>>By the time Reagan took office, the embassy had ceased being one, for all intents and purposes. I don't know that there is an exact legal definition for when a building ceases to be sovereign territory, but an attack on a functioning embassy may clearly be called an act of war.
>
>I am sure you'll agree then that the Hezbollah attack on the U.S. embassy in Beirut in 1983 and the bombing of our Marines barracks the same year were acts of war. I don't recall Reagan do anything about either of those.

Because he used his common sense and kept the world position of the U.S. in his mind.
Now the U.S. stands alone, power-wise and the noe-cons have full control and are using the opportunity to do what they've always wanted, which is to use that power to CONTROL whatever they want.

War should be anachronistic at this point in the development of humanity, at the very least for the more "developed" countries.