Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!henry From: henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) Newsgroups: can.politics Subject: Re: Canada's defence : Doesn't anyone care? Message-ID: <5905@utzoo.UUCP> Date: Fri, 23-Aug-85 15:46:51 EDT Article-I.D.: utzoo.5905 Posted: Fri Aug 23 15:46:51 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 23-Aug-85 15:46:51 EDT References: <1029@ubc-vision.UUCP> Organization: U of Toronto Zoology Lines: 32 > In short, we should concentrate our efforts on monitoring capability. Like > it or not, we *do* rely on the Americans for our defence... The problem here is that the Americans are increasingly unhappy about defending people who won't make any effort to defend themselves. This doesn't mean they'll stop, since Canada is of some strategic importance to them, but it does mean that they'll make decisions that affect us without consulting us or considering our interests. This seems undesirable. (Case in point: recent uproar about claimed American plans to base nuclear weapons in Canada in the event of war. If we don't like this, it behooves us to retain some voice in such decisions.) Long-term efforts to render military forces unnecessary are not inconsistent with short-term realization that the ability to defend oneself by force is a practical necessity right now. *Defend*, please note. There is NOTHING morally reprehensible about defending oneself, although the necessity for it is annoying and regrettable. Threatening to murder your opponent if he steps out of line is different; that is offence, even if it is billed as "deterrence". The two are morally and ethically very different. A world armed exclusively with defensive weaponry would be a considerably better place to live than what we have now, and may be a more realistic hope than a world without weapons. What's defensive? ICBMs are not. Antitank missiles are (and are probably a much better investment than tanks, by the way). Long-range bombers are not. Air-defence interceptors are. Many types of weapon are ambivalent, capable of being used for either purpose; the intent matters. Aircraft carriers being used to hunt for submarines are probably defensive; aircraft carriers being used to bomb land targets probably are not. -- Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry