Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site water.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!water!jbtubman From: jbtubman@water.UUCP (Jim Tubman) Newsgroups: can.politics Subject: Re: the Pentagon / nuclear weapons Message-ID: <232@water.UUCP> Date: Tue, 15-Jan-85 10:47:31 EST Article-I.D.: water.232 Posted: Tue Jan 15 10:47:31 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 16-Jan-85 03:59:05 EST References:<1327@dciem.UUCP> Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario Lines: 28 > > > While I am a rookie politics spectator a long held belief was that Canada > >was always, and would remain, free of nuclear weapons (except for the > >ones raining around us during a nuclear exchange). > > It's only relatively recently that nuclear weapons were withdrawn > from Canada, if I remember rightly. Who remembers the Bomarcs? > -- > Martin Taylor As far as I know, the last nuclear weapons in Canada were the Genie missiles on the CF-101 Voodoo fighters. The Genie was an unguided air defence missile -- I guess the theory was that with a nuclear warhead, all you had to do was point the missile in the general direction of the target and let it go. They were retired along with the Voodoos themselves when the new CF-18 was brought into service; some mention of this was made in the media when the changeover occurred. The CF-105 Starfighters had a nuclear strike role, but the government changed their mission to ground attack (!). The Canadian forces in Europe also had a nuclear artillery rocket, the "Honest John". I don't know when it went out of service. As Canada is undoubtedly targetted by the USSR in the event of a nuclear war, I don't think that having nuclear weapons on our soil makes any difference one way or the other. Any comments? Jim Tubman University of Waterloo ...watmath!water!jbtubman