How many times have we heard the phrase "Then end of _____ has come" ?  You can fill in "blank" with any number of political issues over the past years:  poverty, welfare, racism, at the list goes on and on.  It has been used so often by our leaders that I think most of us don't even hear it anymore.   President Johnson thought is great-society would put an end to poverty.   Clinton said the "Welfare as we know it is over (or ended).  Obama, in his trying to mended his perceived "wounds" with other countries, has made similar statements as well.   We thought that with the fall of the Soviet Union that nuclear war was somehow averted but now with more unstable countries like Iran and North Korea working to develop these weapons we now almost pine for the Cold-War years again. 

    Today, Obama is trying the same approach as Jimmy Carter did back in the 70's.  By telling the world that we are going to reduce our nuclear weapons and cut back on our developments, he hopes to endear the world to himself and his policy as a "nuclear-pied-piper" in hopes to rid the world of nuclear weapons.  The problem with this approach is that its a bit like one person playing chess and another person playing checkers at the same time on the same board.  Nothing can be won in a game like this as no one can agree on the rules or the what the end-game is.   Obama thinks that by reasoning with them we can win them over to our side.  But these leader are NOT reasonable, for no reasonable leader whose country is falling apart wastes their countries resources on a tool that will ultimately destroy them.  Its like getting into argument with a patient at the Insane-asylum nothing of worth can be achieved. 

    Reagan, on the other hand, had the correct approach in the end.  By standing up to the Soviet Union he knew that they could not outspend the US in military developments.  He used our greatest tool against them.... our economy.   Russia did not have the economic resources to keep pace with us and in the end they bankrupted their economy and were destroyed from within. 

   Now I am not saying that same approach will work with Iran or North Korea.  These leaders are not as rational as Gorbachev was in Russia.  Their goals are not world domination and so their weapons needs are far smaller than Russia's was.  As the bumper sticker used to say: "It only takes 1 atomic bomb to ruin your whole day".   Even these 2 countries don't share the same goals!   In my opinion, North Korea merely wants attention and money.  Kim Jong Il wants to extort Japan and the US for as much money as he possibly can.  His countries economy is pathetic and his people are starving (that's one way to hold down an uprising).   Like the Chicago mob extorting business for "insurance money" Kim Jong Il wants "protection money".   Iran's leaders goals, on the other hand , I believe are much more devious than Kim Jong Il's.   I believe he hopes to bring on some Islamic second-coming by wiping Israel (and a large number of muslims) off the face of the planet. 

   To face these new threats head on to me will require more than just having heart-to-heart talks with them.   At the same time the Reagan approach will probably not have the same effect as it did back in the 80's.  These new threats will most likely not be stopped economically as Russia was, as Iran can fuel itself with its own oil production and North Korea can probably starve their people for years to come.  To face these global bullies it will require the US to be the biggest bully on the block as there is nothing a bully fears more than a bigger bully.  We need to remind them of the arsenal we have at our disposal.  We also need to be straight with them and show their neighboring countries what our "plans" are if ANY of our allies are attacked.  As we did to Japan by dropping leaflets prior to our bombings, we need to drop internet-leaflets on these countries showing them (and other countries that support them) who will be attacked first, second, third etc..  We need to wake up these supporters and make them question whether they truely want to be in bed these leaders or not.  

    Finally I think we must stop kidding ourselves that a war with nuclear weapons will never occur.  As more and more smaller countries aquire this technology and groups with "more to gain that they have to lose" come into contact with those weapons (such as Al Quaeda or Hamas), we will need to understand that we did all that we could stop it.   We need to straighten up and realize that like it or not, we are the worlds policemen and we do provide peace through strength and not weakness.