Nuclear weapons should be used on Canada

I strongly believe that nuclear weapons should be used on Canada for the following reasons.

* Canada has milk in bags. This is clearly fishy. Why would anybody want their milk to be in bags? It's no more efficient, in fact, it's down right insanity. Do you want to support insanity?

* Canadian girls are often more attractive than American girls. Most Americans can see those girls, perhaps look at their photos over the internet, but they can not date them- however attractive they might be. This harms American productivity, and should be stopped.

* Canada is very cold, several nuclear weapons would, at least temporarily, rise temperatures in some regions- specifically the ones in which the bombs were going off in.

* Maple Syrup is very important for Canadians, while being highly overrated. Syrup tastes way too syrupy, unless it's in a soft drink.

* Their flag has a leaf on it. Enough said.

* They steal our jobs.

* Their heads look weird, just watch south park.

* They have no real army, so they're not much of a threat to us anyways

* New photos could be taken of the blast, which would look awesome in fine art museums.

* The blasts would melt a lot of the snow, this snow would melt into water- which could be collected and shipped elsewhere to help with the water shortages around the world.

* Nothing very big has happened in the news for a while, this would be some great entertainment.

I must reiterate my point that Canada should be completely destroyed VIA nuclear weapons.

An interesting argument, DucoNihilum. Interesting indeed.

However, I would submit that your argument is faulty. Dropping nuclear weapons on Canada would prove to be counterproductive to the U.S.

First, nuking Canada would create a massive radioactive wasteland, replete with black rain (similar to that which fell on Hiroshima for over 12 hours in August of 1945), nuclear fallout, and nuclear winter throughout most of the northern half of the United States. At the very least, every single state that borders Canada would be destroyed; Washington, Montana, North Dakota, Minnesota, Michigan, New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, etc . . . and likely at least the next level of states bordering those to the south. This would not be beneficial to our economy, much less our social and political structures.

Second, nuking Canada would destroy natural resources that we could otherwise use via more peaceful means; trees, fresh water, minerals, Canadian Bacon, farmland and rich planting soil, and similar primary resources. This would likewise be a significant detriment to not only the American people, but to other nation states that trade with and benefit from Canadian exports.

Third, the political fallout from the nuclear obliteration of Canada would be arguably as damaging as the physical act itself. The United States would lose every single allie it has in the world, and would likely expose itself to attacks by Canada's (and, prior to said nuclear attack, our) allies via invasion or similar nuclear exchange. So if the nuclear fallout did not destroy the U.S., the act would inevitably destroy the the country economically, politically, and socially in an international context. This is assuming the U.S. is not simply nuked in response instead.

So, my child, you must come up with a better rationale for nuking Canada.

I eagerly anticipate my opponent's next posture.