 | Seyom Brown - 2004 - 228 pages
...losses would be exponentially more severe if terrorists acquired and used weapons of mass destruction. The United States has long maintained the option of...The greater the threat, the greater is the risk of inaction—and the more compelling the case for taking anticipatory action to defend ourselves, even... | |
 | Eugene R. Wittkopf, James M. McCormick - 2004 - 420 pages
...to develop weapons of mass destruction. Also, it asserted that the United States reserved to itself "the option of preemptive actions to counter a sufficient threat to our national security." This strategy, in the words of one analyst, "could be ... the most important reformulation of US grand... | |
 | Bryan Hilliard, Tom Lansford, Robert P. Watson - 2004 - 302 pages
...terrorism which attempts to gain or use weapons of mass destruction (WMD) or their precursors." Further, "The United States has long maintained the option...The greater the threat, the greater is the risk of inaction—and the more compelling the case for taking anticipatory action to defend ourselves, even... | |
 | Armin Von Bogdandy, Rüdiger Wolfrum, Christiane E. Philipp - 2004 - 479 pages
...subsequent passage makes clear that the strategy statement occasions no fundamental change in concept: "The United States has long maintained the option...The greater the threat, the greater is the risk of inaction—and the more compelling the case for taking anticipatory action to defend ourselves, even... | |
 | Alexander T.J. Lennon, Camille Eiss - 2004 - 396 pages
...adapt the concept of imminent threat to the capabilities and objectives of today's adversaries. ... The United States has long maintained the option of...sufficient threat to our national security. ... The United States will not use force in all cases to preempt threats nor should nations use preemption... | |
 | William J. Crotty - 2004 - 340 pages
...ways that meet the challenges of the twenty-first century" (Bush 2002c). The president went on to say: "The United States has long maintained the option...sufficient threat to our national security. . . . the United States will, if necessary, act preemptively" (Bush 2002a). However, it was not "preemptive"... | |
 | Nicholas Guyatt - 2003 - 340 pages
...States would take pre-emptive action against terrorists and rogue states. The document pointed out that 'the United States has long maintained the option...counter a sufficient threat to our national security'. In this new incarnation, however, the Bush administration promised not only to take military action... | |
 | Niels M. Blokker, N. J. Schrijver - 2011 - 548 pages
...bench stone for any policy of pre-emption to even be thought about', The Times (22 November 2003). of pre-emptive actions to counter a sufficient threat...national security. The greater the threat, the greater the risk of inaction - and the more compelling the case for taking anticipatory action to defend ourselves,... | |
 | Christian Walter, Silja Vöneky, Volker Röben, Frank Schorkopf - 2004 - 1516 pages
...option of pre-emptive actions to counter a "sufficient threat" to national security. The document states "The greater the threat, the greater is the risk of...inaction — and the more compelling the case for anticipatory action to defend ourselves, even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the... | |
 | Matthew Sparke - 2005 - 442 pages
...includes: Proactive counterproliferation efforts. . . . We cannot let our enemies strike first. . . . The United States has long maintained the option of...The greater the threat, the greater is the risk of inaction.74 It only remained for the concocted evidence of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction to be... | |
| |
States has long maintained the option of preemptive actions to counter a sufficient threat to our national security. The greater the threat, the greater the risk of inaction - and the more compelling the case for taking anticipatory action to defend ourselves,... 
