Why or why not?
2006-06-17 14:08:45 · 11 answers · asked by quasimodem1_2005 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
the war in Iraq is a pre-emptive strike
2006-06-17 14:13:04 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
A pre-emptive strike is effected before - and not during - hostilities. There is a full-fledged war going on in Iraq. The other obvious issue is the 'target'. What will be struck in such a strike? The terrorists do not present a well-defined target.
Do also remember that such a strike, with the possibilities of collateral damage, would undermine the pro-US Iraqi government and further fuel anti-Americanism.
2006-06-17 16:37:36 · answer #2 · answered by Neeraj 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How can you have a pre-emptive strike to end a war? Did you just learn that word today? Seriously......
The operative part to the word pre-emptive is PRE (meaning before or prior to).
Would a pre-emptive strike help to avoid a war with Iran? There, I used it in a sentence for you.
2006-06-17 14:13:14 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
IA pre-emptive strike is on a particular area like the Nuclear Power Plant. I do not see that we could strike anything that would not hurt the new government more than help ending the war.
2006-06-17 14:54:33 · answer #4 · answered by Wolfpacker 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You don't know much about what's going on over there do you? A pre-emptive strike against what? I'm assuming you mean an attack from the air, we have done that, but it is now a ground war where our forces have to fight an enemy that hides behind women and children, hides in Mosques, etc. What do you want us to do, Nuke the whole country? your question makes no sense. The war is on track. It takes time to make changes. Be patient and respect the people fighting for you! Let me ask you a question, what have you done for your country? I already know you have never been in the military or you wouldn't have asked this question. Why don't you enlist and see the truth?
2006-06-17 14:25:32 · answer #5 · answered by basscatcher 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
pre-emptive strike on what? the terrorists? Like in the middle of the towns with civilians? Prob not. We'd just make more enemies.
2006-06-17 14:18:52 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If a pre-emptive strive would end the war in Iraq, the war would have ended eons ago. If only it were that simple..
2006-06-17 14:13:06 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pre-emptive because the conflict replaced into began by ability of america of a for reason of scuffling with aggression by ability of Iraq. Your round arguments about treaties from Gulf conflict i have not any earnings. Saddam did not declare conflict on Kuwait. us of a and the different international locations that countered Iraq did not declare conflict on Iraq. by ability of a similar lack of reasoning you're demonstrating you ought to hint Operation Iraqi Freedom again to the days of Alexander the great. It replaced into all his fault!
2016-10-14 06:28:46 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the definition of a pre-emptive strike is to attack the enemy without warning.....so how long have we been in Iraq and how long has it been since Sadam and his Republican Army been defeated? I don't suppose you were asking about Iran?
2006-06-17 14:24:11 · answer #9 · answered by Its not me Its u 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i really love the people who use heavy stratigic idioms to show that they are thinking like five star generals.
man.pre-emptive strike means cutting tomato with razor blade.
2006-06-18 10:21:02 · answer #10 · answered by adm_maaf 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋