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 of may be sanctioned under international law, but requires the need for us nature of the threat to defend ourselves against an imminent attackbe credible and significant."[http://www.natcath.org/NCR_Online/archives/020703/020703d.htm] --------- In January 2004, the matter of '''==Definition=====''Wikipedia'' Definition==="A preemptive attack (or preemptive war''' initiated by ) is waged in an attempt to repel or defeat an imminent offensive or invasion, or to gain a strategic advantage in an impending (usually unavoidable) war. "Preemptive war is often confused with the term [[Bush administrationpreventive war]] in pursuit . While the latter is generally considered to violate international law, and to fall short of the requirements of alleged a [[terroristjust war doctrine|just war]]s, [[weapons of mass destruction]], [[al Qaeda]]preemptive wars are more often argued to be justified or justifiable. "The intention with a preemptive strike is to gain the advantage of initiative and to harm the enemy at a moment of minimal protection, " particularly when the enemy is vulnerable. [[Osama bin Laden]], and [[Saddam Hussein]] was pushed into public discourse for [[Uhttp://en.Swikipedia. presidential electionorg/wiki/Preemptive_war] ===Daniel Webster===In 1841, 2004]] by [[George WU.S. Bush]]'s former Secretary of the Treasury [[Paul O'Neill]], the main source State Daniel Webster "articulated a set of demanding criteria for the upcoming book acting with a 'necessity of self-defense'The Price —in particular for a legitimate use of Loyalty'' by [[Ron Suskind]]preemptive force. Preemption, Webster said, a former [[Wall Street]] reporter.[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/09/60minutes/main592330.shtml?cmp=EM8707] According to O'Neillis justified only in response to an imminent threat; moreover, from the moment of the "very first [[National Security Council]] (NSC) meeting, 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... 'From the very beginningFurthermore, there was a conviction, that Saddam Hussein was a bad person preemptive attack must be limited to dealing with the immediate threat and must discriminate between armed and that he needed to gounarmed,' says O'Neill, who adds that going after Saddam was topic '''A''' 10 days after the inauguration - eight monthsinnocent and guilty." prior to [[September 11, 2001]]http://www.bostonreview. "'From the very first instance, it was about [[Iraq]]net/BR28." The focus was on what could be done to affect 1/crawford.html]  ===International Court of Justice==="The [[regime changeInternational Court of Justice]], says Suskind, "'Day one, these things were laid and sealed(ICJ) spelled out exactly what no nation can legally do in light of its commitments to uphold the [[United Nations|U.N.]] Charter: '" Suskind adds that OThus it would be illegal for a state to threaten force to secure territory from another State, or to cause it to follow or not follow certain political or economic paths'Neill ,"got briefing materials" under his cover sheet for according to Ann Fagan Ginger, Executive Director of the second NSC meetingMeiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute. [http://www. "There are memosmcli. One of them marked, secret, says, 'Plan for post-Saddam Iraq'org/law/federal/war_is_preventive." According to Suskind, "they discussed an [[occupation of Iraqhtml]] in January and February of 2001. ===Anticipatory Self-Defense===" And, as early as March 2001The prevailing view probably is that, one way or another, anticipatory self-defense is permissible but traditionally has required the Bush adminstration was discussing the future existence of [[Iraq's oil industry]]an imminent threat, including "a map of potential areas writes Steven C. Walsh, research analyst at the [[Center for Defense Information]]. [oil] explorationhttp://www.cdi." --------org/news/law/preemptive- war.cfm]'''Quotable Quotes''' Preemptive war "punishes ==[[Justifications for the defenseless not for what they have done US-Iraq 2003 war: "preemption" or are doing but for what they might have "preemptive war"]]== ==Quotes==Preemptive war "punishes the defenseless not for what they have done or could doare doing but for what they might have done or could do." -- <br>&mdash;[http://www.paxhumana.info/article.php3?id_article=280 Eduardo Galeano, PaxHumana, September 2003]. ------- "Described as "preventive defense" or "extended deterrence" by its supporters--but decried as "a new form == Related SourceWatch Resources ==*[[Authorization for Use of gunboat diplomacy" by its detractors--a new program called the "[http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/pdd18.htm Counterproliferation InitiativeMilitary Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002]]" *[Presidential Decision Directive PDD/NSC 18[Bush doctrine]] was unveiled in December 1993 by then-Defense Secretary *[[Les AspinDoctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations]]. *[[Eisenhower doctrine]]"There was considerable controversy over what "counterproliferation" meant. But it was widely interpreted as indicating that the United States*[[Geneva Conventions]]*[[nuclear weapons]]*[[PDD-39]]*[[PDD-having recently demonstrated overwhelming military superiority in the Gulf War--would now flex its muscles even further, looking into the ways and means of preemptively striking regional troublemakers or would-be attackers. 62]] "Although there was talk of building conventional weapons capable of destroying deeply buried targets like command centers (Aspin said both new strategies and new military capabilities were needed), the initiative envisioned the use of U*[[Truman doctrine]] == External links ==*Paul W.SSchroeder, [http://www. nuclear weapons to defeat chemical or biological weaponsamconmag. The idea, simply, was to com/10_21/iraq.html "locate, neutralize, or destroy" others' [[weapons Iraq: The Case Against Preemptive War. The administration’s claim of mass destruction]] before they could be used. For a right to overthrow regimes it considers hostile is extraordinary – and one the first timeworld will soon find intolerable, the United States openly added targets in the Third World to its nuclear-weapons targeting plan"] ''American Conservative Magazine'', undated. "Now *Netta C. Crawford, [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 "The Fate of President [[Bill Clinton]]Best Defense. The problem with Bush’s 'preemptive's war doctrine,"Counterproliferation Initiative" was tethered to its strategic assumptions. ] ''Boston Review'An initial interest in devising plans for preemptive strikes against foreign proliferation activities simply ignored the American culture's bias against launching Pearl Harbor-like attacks. More important, the initiative at first presumed that some military-technical means could neutralize proliferation problemsFebruary/March 2003. And that, in fact*Dietrich Murswiek, turned out to be inherently difficult, if not impossible.'''" [http://www.thebulletinjura.uni-freiburg.orgde/issuesinstitute/2001ioeffr3/ma01forschung/ma01sokolskipapers/murswiek/PreemptiveWar.html Source: Bulletin pdf "The American Strategy of Atomic ScientistsPreemptive War and International Law,"]Albert-Ludwigs-Universitat Freiberg Institute of Public Law, March/April 20012003. -------- '''"Justification" for the Preemptive War in Iraq''' *[*Ann Fagan Ginger, [http://newswww.yahoomcli.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=540&u=org/aplaw/20040126federal/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ashcroft_iraq_1&printer=1 27 January 2004]: war_is_preventive.html "Ashcroft: Preemptive War / Preventive War Justified Even Without WMD" by William J. KoleBoth Are Against The Law Of The United States, AP: "Even if weapons of mass destruction are never found in Iraq] Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute, the Uundated [2004].S.-led war was justified because it eliminated the threat that Saddam Hussein might again resort to '''[[evil]] chemistry and evil biology*Steven Murdoch,''' Attorney General [[John Ashcroft]] said Mondayhttp://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/washington_lawyer/january_2003/war.cfm " ----- == Other Related SourceWatch Resources == Preemptive War: Is It Legal?,"] ''DCBar.org'', January 2003.*[[Bush doctrine]http://writ.news.findlaw.com/commentary/20030415_segal.html "Pre-Crime? What the Film Minority Report Can Teach Us About the Three Key Rules of Preemptive War,"] ''FindLaw's Writ'', April 15, 2003.*Russell Madden, [[civil liberties]] *[[clear and present danger]] *[[Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act of 1996]] *[[Defense Science Board]] *[[Eisenhower doctrine]] *"[[forward strategy of http://216.109.117.135/search/cache?p=%22preemptive+war%22&ei=UTF-8&fl=0&pstart=1&b=91&u=freedom]].orlingrabbe.com/lfetimes/selfdefense_preempt.htm&w=%22preemptive+war%22&d=12914A2F40&icp=1&.intl=us "Self-Defense: Preemptive, Immediate, and Retaliatory" *[[Homeland defense]] (cache file), ''The Laissez Faire Electronic Times'', Vol 2, No 18, May 5, 2003.*Duncan E.J. Currie, [[Homeland security]] *[[http://www.globelaw.com/Iraq Coalition Casualty Statistics]] *[[Iraqi Civil Defense Corps]/Preventive_war_after_iraq.htm "'Preventive War' and International Law After Iraq,"] May 22, 2003.*Steven C. Welsh, [[National Security State]] *[[National Security Strategy of September 2002]http://www.cdi.org/news/law/preemptive-war.cfm "Preemptive War and International Law,"] Center for Defense Information, December 5, 2003.*Maggie Ledford Lawson,[[National Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction]http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives2/2004a/022704/022704p.php "The fatal legend of preemptive war. German history shows the perils of Washington's new strategy,"] ''National Catholic Reporter'', February 27, 2004.*John Hendren, [[NSC-68]] *[[neoconservativehttp://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/intervention/2005/0319firststrike.htm "Policy OKs First Strike to Protect US,"]] *[[Operation Iraqi Freedom]] *[[Operation Iraqi Freedom II]] *[[Patriot Act I]] *[[peacekeeping]] *[[Post-war Iraq/NATO]] *[[Proactive Preemptive Operations Group]] *[[Project for ''Los Angeles Times'', March 19, 2005: "Two years after the 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 threat to the New American Century]] *[[regime change]] *[[Stanley FoundationUnited States. The doctrine also now stipulates that the U.S. will use 'active deterrence's Independent Task Force on US Strategies for National Security]] in concert with its allies 'if we can' but could act unilaterally otherwise, Defense officials said."  *[[Transitional Iraqi Governmentcategory:national security]] *[[Truman doctrinecategory:war in Iraq]] *[[U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century / Hart-Rudman Commissioncategory:Iraq]] *[[war on freedomcategory:Globalization]] *[[war on terrorismCategory:Civil liberties (U.S.)]] *[[weapons of mass destruction]Category:Needs review] == External 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 claim of a right to overthrow regimes it considers hostile is extraordinary - and one the world will soon find intolerable], ''The American Conservative'', no date. *Alan Bock, [http://www.antiwar.com/bock/b091002.html Preventive or Preemptive War?], ''Eye on the Empire'', September 10, 2002. *William Galston, [http://www.prospect.org/print/V13/17/galston-w.html Perils of Preemptive War. Why America's place in the world will shift -- for the worse -- if we attack Iraq], ''The American Prospect'', September 23, 2002. *Stephen Murdock, [http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/washington_lawyer/january_2003/war.cfm Preemptive War: Is It Legal?], ''DCBar'', January 2003. *Todd Gitlin, [http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2003/02/ma_205_01.html America's Age of Empire: The Bush Doctrine], ''MotherJones'', January/February 2003. *Michael E. Salla, [http://www.exopolitics.org/Study-Paper2.htm An Exopolitical Perspective on the Preemptive War against Iraq], ''Exopolitics'', February 3, 2003. *Eliot Katz, [http://www.counterpunch.org/katz02282003.html To Declare Pre-emptive War is to Declare a Bankruptcy of the Imagination], ''CounterPunch'', February 28, 2003. *Robert Schneer, [http://www.salon.com/opinion/scheer/2003/03/12/war_crimes/index_np.html Preemptive war crimes. Driven by a coterie of neoconservative ideologues -- and the accidental president in their sway -- we are hours away from becoming international outlaws], ''Salon.com'', March 12, 2003. *Jeffrey Donovan,[http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2003/03/14032003174825.asp Iraq: 'Preemptive' Or Otherwise, U.S. Interventionism Has A Long History], ''Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty'', March 14, 2003. *Steven R. Weisman, [http://www.iht.com/articles/90747.html Doctrine of preemptive war has its roots in early 1990s], ''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 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 17, 2003. *Joel S. Beinin, Ivan Eland, and Edward A. Olsen, [http://www.independent.org/tii/forums/030625ipfTrans.html Preemptive War Strategy: A New U.S. Empire?] (Transcript), [[Independent Institute]], June 25, 2003. *Ulrich Arnswald, [http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/09/1639819.php Preventive War or Preemptive War], ''IndyMedia'', September 3, 2003. *Stan Crock, [http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=66&ncid=66&e=1&u=/bw/20031022/bs_bw/nf200310221599db056 Preemptive War Is the Wrong Weapon], ''BusinessWeek'' Online, October 22, 2003: "the electronic newsletter sent out by [[Chuck Spinney]], a retired Pentagon analyst ... starts out with a quote from the late journalist [[H. L. Mencken]]: '''"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed [and hence clamorous to be led to safety] by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."''' *Jalal Ghazi, [http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=17268 Wolfowitz Doctrine Sinks in the Iraqi Quagmire], Pacific News Service, November 25, 2003: "The pre-emption doctrine of Deputy Defense Secretary [[Paul Dundes Wolfowitz]] 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: the quagmire has stymied aggressive U.S. unilateral action and forced Washington to work with European allies and even an old foe, Iran." '''Future Preemptive Actions''' *David Morgan, [http://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 Plans], Reuters, December 5, 2003.