Russia Has Nukes; Should Canada?

[ThisIsAnOutrage]

It is no secret that Canada and Russia have competing claims to the Arctic. IN fact, it is possible that the two nations will share a border there some day:

https://nunatsiaq.com/stories/articl...ing_borders_t/

The war in the Ukraine has revealed how reluctant the West can be to get involved in a war. It has also brought the possibility that Russia may make a nuclear weapon strike to the fore.

Even thought Canada is part of Nato, I am not certain that nuclear power Nato allies would be willing to guarantee that they are prepared to launch the own nuclear weapons in defence of Canada if a military conflict over the sparesely populated arctic broke out.

So, should Canada have its own nukes?

At this point, my first thought is that it couldn't hurt. Then again, I also pronouce "nuclear" the same way ol' W did. Nukular!

Thoughts? Is it viable economically? Technologically? Politically?

EDIT:

Lot's of good points in the replies so far, thanks everyone.

To clarify a bit, I guess what I am wondering is if Canada needs its own Nukes in order to ensure mutually assured destruction, which would deter a hostile state from using its own nuclear arsenal. Nuclear war seems unthinkable, and yet possible. In the event that Russia used a "low yield" nuke I am skeptical that allies would respond in kind for fear of escalation to a full out armageddon. In which case, Canada may need its own nuclear capabilities.

Further food for thought here:

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/0...clear-00019899

[blender]

Hard no.

[burn_this_city]

We're part of NORAD, if nukes fly towards North America the US nuclear triad would return strikes on our behalf. We never had nukes even during the height of the cold war, I don't think spending money on weapons no one can ever use is worthwhile for us.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by ThisIsAnOutrage

It is no secret that Canada and Russia have competing claims to the Arctic. IN fact, it is possible that the two nations will share a border there some day:

https://nunatsiaq.com/stories/articl...ing_borders_t/

The war in the Ukraine has revealed how reluctant the West can be to get involved in a war. It has also brought the possibility that Russia may make a nuclear weapon strike to the fore.

Even thought Canada is part of Nato, I am not certain that nuclear power Nato allies would be willing to guarantee that they are prepared to launch the own nuclear weapons in defence of Canada if a military conflict over the sparesely populated arctic broke out.

So, should Canada have its own nukes?

At this point, my first thought is that it couldn't hurt. Then again, I also pronouce "nuclear" the same way ol' W did. Nukular!

Thoughts? Is it viable economically? Technologically? Politically?

lets work on having a functioning and credible conventional military first

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

We're part of NORAD, if nukes fly towards North America the US nuclear triad would return strikes on our behalf. We never had nukes even during the height of the cold war, I don't think spending money on weapons no one can ever use is worthwhile for us.

Huh?


We had Nuclear Warheads for our Bomarc missiles at Goose Bay Labrador. Canada had 4 Honest John missile batteries in Europe with 16 nuclear warheads. 108 Genie nuclear rockets for our Voodoo interceptors. As well in Europe as part of NATO, we had 90 nuclear warheads with our CF-104 NATO compliment.



While these weapons were given to Canada under a custodial agreement, the weapons were effectively under Canada's control and mounted on Canadian assets.


Now the question is should Canada get nukes. Nope, first of all, we don't really need a deterrence force, that's what the American's and NATO are for. So if we are attacked by weapons of mass destruction for example. Chemical, biological or Nuclear. The NATO response is a bug, is a nerve agent is a nuke is all a nuke.



For the defense of Canada, its unlikely that we would want to use Nukes in the defense of Canada on our own soil or seas. In terms of NATO, Canada really doesn't have a nuclear platform anyways unless we buy the F-35.



So nope.

[Fuzz]

No, we are part of the NPT. Taking that step gives other countries the same idea, which is bad for the world. Major net negative.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Huh?


We had Nuclear Warheads for our Bomarc missiles at Goose Bay Labrador. Canada had 4 Honest John missile batteries in Europe with 16 nuclear warheads. 108 Genie nuclear rockets for our Voodoo interceptors. As well in Europe as part of NATO, we had 90 nuclear warheads with our CF-104 NATO compliment.



While these weapons were given to Canada under a custodial agreement, the weapons were effectively under Canada's control and mounted on Canadian assets.


Now the question is should Canada get nukes. Nope, first of all, we don't really need a deterrence force, that's what the American's and NATO are for. So if we are attacked by weapons of mass destruction for example. Chemical, biological or Nuclear. The NATO response is a bug, is a nerve agent is a nuke is all a nuke.



For the defense of Canada, its unlikely that we would want to use Nukes in the defense of Canada on our own soil or seas. In terms of NATO, Canada really doesn't have a nuclear platform anyways unless we buy the F-35.



So nope.

I knew we possessed them as part of NORAD but Canada has never been considered a nuclear power. Part of the Arrow cancellation was the decision to get bomarcs instead.

The warheads were never in the sole possession of Canadian personnel. They were the property of the Government of the United States and were always under the direct supervision of a "Custodial Detachment" from the United States Air Force (or Army, in the case of Honest John warheads).

Through 1984, Canada would deploy four American designed nuclear weapons delivery systems accompanied by hundreds of warheads:

56 CIM-10 BOMARC surface-to-air missiles.[20]
4 MGR-1 Honest John rocket systems, each with four rockets and four warheads, for a total of 16 W31 nuclear warheads the Canadian Army deployed in Germany.[20]
108 nuclear W25 Genie rockets carried by 54 CF-101 Voodoos.[20]
estimates of 90 to 210 tactical (20–60 kiloton) nuclear warheads assigned to 6 CF-104 Starfighter squadrons (about 90 aircraft) based with NATO in Europe (there is a lack of open sources detailing exactly how many warheads were deployed).[21][/I]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada...ss_destruction

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

lets work on having a functioning and credible conventional military first

I can't even begin to imagine the quality of Nuke that would be acquired by Canada.

[MoneyGuy]

NO to nuclear weapons.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I can't even begin to imagine the quality of Nuke that would be acquired by Canada.

On the plus side, it would take decades to acquire.

[GoinAllTheWay]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I can't even begin to imagine the quality of Nuke that would be acquired by Canada.

Or the timeframe it would take to get them. With the length of times it's taken to select a jet (and that's not even close yet) and heck, even pistols. By the time we'd finally selected one, the world would have moved on to photon torpedoes or something.

[FlamesAddiction]

Definitely no.

Nuclear weapons are very expensive to make and to maintain. We can barely adequately arm our military with modern conventional weapons before adding that expense.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by GoinAllTheWay

Or the timeframe it would take to get them. With the length of times it's taken to select a jet (and that's not even close yet) and heck, even pistols. By the time we'd finally selected one, the world would have moved on to photon torpedoes or something.

I just envision a nuke version of the LSVW........

[GoinAllTheWay]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I just envision a nuke version of the LSVW........

Ya I wanna laugh but you're probably not wrong.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I can't even begin to imagine the quality of Nuke that would be acquired by Canada.

Lol!

"Come on down to Bill's Discount Nukes and Pinball Machine Emporium!!"

Seems reputable...

[CaptainCrunch]

Well you know with the sanction and everything hitting Russia and their need for hard currency, there might be nuclear warheads going on sale for hard currency soon.

[CroFlames]

Hard no to nukes for Canada.

The ultimate goal should be to reduce the nuclear arsenals of all nations.

[ThisIsAnOutrage]

Lot's of good points in the replies so far, thanks everyone.

To clarify a bit, I guess what I am wondering is if Canada needs its own Nukes in order to ensure mutually assured destruction, which would deter a hostile state from using its own nuclear arsenal. Nuclear war seems unthinkable, and yet possible. In the event that Russia used a "low yield" nuke I am skeptical that allies would respond in kind for fear of escalation to a full out armageddon. In which case, Canada may need its own nuclear capabilities.

Further food for thought here:

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/0...clear-00019899

[Puppet Guy]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I can't even begin to imagine the quality of Nuke that would be acquired by Canada.

We're more likely to use cluster bombs that disperse crabapples and stale Timbits.

[Lubicon]

Hard no but we DO need to get serious and increase our capabilities for patrolling the arctic. Along with our coastal areas. Defence spending has been pathetically low in this country for far too long.