Of course, there were many authors of that report. I would just refer to the report and what it says, with respect.
They weren't talking about the level of the threat, in the report. They were talking about the seat at the table, the fact that NORTHCOM has the command, and why there's a “double-hatted” factor at the operational level. Canada can't participate in that. Therefore, if we did get into missile defence, we might get “double-hatted”, and we could participate in that as well. However, they go on to say in the report that we shouldn't interpret that to mean that it would necessarily be a meaningful role.
Really getting down to brass tacks, if a missile, an intercontinental ballistic missile, were launched towards North America, we are talking about a very short period of time and the United States' making decisions on its most vital interests. I suggest to you that there is no indication in the history of how the United States responds to these things that they would enable someone else to weigh in, in a way that would prevent them from acting the way they deemed they had to act. We would be lucky to be advised.
That's where I'm coming from on that point.