Defending North America

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
Rocket clouds
Defending North America by Mind Map: Defending North America

1. The Scrapping of the Avro Arrow

1.1. FOR

1.1.1. 1. With the launch of the Soviet Union's Sputnik, the first human built satellite, the Avro Arrow's purpose was now unclear. Thoughts shifted to the threat of ballistic missiles launched through space, and not from piloted bombers. Were they sufficient?

1.1.2. 2. Allied countries were making quicker gains in technology in fighter jets, they were producing them faster, with better flight range and higher altitude. And they were producing them faster than Canada could too.

1.1.3. 3. A.V. Roe (owner) tried to find a foreign buyer but was unable to do so due to the high cost and the narrow scope of its use. Other countries were more interested in pushing forward their own aircraft industries.

1.1.4. 4. With the total cost of the Arrow being 1.1 billion dollars, it was too risky and costly for a country the size of Canada.

1.2. AGAINST

1.2.1. 1. Once cancelled, thousand of people, including skilled engineers lost their jobs, which jeopardized the entire future of the Canadian Aviation industry.

1.2.2. 2. The cancellation marked Canada's strong reputation as being a leader in the world's military air force during previous World Wars.

1.2.3. 3. Not having this system of defense left Canada open to danger during the Cold War and left many feeling unsure and unsafe.

1.2.4. 4. The Avro Arrow could have been used to promote Canada's technological skill and leadership, but once cancelled all was destroyed from the aircrafts to models to blueprints.

2. Canada's Acceptance of Nuclear Weapons in 1963

2.1. FOR

2.1.1. 1. Having nuclear weapons would increase the reputation that Canada's military can fulfill its role in NATO and NORAD, and will increase the chances it can rightfully defend North America.

2.1.2. 2. Canada would have more control over defending their own borders vs. the Soviet Union and would not have to depend on the USA.

2.1.3. 3. Canada as a whole presented as a united front when making the decision to acquire Nuclear Weapons, even though originally the majority government was not supportive.

2.1.4. 4. Having nuclear power makes Canada more of a player in the world political scene, an image a more secure, safe and powerful nation.

2.2. AGAINST

2.2.1. 1. Having nuclear weapons would make the Soviet Union feel more threatened, that Canada would be more aggressive.

2.2.2. 2. Nuclear weapons are extremely expensive to build and maintain, much to the expense of the welfare of Canadian citizens.

2.2.3. 3. Too many risks come with nuclear power, such as disasters and the production of nuclear waste. Even the loss of human life on a huge scale.

2.2.4. 4. Residual nuclear waste can lead to great damage to the environment and animal life.

3. Canada's Role in the Cuban Missile Crisis

3.1. FOR

3.1.1. 1. Canada's stance was in support of the UN and the process of its decisions, trusting that it would make the right decision and defuse the situation.

3.1.2. 2. Canada thought that the US was perhaps being hasty and aggressive, and was not convinced that the Soviet Union had installed missiles in Cuba. They did not want to move forward without confirmation from UN.

3.1.3. 3. It was important for Canada to be independent of the US and not be influenced. Canada needed to present as fair and balanced in making its own decisions.

3.1.4. 4. The outcome was peaceful and did not result in nuclear war.

3.2. AGAINST

3.2.1. 1. This decision to not move as quickly and as aggressively as the US wanted hurt the Canadian- US relationship.

3.2.2. 2. Made the Canadian government look indecisive.

3.2.3. 3. The US lost trust in Canada as an ally and made for a difficult time with the Kennedy Administration after the crisis was over.

3.2.4. 4. 80% of Canadians when polled wanted Canada to be involved alongside the US. Was the government not listening to the people?