Canada and nuclear partnership.

With Canada producing nuclear isotopes for a major part of the medical world, the Candu reactors are producing some nice definable uranium. That nuclear wast is being "stored" and maintained but did you know that the U.S. is a major buyer as well ?

Not only that but ever since the start of the cold war, the U.S. has "moved" in to Canada in some strategic places and maintaining it's fleet of nuclear ICBMs on Canadian soil. Although Canada has always said that it does not own any nuclear ICBMs it can also never deny that the U.S. is managing their own on Canadian soil. The U.S. "planted" these in a strategic manner to be able to either strike first of have immediate response to Russian missile launches. With an array of satellite dishes in the Alaskan north ( The northern belt ) The U.S. still has a mighty foot in the face of Russia.

A sure way in finding these nuclear ICBM is to go through the freedom of information office requesting all information on U.S. owned or least land in Canada and from the U.S. side do the same request. Correlating both and coming up with specific common points.

Of course you can search the web for any of this information and not come up with much but.....from what I've personally seed and read.....This is true. You can choose to believe it or not....That is fine with me...I'm just putting out here.

Ohh so u mean that CANADA has Nuclear Wepons as well?? Gee what a nice deterent in these oh so fraut filled times.
Got to luv us Canadians, and if America/Russian/Chinese,, really pissed us off ,,,would wethen we ask for there military and Corporations,,,to leave Canadian soil,, hmmm
And dosn't that mean that Canada is indeed well armed.
Now if we just kept up with the Avro Arrow ,,,and should we buy the Diefenbunker back from the Hells Angels ?? lol

reply to post by BobAthome


Didn't say Canada was well armed but under agreement we are "well protected" and we could never piss off the Americans enough to pull their nuclear ICBMs out of here. They need them here just as much as the U.S.S.R. needed theirs in Cuba. All about reach and response.

I've got a feeling we may not be agreeing to that as readily after the "wikieleaks" diplomat thing starts. Maybe just a foreshadow.

reply to post by BobAthome



Well those documents will have more blacked out parts than pages...So in my opinion will be mostly irrelevant!

P.S. The Diefenbunker is owned and operated buy Heritage Canada if I'm not mistake,

Originally posted by Fox Molder
...and maintaining it's fleet of nuclear ICBMs on Canadian soil. Although Canada has always said that it does not own any nuclear ICBMs it can also never deny that the U.S. is managing their own on Canadian soil...

From Wikipedia:
While it has no more permanently stationed nuclear weapons, Canada continues to allow nuclear-armed American planes and naval vessels to use Canadian facilities.

Please cite some proof that there are ICBM's on Canadian soil. According to Wikipedia, there were nuclear weapons up until 1984, but these were all removed.

Seems to me that basing the nukes in Alaska would be sufficient to deter the Russians.

There is no doubt that the DoD uses Canadian airports. Lots of rendition flights went through Canada.

There are no ICBMs in Canada.

Ofcourse there isnt. They would be in Alaska.... but wait! Dont use common sense before making a thread on ATS!

Second line for the nazis.

Originally posted by Velocismo
Ofcourse there isnt. They would be in Alaska.... but wait! Dont use common sense before making a thread on ATS!

Second line for the nazis.

Nor are there any in Alaska either

reply to post by Fox Molder


Read up on the various Strategic Arms limitation treaties over the last few decades.

en.wikipedia.org...

Study closely the transparency that these treaties entailed? This included on-site inspections of nuclear facilities and bases. Your claim would mean that the US has been in violation of the agreements in Russia. The Russians would have embarrassed the US long ago by revealing that they knew of ICBMs silos in Canada. The transparency in the decades of treaties and on site inspections make your claim of ICBMs in Canada a fantasy.

Both sides know that they can obliterate each other with nuclear weapons. No anti-ballistic missile shield will eliminate that fact and neither will basing ICBMs in Canada provide any advantage to the US nuclear triad.

Both sides have on site inspection and verification under those treaties. The new treaty being proposed will only increase this transparency.

For example.

Russians visit Dyess as part of START Treaty

www.af.mil...

Also have a look at the Open Skies Treaty.

en.wikipedia.org...

TJ

No country respects those treaties since both are ignoring them in hiding. Those treaties are media darlings and "propaganda" to the public.

Like I said research:
1- U.S. military outpost in Canada
2- U.S. least land in Canada
3- U.S. Embassy in Canada
4- U.S. use of Canadian forces bases.

When they say that aircraft equipped with nuclear bombs are still allowed to fly in Canadian air space and land on Canadian military bases it also means much more than what you read. Having been posted to bases with American soldier in Canada I can tell you that even with Wikileaks and the forever unreliable wikipedia, we still know but 1/1000 of what's really going on.


PS...Noticed this line in your news article? "The treaty allows them to come and inspect us twice a year on a short-notice basis," Mr. Simpson said.

reply to post by Fox Molder


It is a great fantasy with absolutely no proof. There is absolutely no advantage for the US to house silo based ICBMs in Canada. This would also mean that every successive Canadian administration would also be part of that deception. Through the various politicians it would leak like a sieve.

All these Minuteman silos hidden in Canada and yet the Russians don't know about them? Only you? I could equally claim that the US has Minuteman stationed on USAF bases in the UK. It doesn't make it fact.

TJ

It's ok TJ...You don't have to believe anything I write...I'm just writing what I've seen. I'm not the only one that knows about this...I mean come on now.....As for every administration knowing....Of course they know and they are sworn in, why would they ever consider leaking the information!

Having ICBMs in an unsuspecting area give you the advantage of striking even if the U.S. is disabled. And it would be if it was attacked.

now, I've said all I had to say about this subject and even if I debated it with you more, you wouldn't budge on your opinion and I respect that so....Have a great day !

Originally posted by Fox Molder
It's ok TJ...You don't have to believe anything I write...I'm just writing what I've seen. I'm not the only one that knows about this...I mean come on now.....As for every administration knowing....Of course they know and they are sworn in, why would they ever consider leaking the information!

Having ICBMs in an unsuspecting area give you the advantage of striking even if the U.S. is disabled. And it would be if it was attacked.

now, I've said all I had to say about this subject and even if I debated it with you more, you wouldn't budge on your opinion and I respect that so....Have a great day !

But still, you have no evidence of secret ICBM fields, and they are not something you can just keep secret and undetected. Feel free to point out locations of said secret ICBMs though.

And SLBMs are able to accomplish what you described anyways.

reply to post by Fox Molder


If you know then why not get on Google Earth and find these ICBM silos? Oh, I forgot they are secret! Which Canadian Spruce is hiding the silo? Anyone can make the claim your are making. It doesn't make it reality!

I claim that Russia has ICBMs in Mongolia. My proof is that I know they are there!

As already pointed out SLBMs provide that flexibility in the nuclear triad. There is absolutely no need or requirement to have secret ICBMs in Canada.

Happy hunting on Google Earth!

TJ

If i had my druthers id like to see Canada a nuclear free country.
The Airforce base at Comox BC would still have a nuclear storage bunker area i think.....
There may have been nukes at Cold Lk Alta..
The Iqaluit air base is the third longest one on North America, and is an alternate for the space shuttle...
Used to be a B 52 staging base so may have them or not....
Maybe in ontario or quebec there could be one or two bases capable...
I really highly doubt we have any nowadays...but the treaty between US and Canada allows forces to operate out of both countries so they could be dispersed here at a moments notice with long highways for takeoffs and landings too.....
I cant imagine how many B 52s you could line up on the traans canada, but they would still have ample takeoff room!

Originally posted by stirling
If i had my druthers id like to see Canada a nuclear free country.
The Airforce base at Comox BC would still have a nuclear storage bunker area i think.....
There may have been nukes at Cold Lk Alta..
The Iqaluit air base is the third longest one on North America, and is an alternate for the space shuttle...
Used to be a B 52 staging base so may have them or not....
Maybe in ontario or quebec there could be one or two bases capable...
I really highly doubt we have any nowadays...but the treaty between US and Canada allows forces to operate out of both countries so they could be dispersed here at a moments notice with long highways for takeoffs and landings too.....
I cant imagine how many B 52s you could line up on the traans canada, but they would still have ample takeoff room!

NO

Iqaluit is not the third longest in north america, and is not an alternate for the space shuttle.