North Korea and Iran's WMD Potential

These stories come on the heels of our President bowing to and kissing the hand of a Saudi leader, proclaiming that America will never be at war with Islam (Who said we were? I thought it was Al-Qaeda, an extremist group we wanted to get?) and that Islam has made major contributions to the world at large (um, can anybody name one?). While all this very dangerous pandering goes on, Michelle Obama is working hard to undermine the notion of first ladies being dignified by trying to upstage her husband in photo ops, and just generally seeming too loud, too mannish, too much of everything boorish Americans are known for when they visit foreign countries.

The Heritage Foundation just launched (no pun intended) a film documenting the threat of North Korea, with their newly-acquired nuclear missiles, the likelihood they will send one our way, and the dire need for our President to wise up and defend us against these attacks. The film is called "33 Minutes," the title being taken from the amount of time it would take a ballistic missile fired from North Korea to reach a city in the United States (including the states of Alaska and Hawaii).

Imagine 9/11, except instead of planes crashing into buildings there is a nuclear warhead that explodes in the air over New York City. Don't think about that too long.

The following is a synopsis from www.askheritage.org (the Heritage Foundation):

" North Korea remains one of the worst proliferators of missile and weapons technology. North Korea already has a missile, called a Taepodong 2, which can potentially reach parts of the U.S. including Alaska and Hawaii. And North Korea shares technology and expertise with Iran and they watch each other’s missile programs to see what they can get away with from the international community and the U.S. And while North Korea claims that the test was merely a peaceful satellite, a "satellite" launch is still a ballistic missile test, violating U.N. sanctions, since it tests all the key components of launching a long-range missile.

Twenty six years ago during the Cold War, Ronald Reagan outlined to the nation his vision of a Strategic Defense Initiative that would protect America from incoming missiles before they exploded in U.S. cities. Since that time, a missile defense system has been established, and the United States has performed 35 successful tests on our existing system. But the system is by no means complete. More bases are needed, and sufficient funds have to be allocated to the existing system for proper upkeep. If the United States does not build a missile defense base in Europe, we will have no defense against an Iranian missile.

Yet, despite the urgent need for missile defense, the current Administration plans to cut funding for the program by 16 percent. Missile defense is not costly, at only two percent of the Department of Defense budget. In fact, if you add up every cent spent on missile defense over the past 30 years, it is still less than the cost of the damage done by the planes on 9-11.

The threat hasn't changed; the science hasn't changed; the need hasn't changed. A ballistic missile can reach and obliterate a U.S. city from anywhere in the world in just 33 minutes. And North Korea has both nuclear arms, and missile capability. Now is not the time to significantly cut and rollback a missile defense plan that has been in place for years to protect us."

Here's the video. Visit www.33minutes.com for more information.



Hot Air then posted this story about Iran's having acquired materials needed to build nuclear weapons. The lead-in paragraph:

"Manhattan’s District Attorney plans to unveil an indictment of a Chinese national on 118 counts relating to the transfer of technology and material for nuclear weapons to Iran. Several New York City banks unwittingly took part in the vast laundering ring, which allowed Iran to acquire critical material for its nuclear-weapons program."

I can almost hear the wimpy U.N. in the background: "But, you promised us you'd play nice! You [Ahmadinejad] came to preach to us about how friendly you were toward the west. We just don't get it..."

That's possibly the understatement of the year. But don't lose hope yet; we still have a few good men in Congress for whom defense is a major concern and they will drag their feet as best they can to slow the passing of our imminent global drawdown. In the meantime, you'd profit from acquiring firearms of some kind, since owning one with most likely a) become illegal or, b) have attached to the privilege firearms taxes so high no one will be able to afford one (let alone two).