Jeroen wrote:
> An act of war is an agressive act by the military of a country against an
> other country.
Are you sure? This poses some very interesting quesitons....
The first one, Dan beat me to:
>So, if a country only employed civilians to build and launch a nuclear
>missle, it would not be an act of war?
Additionally:
If it is demonstrated that military officials of Afghanistan or Iraq or
both gave aid or comfort or both to the terrorists that implemented this
attack, does that constitute an act of war?
Should State-sponsored terrorism against another State be considered an act
of war? If this State-sponsored killing of thousands of civilians should
not be considered an act of war, why not? And what should an act of war be
defined as?
What is the appropriate US response to the killing of thousands of civilians?
Finally, in relation to the last one, you have not posted your answer to
Dan's question regarding what you would have considered an appropriate US
policy for the Balkans in the '90's was. On one hand, you are on record
that we should not be involved in places of the world where we are not
wanted. On the other hand, you have berated the US for waiting too long
to intervene in the Balkans. I am most curious as to what your
recommended policy for the United States would have been, as well as in
your answers to the above questions.
JDG
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
"Freedom itself was attacked today, and Freedom will be Defended."
-U.S. President George W. Bush, 09/11/01
