Daniel Webster on Preemptive War

Jason

> 30 days ago

‹ chat status

Profile

Name:: Jason
Location:: Netanya,
Birthday:: 11/03/1941
Status:: Single
Job / Career:: Consultant

Stats

Posts:: 1109
Post Reads:: 5,230
Photos:: 53
Last Online:: > 30 days ago
Technorati:: blog reactions

Users Chatting

View All 1109 »

My Friends

anniel

Daniel Webster on Preemptive War

In 1841, U.S. Secretary of State Daniel Webster
"articulated a set of demanding criteria for acting with a 'necessity of
self-defense'—in particular for a legitimate use of preemptive force.
Preemption, Webster said, is justified only in response to an imminent threat;
moreover, the 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, a preemptive attack must be limited to dealing with the
immediate threat and must discriminate between armed and unarmed, innocent and
guilty."

posted on July 4, 2008 9:21 AM ()

Comments:

Has our gene pool been so depleted that we can't find anyone with more intellect than ummm, the prez? Over 150 years ago, we find a definition of what should have been done... My!

comment by sunlight on July 4, 2008 1:14 PM ()

You do have a way with thoughts and words!!

reply by sunlight on July 6, 2008 5:25 PM ()

Our public employees are triple dippers. They collect salaries, accept bribes and steal the government blind. They run guns, women and narcotic. Any honest workers should be fired for stupidity.

reply by bumpedoff on July 4, 2008 10:08 PM ()

Well, we are in no man's land... If enough people did speak up, the politicians would have listened. They listen to the loudest, and the ones who have the greatest numbers. But somehow everyone was distracted by their own worries. Now it is everyone's worry, and nothing is still being done.

reply by sunlight on July 4, 2008 1:56 PM ()

It's even worse. A number of months after the invasion EVERYONE should have realized it was illegal and prosecutable. To cover it, the US could have announced victory and ended the war. When they didn't do this, they opened employees in all three branches of government to charges of war crimes and murder.

reply by bumpedoff on July 4, 2008 1:39 PM ()

I suppose he said or wrote that in defense of our invasion of Mexico the year before.

comment by jondude on July 4, 2008 12:25 PM ()

I am sure from time to time we have had compelling arguments to justify preemptive expeditions and strikes. Extended occupations such as the ones in Europe and Korea are indefensible [and damned expensive].
Clearly, we can't continue to claim huge segments of resources as our private domain.

reply by bumpedoff on July 4, 2008 2:02 PM ()

Too bad Bush never got around to reading this.

comment by redimpala on July 4, 2008 10:21 AM ()

I don't know if it would have done him any good. Bullies rarely change, as pedophiles and wife beaters don't reform. They don't respect life animal or human. My good friend Mike often said."If you can kill a cat, you can kill a human being." A young hoodlum first killed my cat and then stabbed Mike 41 times.

reply by bumpedoff on July 4, 2008 11:26 AM ()

Comment on this article

1,109 articles found [ Previous Article ] [ Next Article ] [ First ] [ Last ]

Jason

Profile

Stats

Users Chatting

Recent Posts

My Friends

Subscribe

Daniel Webster on Preemptive War