What Will We Do the Day After?

The odd news out of Boston today of hoax electronic devices planted as a publicity stunt, but paralyzing the city, should be a wake up call.

What will we do when the day arrives that an evil device isn't a hoax?

It will be too late to debate pre-emptive action or go to the U.N. September 11th was a nightmare for most Americans ( liberals in denial excepted). But as bad as that day was, a nuke exploding in a major American city will make 9/11 look like a picnic.

What are we doing about it NOW that would prevent a nuclear holocaust that might be but the beginning of a worldwide conflagration?

Newt Gingrich was thinking about just that in a lecture he delivered to the Herzliya Conference in Israel last week.

The Threat of a Nuclear Iran
By Newt Gingrich
Real Clear Politics
January 30, 2007

...Three nuclear weapons constitute a second Holocaust. Enemies are explicit in their desire to destroy us. We are sleepwalking through this as if diplomatic engagement will create a fiesta where we will all love one another. The terrorist threats are larger and more formidable than the political system in Israel or the US can cope with. We need a grand strategy similar to the Kenan telegram which formed US policy for the duration of the Cold War, and the 68 plan developed by Nitze in 1950.

We lack the language and goals to address the new environment along with the speed and intensity to counter the contemporary threats. If we have no strategy we will need to be intellectually honest to consider the next step once two cities have been destroyed. My grandchildren are in greater danger than I was throughout the Cold War. What stages are you in Israel going to take if tomorrow morning Jerusalem, Haifa and Tel Aviv would be destroyed? Similarly the US needs to consider what policies it would advance if in twenty four hours, Atlanta, Boston and San Francisco were destroyed. These threats will become even more imminent in two or five years time.
...
The US should have as an explicit goal, regime change in Iran, as its constitution makes them a revolutionary regime. In 2006 even the Department of State which seeks to deny the nature of reality, noted that Iran is a leading sponsor of terror. What I need is something that will be similar to Reagan's Replacement strategy in Iran. The current unrest in Iran will facilitate this.
...
In conflict one side wins and another loses. If I have to choose between surviving and being killed, I will choose to kill the enemy and to survive. Peace comes as a result for victory and not as a substitute for victory.