Nuclear weapon test Romeo on Bikini atoll: part of Operation Castle. (27 March 1954) [public domain / Wikimedia Commons]
It shall be the policy of this Nation to regard any nuclear missile launched from Cuba against any nation in the Western Hemisphere as an attack by the Soviet Union on the United States, requiring a full retaliatory response upon the Soviet Union.
Note how he said that nuclear attacks not only against the US, but any nation in an entire hemisphere (half the world), would require an attack (probably nuclear) against the Soviet Union.
President Carter stated in an interview in 1985 that he warned the Ayatollah: “if any of them [Iranian hostages] were killed, we would attack Iran militarily.”
Thus, the death of one man was enough for Carter to threaten an attack on the nation of Iran.
President Truman issued a threat to Japan in 1945, after the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and before Nagasaki:
It was to spare the Japanese people from utter destruction that the ultimatum of July 26 was issued at Potsdam. Their leaders promptly rejected that ultimatum. If they do not now accept our terms they may expect a rain of ruin from the air, the like of which has never been seen on this earth.
North Korea’s party newspaper had stated, “The day the US dares tease our nation with a nuclear rod and sanctions, the mainland US will be catapulted into an unimaginable sea of fire.”
President Trump retorted (in words quite similar to Truman’s):
North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen… he has been very threatening beyond a normal state. They will be met with fire, fury and frankly power the likes of which this world has never seen before.
When JFK does it, it’s a “great speech” and indicative of nobility and majesty (indeed, one of the renowned moments of his presidency). Carter can threaten war over the death of one hostage. Truman can use almost the same words, even though no one else even had nuclear weapons at the time (in other words, the threat to us was exponentially less than it is now).
But when President Trump issued a warning after North Korea literally threatened annihilation of US cities (and threatened Guam by name by the end of the day yesterday), Sen. Dianne Feinstein referred to his words as “bombastic comments.” Rep. Eliot Engel called the sentiment “unhinged.” Sen. Ben Cardin said that the President “should not be engaging in the same kind of bluster and provocative statements as North Korea about nuclear war.” Sen. Chuck Schumer categorized them as “reckless.”
What do these Democrat nattering nabobs and their RINO “useful idiot” comrades expect a President to say in such a situation? I guess it should be something like, “Come and pulverize our cities and murder millions of Americans, and we’ll do nothing, because we only have warm fuzzy feelings for you. No need to worry about any response from us!”
President Trump is in this almost (militarily and morally) impossible situation in the first place, because of the stupidity and naivete of President Bill Clinton in 1994, when (like Neville Chamberlain with regard to Hitler in 1940), he was foolish enough (with the direct assistance of President Carter) to trust the North Koreans to abide by an agreement not to develop a nuclear program.
So here we are, thanks to Democrat incompetence and witless trust in some of the worst dictators to ever walk the face of the earth, and we have choices facing us that have never before occurred in the history of the world. But Trump is a Republican, so he has to put down as a dolt and an idiot, for issuing a Truman-like warning: one hardly different from what JFK stated during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Likewise, Ronald Reagan was pilloried as a warmonger and a dunce. Yet somehow he managed to outfox Gorbachev in arms negotiations, and somehow managed to not get us into World War III (contrary to the confident predictions of about 30 million liberal pundits and naysayers). And he sought to develop the Strategic Defense Initiative (remember that?), so we could move away from the notion of “mutually assured destruction”. But the liberals mocked it and lied about it, derisively calling it “Star Wars.”
Right about now (with a very real nuclear threat hanging over the heads of the Japanese, South Koreans, and even the mainland US), that idea looks pretty good, doesn’t it? We have pretty extraordinary defensive capabilities, but likely not enough to completely prevent a successful nuclear strike somewhere, should North Korea commence an attack. It didn’t have to be that way.
It’s always the same. Republicans are trashed and insulted, no matter what they do. Meanwhile, we are in a grave crisis that could quickly become the worst the world has ever known. It would seem to be a time for unity, if there ever was one. But not for liberals and Democrats! Talking points and derision towards Republicans, conservatives, and above all, the Great Satan, Donald Trump, are more important than the crisis at hand.