Canadian Parliament on North Korea

[Adelaide]

Ballistic missile defence is one of those radioactive political issues in Canada.

Not only did the Liberals back away from it, but so did Stephen Harper's government.

It was the Conservatives who were responsible for calling the emergency committee meeting during the summer recess.

They arrived, however, without a clear position on whether they support joining the missile shield or not.

It is something that will be decided at the party's upcoming policy convention, said defence critic James Bezan. He argued that threat from North Korea really hadn't evolved until the regime in Pyongyang first tested its latest long-range missile on July 4.

"You've got to remember the history behind that discussion, the wounds that were created because of the decision by Paul Martin back in 2005, and things didn't change until this summer," Bezan said. "So from this point forward, everyone is looking at how we can best work with the United States. How we can work through NORAD in dealing with this new threat."

Parliamentary committee ponders how to cope with nuclear threat from North Korea - CBC News


I have said previously that if war were to take place that Canada may join - we have some skin in the game. Our government is currently arguing about whether they should join the U.S. anti-ballistic missile defense program, or rely on NORAD and the North Warning System. The Liberals and Conservatives seem to be moving in the direction of joining the United States, while the NDP is solidly against.

[MisterVeritis]

Parliamentary committee ponders how to cope with nuclear threat from North Korea - CBC News
I have said previously that if war were to take place that Canada may join - we have some skin in the game. Our government is currently arguing about whether they should join the U.S. anti-ballistic missile defense program, or rely on NORAD and the North Warning System. The Liberals and Conservatives seem to be moving in the direction of joining the United States, while the NDP is solidly against.

One of the options the US has is to not engage any inbound missile or warhead that will not land in the US. So if a warhead is headed for a nation that does not participate in the costs that nation should not be protected.

[Tahuyaman]

One of the options the US has is to not engage any inbound missile or warhead that will not land in the US. So if a warhead is headed for a nation that does not participate in the costs that nation should not be protected.

No. We can't allow North Korea or anyone for that matter launch a nuclear strike on North America. We can't allow a nuclear attack on our bordering nations.