Recently, cjcampbell posted:

Jose wrote:

When a nation attacks us, we have the moral right to defend
ourselves, to attack back, and to defeat the enemy. When a nation
attacks our allies, we have the obligation to our allies, according
to the terms of our alliance, to help them defend themselves - in
exchange presumably they would do the same or some equivalent for us.
[...]
In the case of 911, we were not attacked by a nation. We were
attacked by a handful of rogue individuals. We have the right and
moral obligation to root them out and destroy them and their support
structure. However, we do not have the right to attack other
countries just because they "look the same", nor do we have the
right to use this attack as an excuse to the American People to wage
war on other countries not involved.


Would we have the right to attack a country that was harboring those
who planned 9-11, funding their activities, and training them? Would
you consider that country to have attacked us?

Apparently not, given that Bin Laden et al are very likely in Pakistan. We
knew that, and attacked Iraq. Hmm.

Apparently a lot of people believe he did by paying rewards to suicide
bombers' families, firing missiles at our planes, etc.

He was firing missiles at our planes in *his* airspace. Hardly surprising.

Let us suppose that an enraged man who cannot be reasoned with bursts
into your home screaming that he is going to kill you and your entire
family. He points a gun at you. Do you wait for him to fire first
before you shoot him, or do you shoot first? What if he is out in the
public street?

Let's not gloss over your assertion that he "...bursts into your home..."
If he had burst into your neighbor's home, do you rush in with a gun and
start shooting? When your stray bullet kills one of your neighbors, what
should be the consequences?

Neil