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/irp/offdocs/pdd18.htm Counterproliferation Initiative]" [Presidential Decision Directive PDDwiki/NSC 18Preemptive_war] 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.Spreemptive force. nuclear weapons to defeat chemical or biological weapons. 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]] *[[Iraqi Civil Defense Corps]] ==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;[[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 ==*[[Patriot Act IAuthorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002]] *[[peacekeepingBush doctrine]] *[[Post-war Iraq/NATODoctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations]] *[[Proactive Preemptive Operations GroupEisenhower doctrine]] *[[Project for the New American CenturyGeneva Conventions]] *[[Stanley Foundation's Independent Task Force on US Strategies for National Securitynuclear 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/V13BR28.1/17/galston-wcrawford.html Perils of Preemptive War"The Best Defense. Why AmericaThe problem with Bush’s 'preemptive's place in the world will shift -- for the worse -- if we attack Iraqwar 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/2003/03cache?p=%22preemptive+war%22&ei=UTF-8&fl=0&pstart=1&b=91&u=freedom.orlingrabbe.com/12lfetimes/war_crimes/index_npselfdefense_preempt.html Preemptive htm&w=%22preemptive+war crimes%22&d=12914A2F40&icp=1&. Driven by a coterie of neoconservative ideologues -intl=us "Self- Defense: Preemptive, Immediate, and the accidental president in their sway -- we are hours away from becoming international outlawsRetaliatory"](cache file), ''Salon.comThe Laissez Faire Electronic Times'', March 12Vol 2, No 18, May 5, 2003. *Jeffrey DonovanDuncan E.J. Currie,[http://www.rferlglobelaw.orgcom/nca/features/2003/03Iraq/14032003174825Preventive_war_after_iraq.asp Iraq: htm "'PreemptivePreventive War' Or Otherwiseand International Law After Iraq, U.S. Interventionism Has A Long History"], ''Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty'', March 14May 22, 2003. *Steven RC. WeismanWelsh, [http://www.ihtcdi.comorg/news/articleslaw/90747.html Doctrine of preemptive -war has its roots in early 1990s.cfm "Preemptive War and International Law,"]Center for Defense Information, ''International Herald Tribune'', March 24December 5, 2003. *Bob ZimmermanMaggie Ledford Lawson, [http://www.impeach-bush-nownatcath.orgcom/NCR_Online/archives2/Articles2004a/CampaignMore022704/globalnightmare022704p.htm php "The truth behind fatal legend of preemptive war. German history shows the American invasion perils of Iraq: The Bush administrationWashington's evolving global nightmarenew strategy,"], ''impeach-bush-now.orgNational Catholic Reporter'', April 7February 27, 2003: "When did 'democracy' become an American export; a commodity installed wherever we see fit by means of overwhelming force?" 2004.*[[Howard Dean]]John Hendren, [http://www.deanvolunteersglobalpolicy.org/DeanVolunteersempire/intervention/press_view2005/0319firststrike.asp?ID=740 Bush: It's Not Just His Doctrine That's Wronghtm "Policy OKs First Strike to Protect US,"], ''CommonDreamsLos Angeles Times'', April 17March 19, 20032005: "Two years after the U. *Joel S. Beinininvasion of Iraq, Ivan Eland, and Edward Athe Pentagon has formally included in key strategic plans provisions for launching preemptive strikes against nations thought to pose a threat to the United States. Olsen, [http://www.independent.org/tii/forums/030625ipfTrans.html Preemptive War Strategy: A New The doctrine also now stipulates that the U.S. Empire?] (Transcript)will use 'active deterrence' in concert with its allies 'if we can' but could act unilaterally otherwise, Defense officials said."  [[Independent Institutecategory:national security]], June 25, 2003. *Ulrich Arnswald, [http[category://www.indybay.org/news/2003/09/1639819.php Preventive War or Preemptive Warwar in Iraq]], ''IndyMedia'', September 3, 2003. *Stan Crock, [http[category://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=66&ncid=66&e=1&u=/bw/20031022/bs_bw/nf200310221599db056 Preemptive War Is the Wrong WeaponIraq]], ''BusinessWeek'' Online, October 22, 2003: "the electronic newsletter sent out by [[Chuck Spinneycategory:Globalization]], a retired Pentagon analyst ... starts out with a quote from the late journalist [[HCategory:Civil liberties (U. LS. 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."''' '''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.