>> > We do not consider pre-emptive strikes to be justified for a reason. > Except when we do. Strike out "when", at least for the U.S. The U.S. lawmakers ob

>> > We do not consider pre-emptive strikes to be justified for a reason. > Except when we do. Strike out "when", at least for the U.S. The U.S. lawmakers obviously believe in importance of the U.S. being able to do no-notice preemptive nuclear strike and the proof is that the bills to "prohibit the President from using the Armed Forces to conduct a first-use nuclear strike" are "read" but then nothing happens afterwards: Read Jan 2017: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/669 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/669 Read Jan 2019: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/669 https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/669 Coverage Jan 2019: https://homelandprepnews.com/stories/32314-sen-markey-rep-lieu-reintroduce-bill-to-require-congressional-approval-for-nuclear-strike/ https://homelandprepnews.com/stories/32314-sen-markey-rep-li... "because of our deeply flawed and dangerous system, if the president decides to launch a nuclear weapon, no one can stop him. It is high time for Congress to add a check on this or any future president’s ability to start a nuclear war." September 2019: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/09/10/donald-trump-nuclear-arms-race-228058 https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/09/10/donald-tr... "Trump also has absolute authority to order the first use of nuclear weapons with no checks or balances from anyone: not his advisors, and not the Congress."