doesn't the logic of pre emptive strikes create the perfect justification for Binladin's attack on the WTC?
guys wait wait...
you got me all wrooong!!
what I meant is that, the whole idea of pre emptive strikes is so stupid and un understandable to the point that, if you want to say that it justifies the war on Iraq, a country that is an enemy that was attacked with no evidences on is involvement with ANY attach against the states, if we are going to accept that the war on Iraq is justified, then we will have to accept that Binladin, who I totally don't agree with, totally don't support, actually did the same thing, he attacked an enemy, But at least he was attacking the actual country that was responsible for the things that were pissing him off!
what I meant to say is that both of these two assumptions are at the same level of stupidity and ignorance.
Stupidity and ignorance? Well.........no. To quote comedian Dana Carvey (Saturday Nite Live) " I only want to know one thing, what is all our oil doing under their sand?"
Arrogance and greed.....yes.