February 23, 2005
COWARDICE
Martin will say No to U.S. missile shield: reports (Alexander Panetta, National Post, February 23rd, 2005)
Prime Minister Paul Martin will deliver a firm No to Canadian participation in the U.S. missile defence plan and break a lengthy silence that fomented confusion on both sides of the border.The announcement, first reported by a radio station and confirmed by federal officials Tuesday night, will come Thursday and end a streak of obfuscation where Martin refused to state Canada's position.
News of the announcement follows a day of confusion on Parliament Hill after Frank McKenna, Martin's choice to be the next ambassador to the U.S., sparked a political firestorm by saying participation in the controversial continental missile defence system is a done deal.
The end of Martin's silence will come as an about-face for a prime minister who had repeatedly stated his support for missile defence when he was a Liberal leadership candidate barely a year ago.
Martin had promised a new era of Canada-U.S. relations after bitter divisions over the war in Iraq. But American officials had warned it would be an inauspicious start to any new era if Canada refused to join the missile plan.
Opposition inside and outside the Liberal party made it impossible for Martin to move forward, said government officials.
Posted by Peter Burnet at February 23, 2005 6:33 AM
So, let's say there's an incoming missle from the Norks and it's trajectory computes that it will hit Vancouver, and the U.S. doesn't make any attempt to destroy it first, then we won't hear any complaints from Canada right?
Posted by: MB at February 23, 2005 8:12 AMMB:
Good point, but it does beg the question: who would waste an expensive missile on Vancouver?
Posted by: Brit at February 23, 2005 8:21 AMWhen you could use it to obliterate Bristol.
Posted by: Peter B at February 23, 2005 8:42 AMTouche
Posted by: Brit at February 23, 2005 8:47 AMCausus Belli.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at February 23, 2005 10:38 AMWait, maybe it targeted the US but fell short.
Oh, well.
Posted by: Sandy P at February 23, 2005 10:47 AMWhy obliterate Vancouver? Because it's not in the US, but so close that it would get our attention while, thanks to the way Canada has behaved the last decade or so, not demand an immediate response. Let the Canadians respond by sending their billion dollar gun registry to cite North Korea for an illegal weapons discharge.
Then again, the North Koreans might have intended to hit Vancouver, Wash. and somebody got confused.
Posted by: Raoul Ortega at February 23, 2005 12:44 PMin a bunker outside pyongang:
dear leader: thinking he would like a little rock music to listen to "get van halen for me"
general: thinking to himself "hmmm, did he say get vancouver ? guess so; better go get the long duc dong programmed up with the coordinates"
Posted by: cjm at February 23, 2005 1:10 PM"Then again, the North Koreans might have intended to hit Vancouver, Wash. and somebody got confused."
As a worker bee at the HP plant in (the southern) Vancouver, I have to take special care to explain to my (particularly non-US) visitors that they need to fly into the Portland airport when visiting, NOT Vancouver B.C. This mistake happens all the time...
Posted by: TimF at February 23, 2005 1:16 PMIf this happens, Condi needs to have a press conference and announce that the US considers Canada to be an open city. And that we will respect their wishes and refrain from military action (or reaction) w/rt Canada.
Posted by: fred at February 23, 2005 5:09 PM