch us some water,,,

Perhaps I'm not cynical enough, but when the leader of our country goes live on national news to say "No, we do not support this", I believe him.

But then, I don't get my information from the Sun, nor any of the bile-soaked Conrad Black shitrags that pass for newspapers in some of the less fortunate corners of this fine land.

In the unlikely event that a missle is fired at Canada the US will still shoot it down if possible

regardless

im pretty sure, but the Canadian's wouldn't be thankful for it even if we did,,,

if a country has the nukes and is set on using them on you, i dont think the missile defense system is whats gonna save your ass. What if it was strapped on a plane and crashed into a city?

Actually, the plane is a much easier kill. Standard SAM can take down any subsonic aircraft, and some can take down supersonic... but when you're talking a warhead that's essentially making a re-entry approach from the outer atmosphere, no missile can move fast enough to catch it. Best you can do is try to intercept it at its slowest points: either at launch while it's still accelerating, or at the peak of its arc (preferably before it separates into its multiple warheads in the case of MIRVs). At least in the case of projectiles vs. projectiles.

If you use something that goes much faster (lasers, say) then it just becomes a matter of tracking. Thing is, in order to track and kill an intercontinental inbound, you have to be above the continent to really do anything worthwhile; Lasers don't just *poof* things, you have to focus and apply energy for a period of time long enough to dust it, and atmosphere attenuates the beam... so in order to have an effective defense, you basically end up with orbital weapons platforms that can easily be turned offensive.

Which is exactly why many countries are against it. They fear it could trigger a new arms race.

satellites designed to kill other satellites, etc.

Bingo. :thumbsup

Although I don't know if I agree with the concept of nation-states getting involved in a new arms race. Personally, I think nations are losing more and more importance to corporations, and it'll be the corporations in the race with each other... corporations unbeholden to any particular legal system or people, and who are developing armies of their own (vis. Mercenaries).

Yep, it's a brave new world.

It's just another way for Bush to make more money for his friends. This missile-vs-missile thing is the dumbest and most easily avoided protection system.

How much $ have you idiots wasted on the project now? $100 million and it fails 2 out of 3 times? :1orglaugh

Not many have the power to launch ICBMs, either way it's much easier to smuggle the device on american soil and detonate it.

You'd be better off spending the money securing your ports

WASHINGTON, Feb. 24 (Xinhuanet) -- The US military conducted a missile defense flight on Thursday, with an interceptor missile successfully intercepting and destroying a short-range target missile, the Pentagon announced.

The target missile was launched from US Navy's Pacific Missile Range Facility at Barking Sands, Kauai, and the interceptor missile, a Standard Missile 3, was launched one minute later from the USS Lake Erie at its patrol area located more than 160 km from Kauai.

Two minutes after the interceptor was launched, it hit the target, Henry "Trey" Obering, director of the Defense Department's Missile Defense Agency, said in a statement.

This was the fifth successful interception in six tests of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense system, an integral part of the US Ballistic Missile Defense System now being developed, tested and fielded by the Missile Defense Agency as part of a "layered" missile defense, the statement said.

Extensive post-test data would be evaluated to determine system performance, validate operational capability and identify potential modifications to the system to improve performance, the statement said.

The Aegis Weapon System, the basis for the sea-based element ofthe US Ballistic Missile Defense System, was currently deployed on68 US Navy cruisers and destroyers, with 18 more ships currently planned, according to the Missile Defense Agency.

Who is going to shoot a missile at America anyway? Greenland???
And lets say for arguments sake that it would be China/N-Korea/Iran, there would still be time to have a cup of coffee before maning a fighter jet to meet it half way and shoot it down.

This is all about giving big contracts to the right people...

Yep :thumbsup
out of the top 100 largest economies in the worl 51 are corporations :helpme
http://www.corporations.org/system/top100.html

Why Worry. The only Country who Would even Try to attack us is the US. All the rest of the World Loves us.

Why Participate in a Program with not 1 Sucessful run?