The Policy of Nuclear Deterrence

We are facing a nuclear threat from both Iran and North Korea. Iran just had an election in June and "re-elected" Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as president. Ahmadinejad is very dangerous. He wants to wipe Israel off the face of the map. There's been reports that Iran is developing nuclear weapons and they could have one developed very soon. It's been reported today by NBC that North Korea test-fired four short-range missiles today. There have been U.N. sanctions already imposed on North Korea.

With the nuclear threats we're facing from both countries, what is the Obama adminstration going to do? Is he going to try to be diplomatic or apologize for America's past sins. What is the solution?

Sean Hannity, who does a daily radio talk show as well as hosts "Hannity" on FOX news during the week, has an interesting slogan which says, "What would Reagan do?" I believe Ronald Reagan was the best of the last several presidents we had as well as the best president in my lifetime. I don't craft my political philosophy from "What would Reagan do?" Even though Reagan was the best president in my lifetime, he also made some mistakes as president. However, I've been thinking about this situation with North Korea and I was thinking on how Reagan would handle this situation.

I believe if Reagan were president and Kim Jong Il was test-firing short-range missiles, I believe Reagan would implement the policy of "deterrence". I believe the solution should be nuclear deterrence. I believe Reagan would say to Kim Jong Il, "If you fire a missile anywhere in the Western Hemisphere, you will have some nuclear missiles at your doorstep and we'll immediately fire them and you'll be toast". That's how I believe Reagan would handle that situation. And he would be right.

The policy of "nuclear deterrence" is what we should use against these rogue countries which include both Iran and North Korea. We need to keep a stockpile of nuclear weapons on hand and we should be ready to use them for retaliatory purposes if a country threatens to use one on the United States or in the Western Hemisphere. These rogue countries wouldn't be so brazen to launch missiles if they knew there country would be up in smoke. However, we have a weak administration that thinks you can engage in diplomacy with people such as Ahmadinejad and Jong Il. The truth is these dictators are ruthless. You have to inflict damage to stop potential nuclear threats. Diplomacy can work in some situations, but not with such madmen as Jong Il and Ahmadinejad.

The policy of deterrence was used to end the Cold War back during the 1980's. Reagan upheld that policy. He built our military arsenal and aided Afghanistan and Latin American countries in their fight against communism. If the United States once again would re-assert itself and show we mean business to the rest of the world by destroying these rogue countries' nuclear capability when they're out of line, we wouldn't be facing these nuclear threats from Iran and North Korea. They know we have a puppet for a president so they can say or do what they want without any fear of retaliation.

Let me ask a question. Why did our judicial system give the death penalty to murders and cold-blooded killers? Why did we at one time institute public hangings? The purpose was to deter crime. It was to deter future criminals from committing acts of murder. At one time the crime rate used to be much lower. We need to apply the same act of deterrence towards these rogue, agressor nations. I'll close with this adage, "You have to fight fire with fire."