"Doctrine of Prevention"?? Isn't it really Doctrine of PREMPTION??

[madmunchie]

Bush is twisting his words and meaning around again - CODE FOR - "I am lying thru my teeth"

[madmunchie]

1. As usual Bush is "spinning" the story about Iran that came

out this weekend. This guy is in full throttle to save his sorry ass!

[Kutjara]

2. Reminds me of Llapgoch

I remember the old Monty Python spoof about Llapgoch, "The Welsh Art of Self Defence". It is described as:

"an ANCIENT Welsh ART based on a BRILLIANTLY simple I-D-E-A, which is a SECRET. The best form of DEFENCE is ATTACK (Clausewitz) and the most VlTAL element of ATTACK is SURPRISE (Oscar Hammerstein). Therefore . . . the BEST way to protect yourself AGAINST any ASSAILANT is to ATTACK him before he attacks YOU . . . Or BETTER... BEFORE the THOUGHT of doing so has EVEN OCCURRED TO HIM!!! SO YOU MAY BE ABLE TO RENDER YOUR ASSAILANT UNCONSCIOUS BEFORE he is EVEN aware of your very existence!"

I think Bush & Co. have taken this spoof a mite too seriously.

[proud patriot]

3. Albert Einstein once said

"you cannot simultaneously both prevent and prepare for war"

he was a smart guy I'll trust him

[Ian David]

4. It's neither preemption nor prevention unless you attack an ACTUAL THREAT

"Hey, Iran is developing nukeyerler weapons.... Let's attack Iraq!"

If they really want to stop Iran from developing nukes, they should close the Halliburton office in Tehran that is helping them build the power plant!!!!

[htuttle]

5. In the language of international law, there is a distinct difference

So-called 'pre-emptive' attacks are legal under Article 51 of the UN charter. In order for a 'pre-emptive' attack to be legal, it must be done when an enemy is KNOWN to be just about to attack you, ie., attacking the Japanese planes enroute to Pearl Harbor.

What the Bush administration is calling 'preventative war' is considered illegal and a war crime under both the UN Charter and the Nuremberg laws. This is an attack conducted because you think an enemy MIGHT attack you in the future, but is not actually in the act of doing so. As I said, it's illegal.