First strike

When Bush 43 introduced the concept of a preemptive strike many people went apoplectic but in a few days and after reviewing all of the options the whole idea was put to sleep. The press had no interest in discussing it and politicians avoided the subject. With the rise of North Korea and its nuclear program the preemptive strike is once again in the news. The idea of first strike is antithetical to what America has always stood for but 9/11 was a wakeup call that cannot be dismissed and perhaps it is time for offense to become the new defense. The leader of North Korea realizes he must constantly increase the rhetoric to keep himself in the news and to prove to the world that he is a force to be reckoned with. It is likely that this will lead to some type of action along the Pacific Rim and then the actions will have to be of increasing nature. Add to that the fact that this man seems to be mentally unstable and his people are going hungry and you have a very volatile situation. The US, by constantly improving anti-missile weapons, can protect the West Coast against attack but countries closer to North Korea may not have that protection. Will the US have to attack first to protect an ally?