OK, let's look at the quote that's the subject of this thread one more time:
Japan has warned it would launch a pre-emptive military action against North Korea if it had firm evidence Pyongyang was planning a missile attack. Defence Minister Shigeru Ishiba said it would be "a self-defence measure" if North Korea was going to "resort to arms against Japan".
Tom: I guarantee when this is over, enough information will be released to show that this is justified.
You're arguing that Iraq has missiles capable of reaching the US? Not even Bush is willing to make such a sweeping and unsupported statement, even knowing it would be a "killer" argument, excuse the expression.
In the context of this thread, that's the definition of an "imminent danger" that forms a solid case for self-defense. Bush hasn't made that case, not by a country mile.
--Robert
Current Events » in reply to Re: Comparing apples and oranges
Re: Comparing apples and oranges (still!)
The whole thread (21 posts)
- Preemptive attack threatened
- I'd dial "I-800-NEO" and be aghast at a cosmic accident at their nuke plants
- The clinton-carter appeasement strategy is shown for the bad theatre it was.§ (n/t)
- Re: Preemptive attack threatened
- Comparing apples and oranges
- Where's all the angry Democrats attacking this unilateral action...
- I'd say that the North Korean situation
