4 ms·
Self-defence, preemptively, on foreign soil on the other side of the world? With definitions like that, who needs a lawful order to legitimise anything? > De
by craigsmansion 8y ago
Self-defence, preemptively, on foreign soil on the other side of the world?
With definitions like that, who needs a lawful order to legitimise anything?
> Department of Defense (remember, its very name is "Defense")
Like the Ministry of Truth (remember, its very name is "Truth").
- albntomat0 8y agoPreemptive self-defense absolutely is a legitimate thing, if used properly. If a great deal of violence against civilians can be stopped by a smaller amount of violence against combatants, the second part is justified, even if it takes place "preemptively, on foreign soil on the other side of the world." A significant amount of context based on real world cases is necessary however. When such capabilities have been misused, we look at why they have been misused and fix those. The Department of Defense has a legitimate usage for defense of the United States. Misuses of that should be handled through the appropriate political channels, rather than destroying something with a legitimate purpose.