[B5JMS] And So It Begins...

[b5jms-admin at cs.columbia.edu]

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: biles at wf.net (Joe G. Biles)
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 23:46:49 GMT
Lines: 23

On 28 Mar 2003 23:27:52 GMT, jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5) wrote:

>This is the first time we have pre-emptively invaded a nation like this.  And
>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 American ones. In 1962 we instituted a naval blockade of
Cuba to prevent Soviet weapons technology from reaching the island. In
1967, Israel struck first at the Arab armies converging on their
border. And in 1981 Israel destroyed Iraq's French-built nuclear
reactor at Osirak, which the official Iraqi news agency proclaimed was
for the purpose of destroying "the Zionist entity." Had they not done
so you'd better be sure Saddam would be ruling Iran, Kuwait and Saudi
Arabia today.

Of the first example, John Kennedy himself said, "We no longer live in
a world [...] where only the actual firing of weapons represents a
sufficient challenge to a nation's security to constitute maximum
peril."


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
Date: 29 Mar 2003 00:09:01 GMT
Lines: 48

>>This is the first time we have pre-emptively invaded a nation like this.
>And
>>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
American ones.

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.

>n
>1967, Israel struck first at the Arab armies converging on their
>border. 

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.

 jms

(jmsatb5 at aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2003 by synthetic worlds, ltd., 
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine 
and don't send me story ideas)