At War III - Homeland Truths.(Brief Article)

September 11 was the day that terrorists attacked America. September 12 was the day that the New York Times and others began using the attack to argue against building a missile-defense system. Their case had a superficial appeal: This horrific attack had not required a ballistic missile. And missile-defense critics had always warned about the terroristic possibilities of, say, a nuclear "suitcase bomb." But the September 11 attacks gave missile defense a political boost-Senate Democrats dropped their objections to Bush's missile-defense spending plans-and, on further reflection, should help the intellectual argument for it as well.

Donald Rumsfeld's emphasis on "homeland defense," ridiculed so often as a retrograde, isolationist impulse, certainly seems prescient now. Of course, no one would have predicted the form of the recent attacks, which didn't come via ballistic missile or suitcase. We have been reminded that attacks are often unexpected. So we probably shouldn't believe the blithe assurances of missile-defense critics that no foreign leader will ever be "crazy" enough to threaten or launch a ballistic-missile attack on the United States. ...