Camden Central High School
Camden, Tennessee
Teacher: Wanda Allen
Preemption or Prevention: How Have Governments
Prevented War
In The Past And What Should Be Their Approach In The Future
By Ann Marie Pepper
12th grade
In today’s society there are millions of people who are automatically against the thoughts of war of any kind. You also have tons of people who are ready for war and ready to take action when needed to do so. Knowing about wars through out history has taught me that when America is threatened the president has to make the calls for us. Some of the presidents in the past haven’t been good but if we went to fight there had to have been a good reason behind it. In history there have been 5 declared wars. In different ways these wars were taken care of. I believe with preemption the American government would be better off. As we know preemption is the ability of knowing when your enemy is going to attack and you take action first.
Senator Byrd was a man who was for preemption. He made good strong cases about preemption and made good arguments. I believe he has a good idea about how the government should work. If you think about it, when the government uses the process of prevention then the people of America will be threatened. The military is for protecting fellow Americans but we don’t need to see them die when it is too late to take action. The American soldiers need to be ready to take action then to get surrounded on a surprise attack. The American people also play a huge role in the government. We are the ones who pick and vote on the elected officials to guide our country. If they would research out all the men running for president, mayor, governor, etc. then they will find out what the men will be like and what they stand for.
Other people like prevention. Prevention is when you do not take action right away and you wait. By using prevention we are risking the lives of fellow Americans. Prevention isn’t the way to go. If the government uses prevention then it might be too late to take action. We will be goners. To me, preemption is the way to go. I have a father and a brother in the military. Through this experience with Operation Iraqi Freedom I have learned that when you have enough information on the enemy of a possible attack, you need to attack them first. I see when some people say Bush hasn’t had enough information to go over there in the first place, but if I had a little bit of information of an attack on America then I would as my duty of being the President take action. It is his duty to protect all Americans in our country.
Knowing that there were three democratic presidents before it is hard for Bush (a republican) to do his job and not get criticized. FDR, JFK, and Clinton were the three. They all had dealings with other countries. They might not have been very good but they did what they thought had to be done. Today, our government and other governments can prevent war by taking all the information they have or can find out and then strike the enemy before they come on our home turf. If you do nothing but sit back then you are just waiting and asking for trouble. In the future we need to take action as Americans to help out the nation by electing good Christian God-fearing men to take all matters given to him and deal with them the best way possible. Maybe in the future we can have a good government who wants the best for the American people and not worry about the cost or the criticizing of the choices. We would need to back up the President in all he would do and pray. We need prayer right now more than anything. We need to pray that the man over us will use the best process he can whether it be preemption or prevention.
A lot of Presidents in the past have been scared, worried about money, or afraid that allies with other countries will back out of alliances with them when they needed to worry about what would be the effect on America and how Americans will be protected in the long run. I think I have made it clear when I say I am for preemption. When the government lies back and gets trampled on, that is when they will realize they should of used preemption.
Questions
Prime Minister Tony Blair's Speech
Q1-What does the Prime
Minister mean by "politics of globalization"?
He wants to use the "power of community" to do what? It means that there are
critics today who will always look down on the ideas and interests of the nation
because they all have opinions and have to have something to complain about. Our
self-interests and mutual interests are today inextricably woven together. If we
make our guiding light for the global economy, then it will be a force for good
and an international movement we should take pride in leading. And we need to
use power of community with globalization.
Greaves Whitney
Q 2- Greaves Whitney
singles out three Democratic presidents in his article. Name them and explain
why they are mentioned.
JFK, FDR, and Bill Clinton were the
three Democrat presidents. JFK wasn’t the first president to make a case for
preemption. He was in office with the Cuban Missile Crisis. He told Americans
summarized that we wouldn’t tolerate deliberate deception and offensive threats
on the part of any nation, whether it is small or large. FDR was in office when
the Nazis came along. He warned the Nazis that the U.S. would not look passively
on their menacing arms buildup and aggression on the high seas. He said that we
would defend ourselves only if the torpedo succeeds in getting home, or if the
crew and passengers ended up drowned. Bill Clinton launched Operation Desert
Fox, an intense 70-hour bombing campaign against Saddam Hussein. In the end he
left no room for doubt. He said if the UN couldn’t take up the job of
undertaking weapon inspections than the U.S. would do it.
Excerpt from November 8, 2003 Issue of the Economist
Q 3- Alexis de
Tocqueville was mentioned in the Economist article. Name three qualities de
Tocqueville found exceptional about Americans.
The first one is that he found an intense amount of Americans religious beliefs.
Second are those in recent years it is true that some of America’s
distinctiveness has become more marked in economics, society, and politics. The
third is that there are some elements of American distinctiveness that end up
dividing America just as much as they divide it from others.
Q 4- Will it be better
for the world if America succeeds in bringing stability, prosperity and even
democracy to Iraq, or if it fails?
I think fails because if we do
everything to make Iraq happy than all we have done is made them reliant on the
U.S. and it be bad for us as a nation. They need to go ahead and pull our troops
out. They are not listening to us now so what makes you think they will days,
weeks, or months from now.
Q 5- Is it American
competence that is feared, or incompetence?
I think American incompetence because
incoherence is one of the luxuries of impotence. And those who cannot, or will
not, take responsibility themselves fee free to snipe at those who do.
Q 6- If America were to
withdraw hastily from Iraq, under the pressure of attacks, would that be a sign
of humility or a devastatingly irresponsible act?
I guess I would have to go with
Humility because if America backs out for any reasons now, then it will show
that we are weak and that we can’t do what we say and then other countries will
get bad ideas of us. We will back out of a conflict that hasn’t yet been solved.
Q 7- What is it about
America that the writer claims is likely to make it even stronger in the future?
Preemption will make the world
stronger in the future because we will be able to get the terrorists before they
get us. People will stand together as a big powerful community and we will take
heed in the actions of the government. We will be able to attack first this time
unlike Pearl Harbor and others.
Congressional Record
Q 8- Name three U.S.
Senators who expressed concern about expanding the doctrine of preemption.
Senator Feingold, Senator Byrd, and
Senator Leahy
Q 9- State Senator
Feingold's definition of preemption and prevention. How does he describe the
difference between the two? Do you agree with the Senator? Explain.
He said that preemption is knowing
that an enemy plans to attack and not waiting to defend oneself. Prevention is
that believing that another may possibly someday attack, or may desire to
attack, and justifying the immediate use of force on those grounds. I agree
because we can’t afford as a country to wait until it happens and us not be
ready. We need to take action on the enemy before we are hit from behind. If a
certain country did it to us before you bet they’ll do it again.
Q 10- In your opinion,
would the world in which the most powerful countries engage in preemption be a
safer world? Explain.
No. Because if preemption is knowing
about the enemy and not waiting to defend oneself than you will get tore down or
hit from behind and than war will break out again and no one will be at peace.
Q 11- In your opinion,
would such a world be one in which our national values would thrive?
Yes, because there are so many people
in our country who look at national values. People thrive all the time on values
because they are worried about the nation; economy and even future attacks. Our
values are precious to us and we don’t need anything to get in the way. We are
dependent on our values.
Q 12- In your opinion, would such a world be one in which terrorism would wither or would it be one in which terrorist recruits would increase in number daily?
In my opinion it would be a world where terrorist recruits would increase in number daily. I mean, look around, the world we live in is not getting better it is getting worse. I think if we go with preemption then we will get the terrorists before they get in our territory. Prevention isn’t going to help because you are standing by and waiting to attack. If you wait then it may be too late and we will get cut from behind. So with all of the bad leaders around the world with terrorism it will get worse. The leaders may fall out but there are always followers.
Q 13- Discuss three reasons to favor the doctrine of preemption. First it will help the community power get stronger by sticking together as a nation against terrorists. Second, it will grant the access of going over to get the enemy instead of waiting for them to get us. And third, it will show that America isn’t looking for a fight but we are not going to just sit there on a log and watch foreign countries destroy us.
Q 14- Who said "The trust and the temptation are too great for any one man." What was the context?
Madison said the quote and the context was from Senator Byrd. Meaning, like Bush today, Anyone who is in the House has a responsibility and that a man can be trusted but he could also do wrong if he is not careful.
Q 15- Senator Byrd voiced a great many concerns. Regarding preemption. Name six concerns that you share with the Senator.
Six concerns for me would be that first we strive for a national consensus like Byrd said. Second, the resolution authorizes the President to determine and use military forces as he will, when he will, how he will, and whenever he will. I have a father and a brother in the military and they signed up to do what needs to be done when our country is in danger. Third, We should utilize the time we have to let the UN marshal its forces and try to get other countries to assist this country in carrying the burden. Forth, We should let inspectors go back and have restrictions such that they will have full and free opportunity to inspect wherever they want. Fifth, we should not try to divert their attention to a threat. And Sixth, We are ceding the constitutional authority to declare war, and it is open- ended.