Only 11 nuclear bombs to 'take out' Canada

The Ottawa Citizen ^ | 7 January 2002 | David Pugliese

[RicocheT]

Computer simulation aims to raise questions about huge stockpiles of nuclear warheads.

A new computer program developed for nuclear weapons researchers in the U.S. probably won't give Canadians much of a sense of security in these days of global tension and uncertainty. The software simulated the destruction of Canada with as few as 11 nuclear warheads.

Read the rest of the article here: Click Here

[RicocheT]

A new computer program has determined that it would take only eleven nuclear missiles to change the Great White North from a frozen, uninhabited land with little human population into a frozen, uninhabited land with little human population and three-headed rabbits.

Ok, so the article REALLY says that it would only take eleven nukes to eliminate Canda as a country.

My question is, why'd they model Canada in the first place? I don't think we've waved a musket at them since the War of 1812. Talk about holding a grudge...

[Billthedrill]

They've been bitter since Gretzky. What can you say?

[LibKill]

Eliminate Canada? Hmmmmmmmmm....

[PeoplesRepublicOfWashington]

The Canucks claim to have won the War of 1812.

[Hunble]

Dosn't that work out to be a single ICBM with a MIRV warhead?

Of course, the obvious question is: why bother?

[Poohbah]

They're still independent, despite America's best efforts. That's a win.

Incidentally, America LOST the War of 1812. Had England opted to go for it, they could have reclaimed her former colonies, but they were rather more worried about that Bonaparte chap.

[ken5050]

Ya can't bomb ice....

[archy]

Even better would be a poll to determine whether most folks figure such a course would be desirable. After all, it's onle eleven nukes, and we've got plenty.

I can certainly think of targets more immediately deserving though, but Canada is admittedly close at hand. And nuking them would give the rest of the world good reason to be more cautious about antagonizing the US.

[Publius6961]

11?
Why so many I wonder.

[Straight Vermonter]

Think that might get them a bit more interested in NMD?

[Republic of Texas]

The real question is, if Canada were eliminated, would anyone notice?

[Mr. Lucky]

WOW! Beachfront property in North Dakota.

[headsonpikes]

So 11 missiles will kill 25% of the population.

I think the remaining 75% might be meaner than you're used to.

Unless you're used to hockey. ;^)

[Leisler]

Where's Canada?

[RightWhale]

America LOST the War of 1812

So the Redcoats burned DC to the ground. So what? No big deal. It wasn't much of a war anyway. Just a misunderstanding. Remember New Orleans.

[randog]

Why so many I wonder...

Lot's of French blood...they'd surrender after the first bomb hit.

[LouD]

Just as long as we station some Patriot missiles around the Molson brewery, I think we'll be OK...

[RadioAstronomer]

Take out all of Canada? 11 warheads! ROFL!!! Check the TD range of even a 1-megaton warhead, multiply it by 11, calculate the total area of Canada and compare the two. Even if they were the "dirty" bombs of the 50's, the fallout would only be severe for the first two weeks and hardly noticeable at the end of 14 weeks. Take it out politically? Maybe, but destroy the landmass, hardly!

[Poohbah]

Like I said, if England had not been distracted by Continental misadventures, we probably would have lost our independence--de facto if not de jure.

[Poohbah]

The point is that everything of significant economic value in Canada is concentrated in 11 warhead's worth of coverage.