><snip>
>
>>Pre-emptiveness is a necessity. Had we taken out countries like Iraq, Syria, and Iran, it could have prevented 9-11.
>
>You do realize that pre-emptiveness is not some God given right for some and not others. The otherside are also thinking they have some sort of pre-emptive "right".

But of course - that's the whole point of the Bush doctrine. Anyone can attack anyone else preemptively, as long as they can cook up their media to keep the fact away at least a month or two until the decision making is done.

I wouldn't be surprised if Iran accepted this most prominent aspect of American foreign policy, as it has good case to prove that USA is 1) a clear and present danger (even ordinary citizens already talk about "taking out" Iran), 2) the existence of WMD in USA is not just proven, it's plainly obvious, 3) they were financing several terrorist organizations (UCK/KLA, the Taliban, Blackwater), 4) they are close allies of their enemy, 5) they have some oil reserves, 6) they have nuclear capabilities and still work on them, 7) their military and paramilitary units are often found beyond its borders. I figure they could make an even stronger case, and I think their Parliament will have no problem giving prez. Ahmedinejad a clear mandate for a preemptive strike.