Now, with totalitarian socialism discredited, civilization is confronted with the dual threats of radical Islam and rogue regimes bent on acquiring weapons of mass destruction. The distinction between the rear and frontlines are now gone. Shadowy networks and state sponsors of terror possess the abilities to strike first on a magnitude unparalleled in the annals of modern warfare. September 11th was a sobering day and yet the tragedy would have been far greater if nineteen men had acquired a sufficient amount of anthrax, b-toxin, or VX nerve gas. Indeed, the architects of the first World Trade Center attack in 1993 were hoping to disperse a vaporized cloud of cyanide gas in the resulting explosion to suffocate whoever survived the expected collapse.

The war that was thrust upon us on September 11th will require new methods of planning, robust military strength and preparedness, and above all the resolve to see victory to the very end. Therefore, President Bush and his National Security Council have devised a new doctrine spelled out in the New National Security Strategy. Declaring the gravest danger exists at the crossroads of radicalism and technology the doctrine outlines the necessity of American power in dealing with twenty-first century threats. Of profound importance is the concept of preemption. The new strategy affirms, America will act against such emerging threats before they are fully formed. Preemption has traditionally not been apart of our war-fighting strategy but it has its precedent as well as its imperative. Twenty-one years ago, the Israeli air force unilaterally destroyed an Iraqi nuclear facility at Osirak temporarily thwarting Saddam Hussein's desire for nuclear weapons. Israel incurred the wrath of the so-called court of world opinion through the condemnation of UN resolutions. In retrospect, the world owes Israel a great debt. Equally, the Reagan administration's deployment of Pershing II missiles in Western Europe matched by a doctrine of first use also provoked the enmity of allies. However, improved U.S. nuclear deterrent capabilities and the willingness to use full force to preemptively blunt a Soviet thrust across the central plains of Europe proved decisive in winning the Cold War.

Europeans tend to forget such events. The same Europe that ridiculed Reagan has sneered at preemption, preferring multilateral diplomacy, and passing off policies of weakness as sophistication.
Declining defense budgets among EU nations will only serve to render once great powers, now irate middle powers, useless in the great struggles of this century. No matter. America, through the Bush doctrine has unequivocally declared that the defense of civilization will fall upon the shoulders of the soul superpower. The absence of popular consensus cannot and will not encumber the goal of pursuing vital national security interests. On Iraq, the administration has ensured that debate for the sake of debate and building coalitions, as an end without purpose does not happen, Hussein will eventually be disarmed. America cannot allow intolerable tyrants and terrorists to persist with their murderous designs. Europe was witness to the observable military buildup of the Third Reich and yet nothing was done until Hitler initiated the first move, the conquest of the continent. In the case of Afghanistan and al-Qaeda, over 11,000 terrorists went through bin Laden's training centers during the 1990s and yet the U.S. was more concerned with arresting individuals than preventative action. To wait again until another September 11th is hatched and executed possibly with Libyan biological weapons or Iraqi chemical agents is sheer madness, if not morally repugnant.

The deliberate and calculated choices of war and preemption are not easy ones to make for democracies. But we cannot escape the realities of an uncertain world and all of the accompanying dangers. We have paid too high a price for our complacency and self-satisfaction. If international peace and order are to be maintained, never again can its guarantor stand idly by.