NO it poisition does not conflict with any current treaty like NATO and NORAD. Those provisions are already in place and very specifically defined. For instance there is dual notification for both the President and Prime Minister in the NORAD treaties. However the SDI is beyond the provisions of NORAD.
Moreover the Canadian public's opinion is solidly against participation in the SDI. So the prime minister should go against the opinion of his own nation? larry On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:18:40 -0500, Nick McClure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > IIRC, the NATO agreement states that attack against one member nation is an > attack against all member nations. > > If there is a missile attack against the US, it is my understanding that > Canada, as a NATO member is the responsibility to assist the US in its own > defense, this Canadian position goes against NORAD, and NATO. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Larry C. Lyons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 1:04 PM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: Re: No Defense over Canada > > > > So you think that there is no such thing as sovereignty and air > > rights. Also in that case I guess that the arguments the US put > > forward since the 50's regarding control of US air space was specious > > - hey the aircraft/missile was over 10 feet from the ground. > > > > > > On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:20:41 -0500, Michael Dinowitz > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > If a missile launched at America is over Canada, then I believe it is > > not > > > only allowed but required to shoot it down. We're not talking a missile > > at > > > 10 feet over the ground. When it's over Canada, it's miles up. When it's > > > over the Arctic, it's miles up and not over Canada. > > > We're talking lives here. We're talking a specific situation where lives > > are > > > at risk. When it comes to saving lives, I say screw airspace! save > > people > > > before political posturing. > > > > > > > > > > So its OK to violate another nation's sovereignty whenever you want > > > > and with no consequences. I guess the converse would also be true, > > > > other nations can violate US airspace at will then without > > > > consequences. > > > > > > > > Typical US attitude - screw the rest of the world, especially your > > > > allies. Real brilliant.It will get to the point that the only US > > > > allies will be paid. > > > > > > > > As for the missile tracks - remember where a good third of the ICBM's > > > > are based, and how many of those russian nukes are really controlled > > > > by Moscow. > > > > > > > > larry > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 11:33:39 -0500, Michael Dinowitz > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> OK, so we either have to keep the Canadians happy or we can save our > > > >> rears. I go for the latter. Screw diplomacy, save my hide! > > > >> > > http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld/myrtlebeachonline/news/nation/1099766 > > 8.htm > > > >> > > > >> (though chances are we'll never see a missile attack come through > > > >> Canadian air space and they know it. Just posturing) > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:148618 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
