Not to toot my own psychic powers, but the writing was on the wall. We're going to use Iraq as a base of operations and spread out through the entire middle east bestowing democracy through conflict as we go.
Sharon said, "Israel will not recoil from defending its citizens and will strike its enemies in every place and with any means.
Sound familiar?
"We've adopted a new strategy for a new kind of war,'' Mr. Bush said, to loud applause. "We will not wait for known enemies to strike us again. We will strike them in their camps or caves or wherever they hide, before they hit more of our cities and kill more of our citizens.''
The logic of pre-emptive striking's becoming quite popular and now that we've established a global precedent, who's to say which country can or cannot implement like strategies?
For sake of argument, isn't this pretty close to the strategy the perpetrators of the 9/11 tragedy used? They hit us when they chose, without significant provocation or permission, on our soil, simply because they wanted to do it and they had a bone to pick.
Is this the pattern we want to encourage, fund and support?
Posted by kerry at October 8, 2003 03:47 PM | TrackBackYou know, there are more news sources than CNN!
Try the BBC, they are less "Liberal"
Posted by: North Texas at October 9, 2003 01:06 PMSorry, I was initially going to link only from Al-Jazeera. I find them too conservative for my tastes.
Posted by: kerry at October 9, 2003 02:10 PMHa Ha....
Very Funny.
I like your website, but you need to remove your head from your arse on occassion
Posted by: North Texas at October 9, 2003 05:51 PMYou say:
For sake of argument, isn't this pretty close to the strategy the perpetrators of the 9/11 tragedy used?
Well, except for the the whole targeting innocent people in an attempt to enslave the world under an oppressive and twisted version of religion, yeah, you pretty much got it. What, exactly, is wrong with using what is proven to be an effective strategy?
And really, do you think other countries would refrain from using a particular mode of attack just because the US hasn't done it yet? And the US has nuked another country (twice, even!), and 50+ years later nobody else has followed suit. Gee, I wonder why that little action didn't let the cat out of the bag the way you claim preemption will...
Do I need add that the other guys are the ones who started the preempting, and we just now finally got around to responding?
Tip: Do some reading on 4G warfare. Do not make the mistake of fighting the last battle.
Posted by: Tom K at October 11, 2003 01:04 AMNumbnut
Posted by: UZI4U at October 11, 2003 09:23 AM