Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Canada won't fund missile shield: PM
Windsor Star ^ | December 15, 2004

Posted on 12/16/2004 5:43:45 PM PST by Libertas aut Mortis

Prime Minister Paul Martin said Tuesday he does not believe the U.S. ballistic missile shield will succeed in shooting down incoming rockets, as he threw up new roadblocks to counter President George W. Bush's strong appeal for Canada to join his continental defence plan.

Canada will not put any money into building the missile shield and it will not allow Washington to station rockets on Canadian soil as the price of participation in the multibillion-dollar program, Martin told Global National in a year-end interview.

In another issue that could cause friction with Bush, Martin said Canada was prepared to accept U.S. citizens who do not want to serve in the war in Iraq.

"In terms of immigration, we are a country of immigrants and we will take immigrants from around the world. I'm not going to discriminate," said Martin, when reminded that former prime minister Pierre Trudeau opened Canada's doors to draft dodgers and deserters during the Vietnam War.

'AN ILLEGAL WAR'

When asked whether the prime minister was referring to ongoing attempts by Jeremy Hinzman, a 26-year-old U.S. deserter, to gain asylum in Canada after refusing to serve in what he calls "an illegal war," Martin spokesman Scott Reid said the prime minister "was not commenting on any individual case and certainly was not sending a signal to the immigration board."

Canada will not put any money into building the missile shield and it will not allow Washington to station rockets on Canadian soil as the price of participation in the multibillion-dollar program, Martin told Global National in a year-end interview.

In another issue that could cause friction with Bush, Martin said Canada was prepared to accept U.S. citizens who do not want to serve in the war in Iraq.

"In terms of immigration, we are a country of immigrants and we will take immigrants from around the world. I'm not going to discriminate," said Martin, when reminded that former prime minister Pierre Trudeau opened Canada's doors to draft dodgers and deserters during the Vietnam War.

'AN ILLEGAL WAR'

When asked whether the prime minister was referring to ongoing attempts by Jeremy Hinzman, a 26-year-old U.S. deserter, to gain asylum in Canada after refusing to serve in what he calls "an illegal war," Martin spokesman Scott Reid said the prime minister "was not commenting on any individual case and certainly was not sending a signal to the immigration board."

Martin was emphatic Canada's participation in the missile defence program would depend on a key decision-making role in the U.S. command and control structure that operates the shield.

"The decision as to whether or not we participate in the ballistic missile defence system is going to depend on whether, in fact, Canada can have a voice in the structure," Martin said in the interview, to be broadcast Christmas Day.

"I'm not going to put money into it. I'm going to put money into our priorities ... Having missiles on our territory is not one of those priorities."

The conditions laid out by Martin are the clearest indication to date the Liberal government is increasingly disinterested in the missile defence program despite Bush's public appeal during his visit to Canada on Dec. 1.

Martin has been under heavy pressure from the Liberal caucus and the party's grassroots to reject the defence shield, which he admitted may not even work to knock down incoming missiles from rogue states or global terrorists.

"Do I believe it could work tomorrow? I suspect there are very few people out there who testify that it could. Do I believe eventually technology could bring it to that point, in all likelihood, but I'm not a rocket expert," he said in another TV interview.

Martin said Canada is not even close to negotiating a memorandum of understanding with the U.S. on missile defence, but added any document must include guarantees that it would not lead to the weaponization of space.

Canada would immediately pull out of the defence shield if it were to join and the U.S. subsequently put missile weapon systems in space.

"I don't believe space belongs to any country," Martin said. "We will not engage in the weaponization of space."

Martin acknowledged for the first time that next year's budget will pump money into Canada's hard-pressed military, including funds to allow the Armed Forces to recruit 5,000 more troops over the next five years.

Martin admitted he struggled over his personal belief in the traditional marriage but finally decided same-sex weddings were a right entitled to all citizens regardless of their sexual orientation.

Martin was emphatic Canada's participation in the missile defence program would depend on a key decision-making role in the U.S. command and control structure that operates the shield.

"The decision as to whether or not we participate in the ballistic missile defence system is going to depend on whether, in fact, Canada can have a voice in the structure," Martin said in the interview, to be broadcast Christmas Day.

"I'm not going to put money into it. I'm going to put money into our priorities ... Having missiles on our territory is not one of those priorities."

The conditions laid out by Martin are the clearest indication to date the Liberal government is increasingly disinterested in the missile defence program despite Bush's public appeal during his visit to Canada on Dec. 1.

Martin has been under heavy pressure from the Liberal caucus and the party's grassroots to reject the defence shield, which he admitted may not even work to knock down incoming missiles from rogue states or global terrorists.

"Do I believe it could work tomorrow? I suspect there are very few people out there who testify that it could. Do I believe eventually technology could bring it to that point, in all likelihood, but I'm not a rocket expert," he said in another TV interview.

Martin said Canada is not even close to negotiating a memorandum of understanding with the U.S. on missile defence, but added any document must include guarantees that it would not lead to the weaponization of space.

Canada would immediately pull out of the defence shield if it were to join and the U.S. subsequently put missile weapon systems in space.

"I don't believe space belongs to any country," Martin said. "We will not engage in the weaponization of space."

Martin acknowledged for the first time that next year's budget will pump money into Canada's hard-pressed military, including funds to allow the Armed Forces to recruit 5,000 more troops over the next five years.

Martin admitted he struggled over his personal belief in the traditional marriage but finally decided same-sex weddings were a right entitled to all citizens regardless of their sexual orientation.


TOPICS: Canada; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: cheapskate; continentaldefence; coward; missiledefense; missileshield; paulmartin

1 posted on 12/16/2004 5:43:45 PM PST by Libertas aut Mortis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Libertas aut Mortis
It's getting truly bizarre up there.

Wonder if that guy has figured out how Canada is going to prevent "their fallout" from landing in the US?

Maybe we ought to conduct a "pre-emptive" clearance project so that they are no longer such a tempting target.

2 posted on 12/16/2004 5:47:17 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libertas aut Mortis

Next time FReepers plan a vacation, I hope these forums have convinced you to keep your money in THIS country. Period.


3 posted on 12/16/2004 5:50:44 PM PST by Indie (Ignorance of the truth is no excuse for stupidity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libertas aut Mortis

What gets me is it doesn't sound like he has put much thought into the issue at all "rocket expert" or no. The article gives the impression Paul Martin is deciding on the basis of pure partisan expedience. As for the deserters and draft dodgers, he can have them and welcome. It's up to us to make sure they can never, ever come back.


4 posted on 12/16/2004 5:51:07 PM PST by sinanju
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libertas aut Mortis
Fair enough, don’t help us with missile defense. But if they want missile defense in 20 years, I hope we make them pay out the a~s for the development cost + interest.

And if they want to grant our deserters political asylum, I’m sure there’s some class of Canadian criminals we can grant asylum to until they change their minds.

5 posted on 12/16/2004 5:52:23 PM PST by elfman2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libertas aut Mortis

Hey, fine by us, but when Iran or North Korea start sending missiles over, we're going to knock them out. If Canada isn't participating, they might just land in Canada. Thems the breaks.


6 posted on 12/16/2004 5:58:57 PM PST by McGavin999 (Senate is trying to cover their A$$es with Rumsfeld hide)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libertas aut Mortis

Without essential funding from Canada, the US will need to develop a cheaper plan.

Rather than outright shoot missiles out of the air, it will be cheaper to "trick" the missile into falling short---somewhere in Canada.

That way the US and Canada can both cut back funding.


7 posted on 12/16/2004 6:02:23 PM PST by truth_seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libertas aut Mortis

Screw Canada. If they don't want an umbrella, fine. And they can take our bums and traitors - good riddance.


8 posted on 12/16/2004 6:02:57 PM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elfman2

I've often thought of applying for refugee status in the U.S. on the basis of being a Canadian gun owner, and therefore subject to persecution on that basis. I may soon be able to add religious persecution on the basis of being a Bible believing Christian.


9 posted on 12/16/2004 6:04:19 PM PST by Libertas aut Mortis (Christian, conservative, heterosexual Canadian, Any Questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

So, said the little red hen, I'll build it myself.

Pretty soon, a big nuclear missile headed to the US from
North Korea, and the little red hen's shield worked perfectly.

It didn't blow up anything...Just diverted the incoming
to Ottawa, or Vancouver, or Regina.

OF course, the big Canuck dumbhorse couldn't do anything about it
except...sue for damages.


10 posted on 12/16/2004 6:07:28 PM PST by plangent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Indie

And preferably in red states. Florida could use the money, y'all, given the four hurricanes' impact on its economy. And it's mostly cleaned up in tourist areas, anyway.


11 posted on 12/16/2004 6:08:10 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (NO BLOOD FOR CHOCOLATE! Get the UN-ignoring, unilateralist Frogs out of Ivory Coast!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Libertas aut Mortis
"We will not engage in the weaponization of space."

Pretty idealistic! Is it denial? Or extreme naivete?.

12 posted on 12/16/2004 6:08:51 PM PST by SolutionsOnly (but some people really NEED to be offended...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libertas aut Mortis
The only thing the liberal idiot Canadians would fund is a combination bong hit, condom launcher.
13 posted on 12/16/2004 6:09:33 PM PST by Reactionary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plangent

Objection, your honor, prejudicial! Plaintiff is glowing in front of the jury!


14 posted on 12/16/2004 6:09:49 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (NO BLOOD FOR CHOCOLATE! Get the UN-ignoring, unilateralist Frogs out of Ivory Coast!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Libertas aut Mortis

Canada was already nuked at least once and survived. That is, you can't tell the difference, but being Canada that wouldn't come as a surprise.


15 posted on 12/16/2004 6:10:55 PM PST by RightWhale (Destroy the dark; restore the light)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libertas aut Mortis

Wonder if the PM knows that before we intercept an incoming ballistic missile, we know where it's gonna land. It's ballistic - it travels on a predetermined course.

So the question is, do we give them the option of buying a "shootdown" for, say, $20B (US) when the time comes ("you have 15 seconds to decide, $20B (US) and we'll attempt an intercept; or not, your choice - 10 seconds left"), or just let it land on Canadian soil.


16 posted on 12/16/2004 6:13:23 PM PST by Growler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libertas aut Mortis
Somebody send Martin a copy of The Little Red Hen.
17 posted on 12/16/2004 6:16:36 PM PST by Savage Beast (This is the choice: confrontation or capitulation. Appeasement is capitulation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Savage Beast

We really need to start getting tough on Canada. If it wasn't for their oil, maybe even cutting off diplomatic relations...........?


18 posted on 12/16/2004 6:18:53 PM PST by americanbychoice2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: truth_seeker
Without essential funding from Canada, Realistically how much money could Canada even provide if it wanted to? Very little. Canada is hard pressed to keep it's helicopters flying. They don't have deep pockets, so their cooperation is mostly symbolic - which leaves me even more puzzled that Martin would want to stick his thumb in Bush's eye for no real benefit.
19 posted on 12/16/2004 6:19:35 PM PST by SolutionsOnly (but some people really NEED to be offended...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: elfman2

When the missiles do start to fly, we should send them an account number. We should then tell them that they have 5 minutes to wire $100B into that account, if they want any protection. After 5m, the price goes up by $20B/minute.


20 posted on 12/16/2004 6:27:59 PM PST by rbg81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Libertas aut Mortis

Canda just does not have the money to fund a paperclip let alone any military research.

Canada has no military defense, they defacto use the USA military.

It seems canada global defense strategy is defense through demonstrable weakness. IOW please don't hurt Kanada because they are irrelevent.


21 posted on 12/16/2004 6:39:07 PM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libertas aut Mortis
What else is new. Canada has beer free loading under the umbrella American military might has provided for decades now, why are we surprised when they want another free ride.

Canada's day of reckoning will come soon when their liberal immigration policy turns around and bites them in the arse. Look at the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, etc.
22 posted on 12/16/2004 6:41:55 PM PST by lt.america (Captain was already taken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SolutionsOnly

I'd say stupidity.


23 posted on 12/16/2004 6:46:03 PM PST by ItsForTheChildren
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Why should they participate any more than the Europeans participate in their defense when Uncle Sam in the red cape is protecting the helpless everywhere.


24 posted on 12/16/2004 6:46:03 PM PST by matchwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Libertas aut Mortis
That South Park movie was right!!!
25 posted on 12/16/2004 6:46:16 PM PST by paudio (Four More Years..... Let's Use Them Wisely...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Growler

"Hi, this is Don at the Pentagon. How may I help you? You want what? You have an incoming missle and you want us to shoot it down? Oh. Ok. May I have your credit card number, please?"


26 posted on 12/16/2004 6:48:43 PM PST by ItsForTheChildren
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: paudio
Yes, absolutely, "Team America" was correct in every important respect when it comes to Canada, or Hollywood, or even North Korea, although North Korea is probably worse sometimes.

Those guys are geniuses, eh?!~

27 posted on 12/16/2004 6:52:38 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

The PM sounds much like a little spoiled girl. Geopolitical realities be damned, "I want to play dress up today and I will not let any reality penetrate my liberal PC nonsense".
So we'll base the stuff in Alaska and Niagara falls. Who cares about Canada?


28 posted on 12/16/2004 7:00:18 PM PST by UltraKonservativen (( YOU CAN'T FIX STUPID ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: UltraKonservativen

Guess we could work it so all the wreckage falls on their side too!


29 posted on 12/16/2004 7:01:45 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Libertas aut Mortis

Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death I will fear no evil; For you are with me; Thy rod and Thy staff ,they confort me. But let the bad guy know that I don't know Thee, that I deny you. I am truly safe.


30 posted on 12/16/2004 7:03:55 PM PST by nkycincinnatikid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #31 Removed by Moderator

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson