Juno News - February 04, 2026


Does Canada need NUKES to stay sovereign？


Episode Stats

Length

15 minutes

Words per Minute

160.37944

Word Count

2,429

Sentence Count

184

Hate Speech Sentences

5


Summary

Defence Minister David McGinty has given a hard no to the idea of Canada acquiring nuclear weapons. This is a radical shift since Canada decided not to acquire nuclear weapons back in the 1950s, opting instead for using nuclear technology for peaceful purposes like energy. Our guest today is David Creighton, former Canadian Armed Forces Senior Public Affairs Officer and host of the YouTube show, Stand On Guard.


Transcript

00:00:00.000 Canada's defense minister has given a hard no to the idea of the country acquiring
00:00:09.880 nuclear weapons. David McGinty was responding to comments made this week by Canada's
00:00:15.440 former top soldier, retired General Wayne Ayer. This headline in the Globe and Mail,
00:00:22.640 Canada should keep our options open on acquiring nuclear weapons, former defense chief says.
00:00:30.000 Ayer spoke at a forum in Ottawa on Monday. He is quoted as saying, here in Canada,
00:00:36.160 let's keep our options open. We've got a good nuclear enterprise here. If conditions change,
00:00:42.800 we've got the civilian infrastructure. We've got the scientists. But when asked about it today,
00:00:49.360 McGinty flatly dismissed the idea as out of line with Canada's longstanding agreements not to have
00:00:56.400 a nuclear arsenal.
00:01:00.400 We have no intention to get it. Because Canada is a signatory to international
00:01:04.800 treaties which preclude us, number one, and Canada has been a non-nuclear
00:01:08.160 proliferation state for a long time, worked on previously as a lawyer. The point is that we
00:01:13.680 are going to continue to build conventional weapons. We're going to continue to rearm.
00:01:17.120 We're going to continue to reinvest. We're going to continue to rebuild our Canadian armed forces,
00:01:21.120 and we're doing... While General Ayer says nuclear weapons are a necessity if Canada wants true
00:01:28.000 independence, this quote, I would argue that we will never have true strategic independence
00:01:35.360 absent our own nuclear deterrent. It would represent a radical shift since Canada decided not to acquire
00:01:43.280 nuclear weapons back in the 1950s, opting instead for using nuclear technology for peaceful purposes like
00:01:49.840 energy. Ayer stepped down as chief of the defense staff back in 2024. Our guest today is David Creighton,
00:01:58.000 former Canadian Armed Forces senior public affairs officer and host of Stand On Guard, a YouTube show.
00:02:05.360 Welcome, David.
00:02:06.080 David Creighton, Always nice to be back, Mark.
00:02:08.880 Okay, so what's your take on this? We've got a retired, a former number one guy as far as the
00:02:15.120 Defense Department is concerned. A retired general saying that Canada really should consider going
00:02:22.400 with nuclear weapons. What do you make of this?
00:02:24.880 Well, I've been following General Ayer's career. I think Ayer is a very apt name for this man. He was a
00:02:32.960 horrible chief of defense staff. He was focused almost entirely on woke politics, on diversity, equity,
00:02:39.920 and inclusion. He was Mr. DEI King. That's what he was concerned about, not combat capability of the
00:02:46.160 Army, Air Force, and Navy. But I've got to say, I don't often agree with Pierre Trudeau and his
00:02:53.920 stand on nuclear weapons, but I think he was right about this. Canada does not need nuclear weapons, and
00:03:00.720 we should not be looking to own or possess or use nuclear weapons. We do not need more proliferation of
00:03:08.160 nuclear weapons. But you know, Mark, this goes back to what I say almost every day on my own channel.
00:03:14.560 The Canadian military, the Canadian Foreign Service has lost sight of Canada being not a nuclear power,
00:03:23.440 but being one of the powers in the world that does not need nuclear arms. Nuclear proliferation is a
00:03:30.160 dangerous, toxic concept. And if Canada gets nuclear weapons, well, who's next? We've never had nuclear
00:03:37.920 weapons. We have had nuclear weapons on our soil, but they were owned by the United States Air Force.
00:03:42.400 How do I know that? Because I grew up in a base that literally had nuclear weapons at there,
00:03:47.760 but we never owned them. The United States Air Force took them with them when they vacated the base.
00:03:54.720 But why are we talking about nuclear weapons in this context right now? And this is what really worries
00:04:00.080 me is I'm hearing generals, especially retired ones, but even ones who are serving in the Canadian Armed
00:04:06.560 Forces, serving in the United Kingdom Armed Forces, in the French military, openly talk about using
00:04:14.000 nuclear weapons in a war probably against Russia. Oh, that makes it okay. We want to nuke Russia.
00:04:22.640 Russia is much less of a threat today than it was at the height of the Cold War. But you know what? We had
00:04:27.360 generals in those days who were sane enough, most of them anyway, to say, no way are we ever going to
00:04:33.200 use nuclear weapons. We're not going to use a first strike. We are not going to attack the Soviet Union.
00:04:38.800 We are not going to foment a situation where the Soviet Union attacks us. Because nuclear war is
00:04:46.160 unwinnable. Nuclear war is the end of civilization. Nuclear war is unthinkable. And that's where we have
00:04:52.720 crossed that threshold, Mark, from nuclear war being unthinkable to, well, maybe we could win it. No, nobody
00:05:00.240 wins a nuclear war. We all win. Well, he's talked about instability, the geopolitical changes that are
00:05:06.000 happening. And he also seems to suggest that we should look at it because we can. Here's a direct quote.
00:05:12.800 Here in Canada, let's keep our options open. We've got a good nuclear enterprise here. And if conditions
00:05:19.440 change, we've got the civilian infrastructure, and we've got the scientists. So in other words,
00:05:24.880 let's do it because we can. Well, let's commit suicide because we can. That's always an option,
00:05:30.960 isn't it? That is not an argument. That's not even an irrational argument. It's not an argument at all,
00:05:38.000 just simply because we can do something. So we should do it. This is what worries me. Why do we need
00:05:43.840 nuclear weapons? Who are we defending ourselves against? The United States? Do we honestly
00:05:49.520 believe? Is this man occupying the same mental space as Mark Carney, who's suddenly viewing the
00:05:55.760 United States as our mortal threat, as a clear and persistent enemy? Are we actually going to go to
00:06:02.720 war with the United States with nuclear weapons? Or are we going to go to war with Russia, which has
00:06:07.120 more nuclear weapons than any other country on the face of the earth? So I think we would be out of that
00:06:13.200 contest very, very quickly, as with just about anybody. And nuclear war is a stupid, stupid
00:06:20.320 phenomenon. It is an absolutely ridiculous idea to even entertain. Canada does not need nukes.
00:06:28.000 We do not because we need to be part of the, not the nuclear club, but the responsible club of nations
00:06:34.640 that says nuclear proliferation is still a bad thing in 2026. It was a bad thing in 1956. It was a bad
00:06:42.720 thing in 1976, and it remains so today. Yeah. And I guess the more countries get it,
00:06:48.000 then you have other countries still saying they want to belong to the club. And so,
00:06:53.280 you know, Iran and countries like that say, me too. And next thing you know, everybody's got nukes,
00:06:59.040 elevating the risk, you know, multiple times over. But I want to read you another quote from
00:07:06.080 General Air, retired General Air. I would argue that we will never, meaning Canada, we'll never have
00:07:13.120 true strategic independence absent our own nuclear deterrent. So he's saying that our independence as
00:07:20.800 a country depends on getting nukes. That's the way I read this quote. What do you think?
00:07:24.960 I think that's extremely dangerous thinking. I think it's wrong. No, our independence does not
00:07:31.520 rest on having nuclear weapons. Otherwise, we would no longer be independent today because we've never
00:07:36.640 possessed owned nuclear weapons. That's never been our policy. But to suggest that we somehow
00:07:44.240 are going to be independent with the assistance of nuclear weapons. You know what that suggests to me,
00:07:48.800 Mark, is that we're going to rely on nukes for independence and not foreign policy, not diplomacy,
00:07:55.840 and not conventional arms. That has always been our policy. Because we don't have much of an armed
00:08:01.520 forces. I think you know that as much as I do. And I served for over 12 years in what is now, again,
00:08:07.440 the Royal Canadian Air Force. And I can tell you how many F-18 fighters we had operational any one time
00:08:13.840 is about 60 of them. Hasn't changed since then. We don't have very many battleships. We don't have
00:08:19.680 very many. In fact, we've given away all our tanks to Ukraine. We don't have a single tank left that's
00:08:24.400 operational. So how in the hell does this ex-general somehow think we're going to have a stockpile of
00:08:31.120 nuclear weapons and that's going to guarantee our sovereignty and independence? That is very dangerous
00:08:36.080 thinking. That is even more radical and more, shall we say, reactionary than General Curtis LeMay
00:08:42.960 at the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis who advised President John F. Kennedy, go ahead,
00:08:48.080 nuke Cuba. We're not going to have any fallout from that. We can do it. No. And thankfully, we had a
00:08:55.680 rational thinking president in John F. Kennedy who said, no, I think that's a pretty stupid option
00:09:01.200 because it's going to lead to World War III if we do that. And he said, no, let's try an embargo
00:09:06.320 first. Let's try other means before anybody invades Cuba with nuclear weapons or otherwise.
00:09:11.280 But, you know, General Eyre and others like him don't even have that capability of rational
00:09:18.000 thinking anymore because they just say, oh, immediately, nukes are the answer. Nukes are
00:09:22.960 the answer. The Yanks have them. The Ruskies have them. We need them too. And this is absolute
00:09:29.760 departure from traditional Canadian military thinking and from all the prime ministers we've
00:09:35.840 ever had who all agreed, no, we don't need to become part of the nuclear club. It's just going to make
00:09:40.160 the risk of nuclear war that much more probable. Yeah. I'm not telling how our American allies
00:09:46.240 would react to that. It goes through their roof and what they would do because a nuclear
00:09:53.680 armed Canada has never been part of the equation, whether as part of NATO or NORAD or as the United
00:10:00.880 States' closest military ally. And we can't lose sight of that, Mark. No matter what people like Mark
00:10:06.560 Kearney or General Eyre is saying, we are so joined at the hip to the United States as our
00:10:12.720 primary military ally, not just through NATO and NORAD, but through a continental defense agreement
00:10:17.680 that most Canadians don't even know exists. The United States is our chief principal ally.
00:10:23.040 So why are we talking about arming ourselves with nuclear weapons when they have always pledged to be
00:10:28.480 to hold a nuclear umbrella over Canada? They did that throughout the entire Cold War.
00:10:32.640 Well, here's why they're talking about it. He says that the world is moving
00:10:39.120 through a dangerous disordering phase. That's his word, his phrase, disordering phrase, in which old
00:10:45.760 norms are eroding, alliances are under strain, and the risk of miscalculation is rising.
00:10:52.800 And just reading on with this Globe and Mail story, in that environment, he argued Canada must build
00:10:58.560 both strategic independence, the ability to act without allies, and strategic autonomy, the freedom
00:11:05.120 to align with or diverge from partners on its own terms. So asked whether NATO can still be relied upon
00:11:15.200 as U.S. support port waivers, Mr. Eyre urged Canadians not to blindly discard the alliance, arguing
00:11:22.880 that containing Russian expansionism in Eastern Europe remains in Canada's national interest.
00:11:28.960 So that's the context under which he suggested that Canada should not close the book on getting nukes.
00:11:38.720 You're buying it?
00:11:39.680 No, not at all, because that is particularly and specifically why acquiring nuclear weapons would be
00:11:46.800 not just problematic, but nightmarish, because we're living in this world that is increasingly unstable.
00:11:52.960 The possibility of a nuclear war would escalate if Canada gets nuclear weapons. We can't defend
00:12:00.240 ourselves against a nuclear attack without involving other nations and getting into the Third World War.
00:12:06.640 The emphasis has to be with avoiding the Third World War. And that, of course, never seems to be on the
00:12:13.360 book. These generals are lusting after conflict. I've never seen generals so in love with the idea
00:12:20.560 of a war, specifically with Russia. No, we should not be telling Russia what to do with Ukraine.
00:12:26.720 Russia has no desire to take over all of Eastern Europe. They've got lots of land,
00:12:31.680 and they're quite satisfied with what they have. Ukraine is not a vital interest of the United States
00:12:38.320 or Canada. It has never been. It is in the Russian sphere of influence. And I think Ukraine can remain
00:12:44.800 independent, autonomous, but it has to remain neutral and never become part of NATO. That's reality.
00:12:51.840 And General Aaron never gets that. He never, never even wants to get that because he's itching for
00:12:58.000 conflict with Russia, even more so than the Cold War generals wanted to wipe out the Soviet Union,
00:13:03.760 which, of course, was never going to happen without us being wiped out at the same time.
00:13:09.360 Yeah, you make it all to be sort of a Dr. Strangelove type character.
00:13:13.040 That's exactly what he is. That's exactly it.
00:13:16.400 Dr. Strangelove, yeah. Very funny or very strange. But he's not getting much of a listening audience
00:13:27.040 in government. The defense minister already dismissed it out of hand. But I guess when a guy
00:13:33.360 who had his job, had that key job, comes out and says this very, I mean, he was only in that position,
00:13:39.920 like 2024, he stepped down. And here he is advocating in a way for Canada.
00:13:46.880 Absolutely, Mark. This is why I'm taking this seriously. I'm saying, you know, some halfwit
00:13:51.920 made this statement. This is not Corporal Bloggans of the 22nd Regiment making this,
00:13:58.560 oh, I think Canada should have nukes. This is a former chief of defense staff. We don't have very
00:14:03.280 many full generals, four-star generals in Canada. We only have one at a time. That's the chief of
00:14:08.480 defense staff. He occupied that office for, what, three, four years. So yeah, I have to take him
00:14:13.440 seriously. But I can't take these ideas seriously. Because this is insanity, and this is bad for Canada,
00:14:19.040 and it's bad for the world. How do people access your content online?
00:14:24.880 Well, you can find just about everything at Creighton's Right News. And you can see my daily
00:14:29.840 show on YouTube. It's Creighton's Right. And the show itself is Stand on Guard, which I continue to do.
00:14:37.680 David Creighton, thank you so much for coming on the show. I appreciate it.
00:14:40.400 Always a pleasure, my friend. David Creighton. And if you enjoyed this show,
00:14:44.880 consider supporting independent journalism by going to junonews.com backslash straight up.
00:14:52.880 So supporting this show helps us stay on the air, and we'd really appreciate that. Thank you very much.