>>This is the first time we have pre-emptively invaded a nation like this.
>>what kind of precedent are we setting? What's to stop China now from saying
>>"We think Taiwan is a potential threat to our interests, so we're going in
>>after them"? Iran's firing up its nuclear program in violation of prior
>>agreements, so are they next in line?
>Preemptive military action has a number of historical precedents -- including
Note that you've just changed the subejct. I was speaking to invading a
nation. Not to generic "military action." Further to the point, none of your
examples, offered below, address this question, none of them constitute
invasions of a sovereign nation.
>In 1962 we instituted a naval blockade of
>Cuba to prevent Soviet weapons technology from reaching the island.
1) Not an invasion. 2) This represented a direct threat against the US. But
despite point 2, it still doesn't address the issue I raised concerning
invading another nation.
>1967, Israel struck first at the Arab armies converging on their
1) I wasn't talking about Israel. I was specifically referring to the first
time in US history that we had pre-emptively invaded somebody. Stay with the
subject, don't pettifog. 2) This was also not an invasion, so it's further
irrelevant to the discussion.
>And in 1981 Israel destroyed Iraq's French-built nuclear
>reactor at Osirak,
See 1 and 2 above.
My point remains. Your comments only help to reinforce it.
(all message content (c) 2003 by synthetic worlds, ltd.,
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine
and don't send me story ideas)