War Comes to America
Those who have perpetrated these acts are waging war against the U.S.

Mr. Gaffney is also president of the Center for Security Policy.
September 11, 2001 3:45 p.m.

t this writing, the United States is under attack as never before in its history. Coordinated, murderous strikes have happened at several of the most visible public and private-sector facilities in the country.

Suddenly, as a result, several facts are clear:

Those who have perpetrated these acts are waging war against the United States. This is not simply terrorism; it is a determined assault aimed at destroying a free society using instruments of mass destruction against which there is, for all intents and purposes, no sure defense — notably, hijacked commercial airliners. Even greater than the threat to our people and property is the prospect that, with the unleashing of these Pearl Harbor-style bolts-from-the-blue, the civil liberties and freedoms we have taken for granted for so long — and that make America the unique and great nation it is — may never be quite the same.

The fight that has now come to our land is the same one Israel has been fighting for many years. Its perpetrators may or may not be exactly the same. My own guess — which can only be a guess in the absence of an uncontradicted declaration of responsibility — is that this violence has been wrought by Islamic supremacists who view the United States and Israel as equally anathema to their faith, society, and cultural mores and, therefore, deserving of a similar, lethal fate.

The United States must now contend with sources of these threats in much the same way as the Israelis have of late: Using lethal force where it can to attack, disrupt and, if possible, destroy those believed associated with international terrorism. This means not only those individuals and groups but also, where necessary, the states that sponsor and support them.

The distinct possibility exists that others may try to seize upon America's distraction and the allocation of its resources to domestic remediation and reconstruction needs to engage in aggression elsewhere. This should put an end to discussion of funding our defense budget at levels inadequate to deal with two major contingencies simultaneously. We now have one at home; how long will it be before we have one elsewhere?

America is not omniscient. For too long, we have been encouraged to believe that our spy satellites would assure we knew in advance of any threat. Clearly, our intelligence capabilities are not what they need to be when the threat comes not from weapons that can be monitored from space but from small, highly disciplined and ruthlessly secretive groups and their state sponsors. The Clinton holdovers who still run the Central Intelligence Agency bear no small measure of responsibility for serious shortcomings in these and other areas. Heads should roll, starting with that of CIA Director George Tenet.

Preparedness for emergencies like those we now confront must be redoubled. For years, the Clinton administration downplayed the importance of continuity of government planning, preparations for evacuating cities and a comprehensive approach to civil defense. This should be seen for what it was — a reprehensible abdication of responsibility. There can be no higher priority than rectifying that reckless policy.

Awful as today's deadly attacks on the United States are, however, they pale by comparison to what missile-delivered weapons of mass destruction could inflict. Even as we improve our ability to detect, deflect and destroy those planning acts of terror against us, we must also end our present, absolute vulnerability to the real and growing danger posed by missile threats. President Bush should be commended for his commitment to deploying effective missile defenses and certainly not deterred by today's events from pursuing them even more aggressively.

There is no doubt that September 11, 2001 is a day that will long be remembered as momentous. If the United States properly perceives the grave nature of the threat it now confronts, and deals with it appropriately, chances are historians will mark it as the day the "Inter- war" years ended.