The other day, Bush launched a new public relations effort on Iran to counter his record-low poll numbers. As part of the PR campaign, he is once again asserting his doctrine of the "pre-emptive war " as he used to justify the Iraq War. Join us now for a few looks at other pre-emptive wars or someone else’s invasion based on one’s point of view.
1941: Japan launches a pre-emptive war on the US over our efforts to rebuild our defenses following the Great Depression and our condemnation of Japanese attacks on China (a pre-emptive war started much earlier). Enhanced by our reluctance to sell Japan needed resources.
1917: Germany launches submarine attacks on the US over US aid to the Allies and rumors of American involvement in WWI.
1812:England launches an attack on the US over regaining lost territory from the Revolutionary War and rumors of spreading the revolt to Canada.
Most Americans did not view these pre-emptive strikes as good news and some might have even questioned the veracity of the threat posed. Certainly there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, so can pre-emptive wars based on unsound judgment ever be justified? I say no.
No comments:
Post a Comment