Yes, teribus, I'm well aware of the fact that Canada was being supposedly "protected" by the NATO "nuclear umbrella". My point was, however, that the national character of Canada is different, in that it has never been a very aggressive country (or society), and has never been much inclined to arm itself heavily, except when obliged to by participation in the two World Wars...and, I suppose, in 1812-1814 when attacked by the USA.

I very much doubt that Canada would have been inclined to produce its own nuclear weapons in the absence of NATO. In fact, it's almost unimaginable. Believe me, we've got better things to spend our money on...like health care, roads, schools, police stations, fire departments, waterworks, and so on.

I have never considered Canada to have been genuinely protected by its membership in NATO, but on the contrary endangered by it...in event that a major conflict had arisen between NATO and the Warsaw Pact, for instance.

Canada is a country that historically has not gone around threatening other people, and accordingly has not been threatened by them either, except when drawn into large world conflicts through her alliances with the U.K.

Be that as it may, I am glad that Canada participated in the 2nd World War. As for the 1st World War, I believe we would have been far better advised to stay out of it...but given the British Empire tradition at the time, that was obviously not going to happen. A lot of the Quebecois tended to see it my way at the time.

- LH