Comment: Hmm. Interesting

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: It is the notion (see in situ)

Hmm. Interesting

Hmm. Interesting distinguishing between defending your own country and defending all countries, but what makes the preemptive principle correct in the prior versus the latter? If a standard were dropped and every nation had to abide by the standard of preemption then the world would have more warfare since no one would have to prove self-defense, rather, claim that their intelligence suggests that their enemies are planning a preemptive strike first. The world becomes much less peaceful when the standard is lowered to suspicion. The world becomes much less peaceful when every country has to destroy their enemies before their enemies destroy them. Actually, if this were the worldwide policy, the most aggressive and preemptive nation would dominate and the weaker countries would be forced to submit absolutely lest they risk annihilation by prompting paranoia in the empire nation. The empire would become the judge, jury, and executioner. The empire would usurp the King of Kings in his rightful role. Of course, Assyria, Babylon, Egypt, Media, Persia, Greece, Rome, Israel, all did this and were destroyed. They said "I am and there is no one besides me." This is the attitude in the heart at the bottom of preemptive warfare. A great pride of heart one that exalts itself above all other nations and against Justice, and against the Lord of Lords.