IF it was a missle we would know where it came from after about 15 minutes after takeoff probably sooner. Wherever it came from would cease to exist shortly after.
The problem is it's not likely to be a missile. More likely a ship or airplane, perhaps stolen from a third country. It doesn't even have to be detonated in the US. Blow it in international waters and let prevailing wind scatter fallout. Who do you retaliate against when some unknown terrorist group claims responsibility?
Exactly when did the science of the 80's get forgotten and people start believing again that a bunch of nukes could be detonated anywhere on Earth without poisoning the whole lot of us?
Bush has so much compassion for the world, he would probably just send troops over there to get slaughtered while trying to rebuild their country. I would hope this is not the case because as soon as we give up on mutual destruction we are sitting ducks.
The USA still has missle locks on Russia and vice versa. I would assume that the USA has numerous locks on N. Korea and Iran. (By locks i mean targeting routes via plane or missle) -Kastro
The policy has never changed since the end of the "Cold War." It is "MAD: Mutually Assured Destruction." Iran does not have a delivery mechanism yet, so a bomb must be placed on a ship and sailed into a major port. It could happen, and I think that eventually, it will happen, because we simply don't have the necessary infrastructure in place to prevent it from happening -- at least not yet. As for N. Korea, they absolutely have a delvery mechanism and it can reach Seattle, Portland, SF, Los Angeles, or San Diego. After such an attack, we would have no choice but to return fire, although this would be bad for U.S. troops in S. Korea, because they would almost certainly be in the destruction zone. The scenario is pretty ugly.