Changes

[[Category:Nuclear PR]]'''Preemptive war''' has been defined as is a unilateral "first strike"military action undertaken absent , in the face of an imminent armed threat or ongoing attack by an aggressor ... a decision to go to This type of war without clear and convincing evidence may be sanctioned under international law, but requires the nature of the need for us threat to defend ourselves against an imminent attackbe credible and significant."[http://www.natcath.org/NCR_Online/archives/020703/020703d.htm] ==Definition====='''Quotable Quotes'Wikipedia'' Definition=== Preemptive "A preemptive attack (or preemptive war "punishes the defenseless not for what they have done ) is waged in an attempt to repel or defeat an imminent offensive or are doing but for what they might have done invasion, or could doto gain a strategic advantage in an impending (usually unavoidable) war. " -- Preemptive war is often confused with the term [[http://wwwpreventive war]].paxhumana.info/article.php3?id_article=280 Eduardo GaleanoWhile the latter is generally considered to violate international law, PaxHumanaand to fall short of the requirements of a [[just war doctrine|just war]], September 2003]preemptive wars are more often argued to be justified or justifiable. ------- "Described as "preventive defense" or "extended deterrence" by its supporters--but decried as "The intention with a preemptive strike is to gain the advantage of initiative and to harm the enemy at a new form moment of gunboat diplomacyminimal protection," by its detractors--a new program called particularly when the "enemy is vulnerable. [http://wwwen.faswikipedia.org/irpwiki/offdocs/pdd18.htm Counterproliferation InitiativePreemptive_war]" [Presidential Decision Directive PDD/NSC 18] was unveiled in December 1993 by then-Defense Secretary [[Les Aspin]]. ===Daniel Webster==="There was considerable controversy over what "counterproliferation" meantIn 1841, U.S. But it was widely interpreted as indicating that the United States--having recently demonstrated overwhelming military superiority in the Gulf War--would now flex its muscles even further, looking into the ways and means Secretary of preemptively striking regional troublemakers or would-be attackers. State Daniel Webster "Although there was talk articulated a set of building conventional weapons capable demanding criteria for acting with a 'necessity of destroying deeply buried targets like command centers (Aspin said both new strategies and new military capabilities were needed), the initiative envisioned the self-defense'—in particular for a legitimate use of U.S. nuclear weapons to defeat chemical or biological weaponspreemptive force. The ideaPreemption, simplyWebster said, was is justified only in response to "locatean imminent threat; moreover, neutralizethe force must be necessary for self-defense and can be deployed only after nonlethal measures and attempts to dissuade the adversary from acting had failed. Furthermore, or destroy" others' [[weapons of mass destruction]] before they could a preemptive attack must be used. For limited to dealing with the first timeimmediate threat and must discriminate between armed and unarmed, the United States openly added targets in the Third World to its nuclear-weapons targeting planinnocent and guilty. "Now [April 2001], after eight years of reality, the initiative has morphed into something much less than promisedhttp://www.bostonreview.net/BR28. Author Henry Sokolski describes the process1/crawford. html] ===International Court of Justice==="The Fate of President [[Bill ClintonInternational Court of Justice]]'s "Counterproliferation Initiative" was tethered (ICJ) spelled out exactly what no nation can legally do in light of its commitments to its strategic assumptionsuphold the [[United Nations|U.N. ]] Charter: '''An initial interest in devising plans Thus it would be illegal for preemptive strikes against foreign proliferation activities simply ignored the American culturea state to threaten force to secure territory from another State, or to cause it to follow or not follow certain political or economic paths's bias against launching Pearl Harbor-like attacks. More important, the initiative at first presumed that some military-technical means could neutralize proliferation problems. And that, in fact, turned out " according to be inherently difficultAnn Fagan Ginger, if not impossibleExecutive Director of the Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute.'''" [http://www.thebulletinmcli.org/issueslaw/2001federal/ma01/ma01sokolskiwar_is_preventive.html Source: Bulletin of Atomic Scientists], March/April 2001. ----- == Other Related SourceWatch Resources =Anticipatory Self-Defense=== *"The prevailing view probably is that, one way or another, anticipatory self-defense is permissible but traditionally has required the existence of an imminent threat," writes Steven C. Walsh, research analyst at the [[Bush doctrineCenter for Defense Information]] *. [[civil liberties]http://www.cdi.org/news/law/preemptive-war.cfm] *[[Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act of 1996]] *==[[Defense Science Board]] *Justifications for the US-Iraq 2003 war: "preemption" or "[[forward strategy of freedom]]preemptive war" *[[Homeland defense]] ==*[[Homeland security]] *[[Iraq Coalition Casualty Statistics]] ==Quotes==*Preemptive war "punishes the defenseless not for what they have done or are doing but for what they might have done or could do."<br>&mdash;[[Iraqi Civil Defense Corps]] *[[National Security Strategy of http://www.paxhumana.info/article.php3?id_article=280 Eduardo Galeano, PaxHumana, September 2002]2003] .*[[National Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction]] *[[neoconservative]] == Related SourceWatch Resources ==*[[Operation Iraqi FreedomAuthorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002]] *[[Operation Iraqi Freedom IIBush doctrine]] *[[Patriot Act I]] *[[peacekeeping]] *[[Post-war Iraq/NATO]] *[[Proactive Preemptive Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations Group]] *[[Project for the New American CenturyEisenhower doctrine]] *[[Stanley Foundation's Independent Task Force on US Strategies for National SecurityGeneva Conventions]] *[[Transitional Iraqi Governmentnuclear weapons]] *[[U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century / HartPDD-Rudman Commission39]] *[[war on freedomPDD-62]] *[[war on terrorism]] *[[weapons of mass destructionTruman doctrine]] == External Links links == '''Preemptive War Against Iraq''' *Paul W. Schroeder, [http://www.amconmag.com/10_21/iraq.html "Iraq: The Case Against Preemptive War. The administration's administration’s claim of a right to overthrow regimes it considers hostile is extraordinary - – and one the world will soon find intolerable,"], ''The American ConservativeMagazine'', no dateundated. *Alan Bock, [Preventive or Preemptive War?], ''Eye on the Empire'', September 10, 2002Netta C. *William GalstonCrawford, [http://www.prospectbostonreview.orgnet/print/V13/17BR28.1/galston-wcrawford.html Perils of Preemptive War"The Best Defense. Why AmericaThe problem with Bush’s 's place in the world will shift -- for the worse -- if we attack Iraqpreemptive' war doctrine,"], ''The American ProspectBoston Review'', September 23, 2002February/March 2003. *Stephen MurdockDietrich Murswiek, [http://www.dcbarjura.uni-freiburg.orgde/institute/ioeffr3/for_lawyersforschung/washington_lawyerpapers/january_2003murswiek/warPreemptiveWar.cfm pdf "The American Strategy of Preemptive War: Is It Legal?and International Law,"]Albert-Ludwigs-Universitat Freiberg Institute of Public Law, ''DCBar'', January March 2003. *Todd GitlinAnn Fagan Ginger, [http://www.motherjonesmcli.comorg/commentarylaw/columnsfederal/2003war_is_preventive.html "Preemptive War /02/ma_205_01Preventive War.html America's Age of Empire: Both Are Against The Law Of The Bush DoctrineUnited States,"]Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute, ''MotherJones'', January/February 2003undated [2004]. *Michael E. SallaSteven Murdoch, [http://www.exopoliticsdcbar.org/Study-Paper2for_lawyers/washington_lawyer/january_2003/war.htm An Exopolitical Perspective on the cfm "Preemptive War against Iraq: Is It Legal?,"], ''ExopoliticsDCBar.org'', February 3, January 2003. *Eliot Katz, [http://wwwwrit.news.counterpunchfindlaw.orgcom/commentary/katz0228200320030415_segal.html To Declare "Pre-emptive Crime? What the Film Minority Report Can Teach Us About the Three Key Rules of Preemptive War is to Declare a Bankruptcy of the Imagination,"], ''CounterPunchFindLaw's Writ'', February 28April 15, 2003. *Robert SchneerRussell Madden, [http://www216.109.salon117.com135/opinionsearch/scheer/2003/03/12/war_crimes/index_np.html Preemptive cache?p=%22preemptive+war crimes%22&ei=UTF-8&fl=0&pstart=1&b=91&u=freedom. Driven by a coterie of neoconservative ideologues -- and the accidental president in their sway -- we are hours away from becoming international outlaws], ''Salonorlingrabbe.com'', March 12, 2003. *Jeffrey Donovan,[http:/lfetimes/wwwselfdefense_preempt.rferlhtm&w=%22preemptive+war%22&d=12914A2F40&icp=1&.org/nca/features/2003/03/14032003174825.asp Iraqintl=us "Self-Defense: 'Preemptive' Or Otherwise, U.S. Interventionism Has A Long HistoryImmediate, and Retaliatory"](cache file), ''Radio Free Europe/Radio LibertyThe Laissez Faire Electronic Times'', March 14Vol 2, No 18, May 5, 2003. *Steven RDuncan E.J. WeismanCurrie, [http://www.ihtglobelaw.com/articlesIraq/90747Preventive_war_after_iraq.html Doctrine of preemptive war has its roots in early 1990s], htm "'Preventive War'and International Herald Tribune'', March 24, 2003. *Bob Zimmerman, [http://www.impeach-bush-now.org/Articles/CampaignMore/globalnightmare.htm The truth behind the American invasion of Law After Iraq: The Bush administration's evolving global nightmare], ''impeach-bush-now.org'', April 7, 2003: "When did 'democracy' become an American export; a commodity installed wherever we see fit by means of overwhelming force?" *[[Howard Dean]], [http://www.deanvolunteers.org/DeanVolunteers/press_view.asp?ID=740 Bush: It's Not Just His Doctrine That's Wrong], ''CommonDreams'', April 17May 22, 2003. *Joel SSteven C. Beinin, Ivan Eland, and Edward A. OlsenWelsh, [http://www.independentcdi.org/tiinews/forumslaw/030625ipfTranspreemptive-war.html cfm "Preemptive War Strategy: A New U.S. Empire?] (Transcript)and International Law, [[Independent Institute]"]Center for Defense Information, June 25December 5, 2003. *Ulrich ArnswaldMaggie Ledford Lawson, [http://www.indybaynatcath.orgcom/NCR_Online/newsarchives2/20032004a/09022704/1639819022704p.php Preventive War or Preemptive War"The fatal legend of preemptive war. German history shows the perils of Washington's new strategy,"], ''IndyMediaNational Catholic Reporter'', September 3February 27, 20032004. *Stan CrockJohn Hendren, [http://storywww.newsglobalpolicy.yahoo.comorg/news?tmpl=story&cid=66&ncid=66&e=1&u=empire/bwintervention/200310222005/bs_bw/nf200310221599db056 Preemptive War Is the Wrong Weapon0319firststrike.htm "Policy OKs First Strike to Protect US,"], ''BusinessWeekLos Angeles Times'' Online, October 22March 19, 20032005: "Two years after the electronic newsletter sent out by [[Chuck Spinney]]U.S. invasion of Iraq, the Pentagon has formally included in key strategic plans provisions for launching preemptive strikes against nations thought to pose a retired Pentagon analyst threat to the United States... starts out with a quote from The doctrine also now stipulates that the late journalist [[HU. LS. Mencken]]: will use 'active deterrence'in concert with its allies 'if we can' but could act unilaterally otherwise, Defense officials said."The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed  [[and hence clamorous to be led to safetycategory:national security]] by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."''' *Jalal Ghazi, [http[category://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=17268 Wolfowitz Doctrine Sinks war in the Iraqi QuagmireIraq]], Pacific News Service, November 25, 2003[[category: "The pre-emption doctrine of Deputy Defense Secretary Iraq]][[Paul Wolfowitzcategory:Globalization]] helped fuel the war in Iraq. Wolfowitz argued that the United States should 'shape,' not just react, to the world, acting alone when necessary and using its military and economic hegemony to foster American values and protect U.S. interests. But the outcome of the Iraq war has brought about the opposite[[Category: the quagmire has stymied aggressive Civil liberties (U.S. unilateral action and forced Washington to work with European allies and even an old foe, Iran." '''Future Preemptive Actions''' *David Morgan, )]][[httpCategory://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&ncid=578&e=14&u=/nm/20031205/ts_nm/iraq_usa_stabilization_dc Pentagon Weighs Contentious Peacekeeping PlansNeeds review]], Reuters, December 5, 2003.