Keep track of all your to-dos for school with this template. You can turn all assignments into tasks using the task widget, set priorities, deadlines and mark progress.
1.1. For: The Diefembaker government said the project was becoming too expensive and was no longer worth the money.
1.2. For: Some say it was a mix of politics, timing, and bad luck.
1.3. For: The launch of Sputnik changed the focus for militaries on both sides of the Cold War, away from conventional bombers and towards atmospheric weapons like ballistic missiles.
1.4. For: Politics were changing because of the North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD.
1.5. Against: There was a huge loss as to what the Avro could have done in the future.
1.6. Against: Many of the special projects at Avro were ahead of their time (i.e., had plans for a lunar rover, flying saucer, and even a hovering truck.
1.7. Against: It could have had a positive impact on commercial aircraft.
2. For/Agaisnt Canada's Role in the Cuban Missle Crisis
2.1. For: Diefenbaker agrees to put Canadian troops on alert, as all other NATO members supported a proposed blockade and agreed to aid the U.S. if an attack occurred.
2.2. For: Canada's fleet assisted the U.S. Navy. Its involvement was important because it allowed the U.S. to deploy its naval assets further south and this participate directly in the 60 ship naval quarantine of Cuba.
2.3. For: Canada's Navy created a "submarine screen" in the northwest Atlantic to defend against Soviet subs.
2.4. For: Nuclear Weapons in Cuba could reach territories in Canada.
2.5. Against: Diefenbaker's agreement on putting Canadian troops on alert was after the climax of the crisis.
2.6. Against: Diefenbaker believed the Kennedy, through his poor handling of the crisis had played a high stakes game and needlessly risked the fate of the world.
2.7. Against: Canada was expected to fall in line with American foreign policy because Canada's military forces were expected to go on immediate war alert status, but Diefenbaker refused to do so emphasizing the need for U.N. intervention.
2.8. Against: Canada also refused to join the organization of American States.
3. For/Against Canada's Acceptance of Nuclear Weapons in 1963
3.1. For: American Burmarc missiles would have been placed at missile sites along the Canadian border, which would have downed any incoming Soviet bombers over vulnerable civilian areas. by moving missile sites to more northern Canadian locations, any downed aircraft or missiles would be far away from populated areas.
3.2. For: It created a sense of security for many Canadians, knowing that we had some sort of defence mechanism against Soviet attacks.
3.3. For: The Avro project was too costly and ineffective at meeting Canada's security needs. Bomarc missiles were a more reasonable route, but would be ineffectual without the use of nuclear heads.
3.4. For: Established a united front with the U.S. not only with NORAD but any actions considered to be Anti-American would have been costly to international relations and trade.
3.5. Against: People felt that by giving up on the Avro project they were effectively destroying Canadian innovation for the sake of convenience and supporting American industry.
3.6. Against: Many feared that this would result in contributing to global suicide; paranoia was rampant.
3.7. Against: Diefenbaker's cabinet was very divided on the issue and spread an image that the Conservatives lacked solidarity. Due to the revolt on the issue, the Diefenbaker government was forced to call an election and was replaced with Lester B. Pearson's minority Liberal government.
3.8. Against: Foreign Affairs Minister, Howard Green, felt that to accept nuclear weapons in Canada was hypocritical and against foreign policy, as our involvements with the United Nations were striving towards global disarmament. Many Canadian citizens felt the same way.
