It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Canada's true position on nuclear arms?

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 6 2007 @ 10:39 AM
I thought this could be an interesting discussion for my fellow Canadians as well as our neighbors to the South and around the world.

What exactly is Canada's true position on nuclear weapons and WMDs?

Officially, Canada opposes the use and harbouring of WMDs and seems to be committed to getting rid of them.

That being said, we are by no means a weapon-free country.

Canada has an ambiguous policy towards WMDs. We will not develop our own WMDs, but we rely on the nuclear arms of our allies for defence, and support the policies that allow them to keep them.

In other words, we don't like our enemies having nukes, but we're perfectly fine with our allies keeping them, because it benefits us.

This is somewhat hypocritical considering our official stance towards nukes. As a member of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, we are officially on the side of not contributing to the development of nuclear arms and will not help non-nuclear states do so.

What the NPT does allow us to do, however, is harbour AND USE nuclear weapons that are officially owned by another country, such as the USA. In fact, there are US WMDs stored on Canadian soil, and we allow the US to use our military facilities to store these weapons.

Currently, using nuclear weapons, testing nuclear weapons, and transporting nuclear weapons is not against Canadian policy.

I love my country, but this hypocisy upsets me. We claim to be anti-WMD, we claim to be for peace and the abolishment of these weapons, and yet we still allow for their use as long as it benefits us. Of course, this is simply the reality and a necessity of the world today, but in this case we should at least be honest about our true position. I had no idea of Canada's actual position until recently...It certainly is not talked about in the news here, or in school where I was always told we were strictly anti-nuclear.

Most of what I talked about can be found here. They have some references on that site as well.

I'd like to know what you guys think.

[edit on 6-8-2007 by DazedDave]

posted on Aug, 6 2007 @ 10:59 AM
Hi. The ploughshares link is non-functional. Can you expand a bit on which and whose WMD's are being claimed as currently stored on Canadian soil?



[edit on 6-8-2007 by V Kaminski]

posted on Aug, 6 2007 @ 11:08 AM
Sorry, the link was working last night.

The article does not talk about arms currently stored on Canadian soil, only that policy allows it. I don't think you'll find any official source that mentions who's arms are stored where on Canadian soil...All I could find was an incident where a US submarine was docked in a Canadian port around 12 years ago.

I'd assume this sort of thing is kept under wraps, for security reasons. I don't live near any bases, so perhaps someone who does could enlighten us.

posted on Aug, 6 2007 @ 11:08 AM
What do I think? I think the dangers of having nukes and/or foreign troops on canadian soil far outweigh any benefits - besides, the only country ever likely to attack or invade canada is: yes, you guessed it - the USA.

They have invaded Canada at least twice in the past (and were soundly defeated both times - check your history books folks..), so why put our selves in jepoardy by making such a situation even easier for them?

Canada has no real enemies anywhere on the planet - so why give any nation as excuse by harbouring and abetting a nation/government that has more enemies around the planet than any other in recorded history??

Independence from superpower politics is the only logical way to go for canada.


posted on Aug, 6 2007 @ 11:13 AM

Originally posted by DazedDave
In fact, there are US WMDs stored on Canadian soil, and we allow the US to use our military facilities to store these weapons.

OK. Thanks for clearing that up.



posted on Aug, 9 2007 @ 06:14 PM
I have recently retired from the Canadian military, and can say with certainty that we are not storing any nuclear weapons at military bases in Canada.
That being said, we still train in nuclear, biological and chemical defense. That being how to survive said WMDs if deployed against us. Our pilots know how to drop them and our artillary crews know how to fire them from our large bore feild peices. But we don't have any in our arsenal in Canada, or stored for us in any other country.
Canadian troops are trained to a standard that is written to include both UN and NATO standards and taskings. Because of this we are trained for many situations involving armaments that we don't have. We are the 'do anything with nothing' champions of the world.
It's like training our Medics to deliver babies, not likely to happen, but better to know than not,

posted on Aug, 9 2007 @ 06:40 PM

While it has no more permanently stationed nuclear weapons, Canada continues to allow nuclear-armed American planes and naval vessels to use Canadian facilities. There is, however, some local and popular objection to this federal policy. The port city of Vancouver is, by its own bylaws and signage, a "Nuclear Weapons Free Zone", although it is not clear if the American military vessels entering its harbour are free of such weapons, or how such a bylaw would be enforced. Canada also continues to remain under the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation's (NATO) nuclear "umbrella", although the government has attempted to modify NATO policy, particularly during the period that Lloyd Axworthy was Minister of Foreign Affairs.

posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 10:08 PM
I care nothing for nationalism, i believe every country (yes even my own, peace country) Canada is corrupt and unlawful. I think perfectly well canada is in favour of nuclear wepons for our allies, so that we remain safe. Every country wants whats best for themselves, NOT whats best for the world. Also i see everybody looking for evidence. Well if u think about it we r just civilians, (some military personel as i can see) but no were close to the real people who run the country, i am absolutely sure that what they write in laws or on paper is much different from their mindset. Its always all about survival and money. For example i am against guns, i think they r dishourable wepons to use in battle and i think they should stop being made. Yet if a gun will help me survive and aquire more power i would take full advantage of it (secretly of course).

new topics

top topics


log in