Its as simple as Iran "maybe being honest" about the nukes instead of
being WHINERS. They need to man up and grow a pair. I see another goddam
sadaam stunt here.

we have a huge storm fixing to hit my area!!! I am going to be offline
instead of getting lit up like christmas here!!!

Have a great day ya'll!!!!!

I am going to look at that jane. Thanks for the lead.

Not relevant to the original question but relevant to a comment...

Canada and the US share a common border. Washington DC and New York
city are prime targets on the NE coast of the US as are others in that
area.

What part of Canada would NOT be hurt if say a nuke was dropped on NY?
Do you not think Canada would be involved then?

It actually behooves both countries to try to stay in-line with each
other on these matters/issues and surely both countries have a lot at
stake. I would say that the SE portion of Canada is just as important as
the rest of Canada so saying the NW Canada lands would be OK if that
happened just is not an option and the same goes for the US. Any nuke
dropped would have an inpact on both countries.

Maybe the Canadian PM is gearing up for what he knows could happen and
keeping in line with current events, I'd say he was smart to do so.

.02

You could very well be right with that thinking verb.

OK, ths moved quite a bit since yesterday! Don't want to be out of
sequence, but need to go back to a comment addressed to me by 'Jane..'
on my first reply.

'Jane...',

Being CRITICAL yes! Being CONDESCENDING, absolutely not!!!

I addressed the opening question, not the person raising it!!! To be
condescending is to belittle a PERSON, in order to establish some form
of domination or superiority. I did no such thing.

I suggested that the opening ‘question’ was, IMO, an affirmation, and
thus was ‘closed’ to debate the very interesting question it raised.

I went to invite you to debate the question after taking a step back:
AN INVITATION IS NOT AN IMPOSITION. If you didn’t accept my invitation,
you had all the latitude to decline it respectfully.

Here is what I said in my first reply to your opening statement; …and
my invitation still stands. Should you decline, I will respect that.
Should you accept, it trust it shall be very interesting for both of
us.

“… If I'm mistaken (I often am), I apologize, and simply ask you to
re-phrase your question, leaving out those most obvious leading
statements.

... Of course this is a sincere invitation to debate a VERY interesting
and extremely sensitive WORLD 'situation' that you are bringing up,
which SHOULD BE of great concern to all citizens of this planet!!!

While waiting for your reply, and because this is a huge topic, I'll
invite the two of us to take a step back, and approach this thing from
an objective perspective! (no sides as to whom the good or bad guys are
beforehand)”


Again very respectfully, and without a trace of prejudice

Actually vert... As one who knows about predicting fallout from a
nuclear explosion, and prevailing winds, a nuclear explosion, while
there are certain circumstances and locations within the US that fallout
from a nuclear blast would affect Canada. New York is not one except
under rare conditions. Most of the dominate air flow in the N eastern Us
comes from Canada and does not flow into Canada. There are the rare
occasions when this might be the case but they are very rare indeed.
Also if Alquida were to deliver a nuke into the US, it would not come
from a missle.

The most damage to the largest area and pop of a nuclear explosion would
be to set such a device off in the Shannadoa National Park.

I think I see where you're going JaneBond.

Why impose sanctions that will be
ignored anyway?

Also, Iran is holding British sailors
hostage because it claims they were
in Iranian waters.

Britain disputes that.

And, let's not forget, Iran is allied
with Hezbollah, a terrorist organization.

Since it has proved it cannot be trusted
in the past, why should it be trusted now?

If the mullahs were smart, they would
arrange for the immediate release of
the British hostages and tell
Ahmadinejad to cool his rhetoric.

There was an extended hostage situation
in the 70s that involved Iran and I don't
think they want a repeat of that.

They should also give complete transparency
to the IAEA on their nuclear program.

Hey Fanta, Yeah, I did think of that but then again, you never know what
THEY are thinking. As far that goes, if they wanted to involve Canada,
Buffalo (Niagara Falls) would be a place to make a big boom. Prevailing
winds or not, think of what that would do.

Iran is pushing the envelope with eveyone now so whatever happens with
this hostage situation (like the last) will have to be their advantage
or they will not release those folks. Sad, but true. They played the
waiting game with the world then and probably will again.

What makes anyone think Iran is capable of telling the truth? Bringing
the eyes of the world around to them is a way of bringing the powers
that be into line with what they want. Their timing could not be better
for these actions. While everyone is looking to them and asking for
their mercy (and they have none) they will be laughing and scheming.

Iran does not care about sanctions.

Thank you mnhiker....bang on. I apologize if my OP was not clearer. I
was posting what the information on hand was, then asked the question as
to why would the UN pose further sanction's. To avoid redundancy, I did
post further on March 31st. Some are right in that being Canadian, what
happens in and to the US does affect us here and is of concern, more so
if people in other countries have their fingers on the little green
button.