26. Urges the Council to discuss with its US counterparts how to make a positive approach to future Non-Proliferation Treaty Preparatory Committees (NPT PrepComs) as a first opportunity to strengthen the global non-nuclear proliferation regime in the run-up to the NPT Review Conference in 2010; underlines in this context the need to discuss at the summit a number of nuclear disarmament initiatives based on the ‘13 practical steps’ agreed to unanimously at the 2000 NPT Review Conference; reiterates its view that, inter alia, such steps break the deadlock on the adoption of a verifiable Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty and facilitate the ...[+++]entry into force of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty; points out that this should also include the non-modernisation of nuclear arsenals in the US, France and the UK, and the withdrawal of US nuclear warheads from European territory; urges the Council to take a leadership role in starting negotiations on the ‘nuclear weapons convention’ aimed at globally banning all nuclear weapons;

17. Urges the Council to discuss with their US counterparts how to make a positive approach to the NPT prepcom that starts in Vienna on 30 April 30 as the first chance to strengthen the global non-nuclear proliferation regime in the run-up to the NPT Review Conference in 2010; urges the Council to veto the US-India agreement on nuclear cooperation in relevant fora (e.g. the Nuclear Supplier Group) and criticises the ongoing French-Indian negotiations on the same matter; underlines in this context the need to present on that occasion a number of nuclear disarmament initiatives based on the ‘13 practical steps’ agreed to unanimously at t ...[+++]he 2000 NPT Review Conference; reiterates its view that, inter alia, such steps break the deadlock on the adoption of a verifiable Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty and facilitate the entry into force of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty; points out that this should also include the non-modernisation of nuclear arsenals in the US, France and the UK and the withdrawal of US nuclear warheads from European territory;

If it only had a high-explosive warhead, it wouldn't really do the most terrible damage; if it had a nuclear warhead, that would be bad news.

Suppose someone puts a missile up and you assume it has a nuclear warhead. It's in a suborbital flight, it's in the atmosphere somewhere, and you knock it down.

to sign the CTBT and move to ratify it; to contribute actively from now on towards opening negotiations in the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva for a treaty banning the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons; to exert stringent controls over export of material, equipment and technology controlled under the Nuclear Suppliers Group Trigger and Dual Use Lists and the Missile Technology Control Regime Annex; to make a commitment neither to assemble nuclear devices nor deploy them on delivery vehicles and cease development and deployment of ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear warheads.

If a nuclear warhead was sent by a jet from somewhere toward my city of Edmonton, let's say, or a nuclear bomb is being delivered by a jet plane, if a nuclear warhead is being delivered by a cruise missile, in both cases, Canada is directly involved in the decision through NORAD, because we participate in NORAD on those two delivery systems.