"We can sum it up in one sentence: Our technical civilization has just reached its greatest level of savagery. We will have to choose, in the more or less near future, between collective suicide and the intelligent use of our scientific conquests....... This is no longer a prayer but a demand to be made by all peoples to their governments -- a demand to choose definitively between hell and reason." - Albert Camus 


Nuclear weapons are one of Instruments of Terror and mass destruction
in modern total terrorist warfare   
_____________________________________

Unfortunately, all U.S. programs concerned with threats of possible attacks with Weapons of Mass Destruction have been always the subject of controversy in the past. For instance, plans to evacuate large cities populations to rural areas in case of attacks with nuclear arms were totally abandoned in the early 1980s in the United States. These plans were rejected by many state and city governments as “unfeasible and unrealistic”. 
  

There is no doubt, that the very concept of the United States as anti-terrorist Country-Citadel set with permanent fortifications and arms necessary for survival of the Nation will just add more oil into almost extinguished fire of old controversy linked to analogous survival programs dumped in the United States in the early 1980s. It is quite predictable that the idea of anti-terrorist Ideological and Economic Weaponries described in this work earlier is not going to be enthusiastically and easy received in the United States either.

Some may passionately argue that the concept of Country-Citadel armed with anti-terrorist Ideological and Economic Weaponries, is “unfeasible and unrealistic” too. They may also wrangle that all these anti-terrorist strategic arms and permanent fortifications are as much useless for the United States, as the abandoned survival programs in the past.

These concerned voices have a sound point: no “nuclear catastrophe” has happened in the United States in the end. Therefore, the strongest argument they may use is that all big efforts and all big money that could have been spent on “futile” survival programs in the past would have been foolishly wasted. It is hard to disagree with this observation too.

Even so, one should become aware of a great deal of difference between the early 1980s and nowadays. The early 1980s were “old good times” of the Cold War with effective deterring Instruments that made usage of Weapons of Mass Destruction just theoretical threats. Can the very same Instruments discourage terrorists from their attacks against the United States now? No, they cannot. Terrorists openly and publicly unleashed their objectives to “wipe out from the World Map” entire states and nations.

Can anyone guarantee that terrorists-aggressors are not going to make use of Weapons of Mass Destruction, if they get them? No one can assure that every single terrorist act is going to be detected and prevented in the future either. Accordingly, terrorist attacks with Weapons of Mass Destruction against the United States are not “just theoretical threats” anymore. They are only a matter of “what”, “when”, and “where”.

The concept of the United States as Country-Citadel and American Towns as fortrsses set with advanced permanent fortifications and armed with strategic anti-terrorist Ideological and Economic Weaponries derives from an extreme need to defend lives of U.S. civilians, cultural values, and material supplies in “life or death” battle with Terror on the American soil. Turning the United States into anti-terrorist Country-Citadel is a must to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”.