EGAD! Obama's Nuclear Terrorism Policy

Let's see. Last June, President Bush takes North Korea off the list of terrorist countries, and says that progress is now "promising." Early in the Obama administration, North Korea demonstrates its ballistic missile capability by sending one over Japanese airspace into the Pacific ocean (hint, hint: look what we can do, Japan!). Yesterday, North Korea conducts another nuclear bomb test, in defiance of UN Security Council resolutions and sanctions.

So, what does our President do amidst all of this nuclear provocation? He reduces funding for America's missile defense program, citing the fact that the costs are too high for "unproven" technology. This is a grand old Democrat Talking Point, dating to almost 30 years ago (!!) when Ronald Reagan proposed SDI, the so-called "Star Wars" missile defense program. At least President Obama’s recent actions verify that Democrats actually do believe their own Talking Points, despite, you know, 20 years of solid evidence that missile defense works and is a fearful technology to those who would conduct nuclear terrorism against its neighbors (x-ref the decline and fall of the Soviet Union).

So with respect to North Korea and other newby nuclear terrorists in this world, what are we to do? Deterrence is the only option left, which returns us to the pre-Reagan years and the doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction, or MAD for short. Except in these modern times the doctrine would be something like EGAD, Enemy God-Awful Destruction, which is only half as bad as MAD because it only annihilates the other guy.

It's funny the way Liberals were always so supportive of the MAD doctrine. I think sometimes how different everything would have been if Liberals had only been able to come up with a good Talking Point denouncing MAD, perhaps something like this: It is abhorrent "that we rely on the ability to 'wipe each other out' as the means of keeping the peace. We must do better, and we can." -Ronald Reagan, first Summit with Gorbachev, as recounted in the Memoirs of George Shultz.

But EGAD is where we are, so I have a proposal to finely tune the doctrine so as to make the deterrence value more transparent to offending governments.

Continue .....
Japan provides a nice example of what I am talking about. Japan already enjoys the benefit of our nuclear umbrella under various treaties wherein we are committed to retaliate with our nuclear arsenal, if necessary, if Japan is attacked.

I think we should publicly announce that, if Japan is attacked with nuclear weapons, then we will respond against the offending country by targeting every legislative and executive political leader with one or more ICBM's. We might even publish publicity photos of mock nuclear missiles with, say, Kim Jong Il’s name painted on the nose. At the same time as this announcement, we should blanket the country with leaflets, a la World War II, advising the citizens that if their government should launch nuclear missiles against a neighboring country, they will have exactly 6 hours to move at least 150 miles away from any political leader to avoid the primary blast area. We might also distribute memos to that affect to every government bureaucrat, military enlisted man and officer, secret service type protection personnel, secretaries, limousine drivers and anyone else who happens to work with any political leader on a day to day basis.

This should have the nice effect of isolating the political leadership from any help in carrying out their nefarious purposes. Imagine Kim Jong Il down in the bunker, waddling around trying to figure out which button to push to send bombs at Japan.

In the face of this, I imagine that even Ahmahdinejad and the Mullahs might have a little trouble getting help annihilating Israel, even though they tell us that all Iranians look forward to dying in a world wide apocalypse. That may be true, but I think lower level officials and citizens would favor running for the hills when confronted with mad actions by their mad rulers.