What is a Preemtive Strike?

I don't know about that,I hear it many times but I'd never understood the meaning of the word!

That's why I have a few questions for you ATS'ers:

-Pearl Harbor was a preemtive strike?

-Did we have in WW2 preemtive strikes?

-Hiroshima and Nagasaki...preemtive strikes?

-Fukushima..preemtive strike?

-Did Hitler inventeted that concept?

Is OWS a preemtive strike used by Gov.?

-Is there any international law to allow something like that?

-Will WW3 have a preemtive strike(s)?And if yes how will be to justify(accountable) ,and by who...

Maybe you can bring some light in to the darkness of(they'r) my mind....

Thank you.

your 10 years old you are at your first day of school, there is a bully that bothered kids last year.
you walk up to him and for no obvious reason beat the living crap out of him.

that is a preemptive strike, thinking that at some point the bully will probably pick on you.

a pre emptive strike is an attack on your enemy before they attack you. the point of this is to make the enemy's attack impossible to acheive or at least weaker.
none on your list is pre emptive, it's retaliation.

If you are relatively certain that something is going to happen, then it is generally considered in some way beneficial to act on it beforehand instead of waiting for it to happen and then responding to it; if nothing else, it saves time. This is pre-emption.

If someone is in the middle of or about to ask you a question and you can guess what it is, you can answer the question before they have finished asking it; pre-empting their question.

It is perfectly legal in the UK to attack someone if you genuinely believe that they are about to attack you. This is because you are far less able to defend yourself if you are generous enough to wait for them to begin kicking your teeth in. This is a pre-emptive attack and this theory transfers nicely to an international level.

I didn't answer all of your questions because I don't have enough time, but I hope I helped! A pre-emptive attack is an attack that deals with something that is perceived to be imminent.

Premptive Strike similar to the self defense option in a murder trial. It has two major requirements

1) you must win and

2) you must be popular

It came into public use by as a stratagem to win a nuclear war or prevent an all out MAD by destroying the opponents nuclear weapons at their bases. The first actual Preemptive strike was by Israel in the 6 Day War 1967.

secure.wikimedia.org...

Man..I am so Dumb...I didn't understand a berry!

reply to post by diamondsmith

A preemptive strike is a military raid with a limited military objective which falls short of the objective of the initiation of all-out war. A preemptive strike does not usually anticipate the likelihood of immediate retaliatory action.

Source: Wikipedia

I believe that by this definition, Pearl Harbor could be called a preemptive strike, as the Japanese had a limited objective, and they did not expect us to respond with all-out war. Their goal of destroying our Pacific Fleet was not attained, as they had hoped.

reply to post by diamondsmith


Pre-emptive strike is you attack someone before they can do you harm. You don't wait for them to harm you, you hit them before they hit you.

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by diamondsmith

 

A preemptive strike is a military raid with a limited military objective which falls short of the objective of the initiation of all-out war. A preemptive strike does not usually anticipate the likelihood of immediate retaliatory action.

Source: Wikipedia

And who is to be hold responsible?

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by diamondsmith

 

Pre-emptive strike is you attack someone before they can do you harm. You don't wait for them to harm you, you hit them before they hit you.

Can Iran do that?

Originally posted by diamondsmith

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by diamondsmith

 

A preemptive strike is a military raid with a limited military objective which falls short of the objective of the initiation of all-out war. A preemptive strike does not usually anticipate the likelihood of immediate retaliatory action.

Source: Wikipedia

And who is to be hold responsible?

As always, the one who loses, whether it blossoms into an all-out war or not, is the one that will be blamed.

The winners write the epitaph.

I was kinda a nerd in elementry. and back in the late 60`s, during the start of the woman movement which gave females a powerful feeling, the bullies were mean verbally and physically, for myself iI got the verba abusel, anyhow, during the summer between 6th elementry and 7th Junior high I developed this great big chip on my shoulder, ( I became in the state of mind of pre-emptive) the first day of school I faught the bullies to stop the year from being a harassful year...peace

reply to post by diamondsmith

-Pearl Harbor was a preemtive strike?

Technically yes and no. Japan rightfully assumed the US would eventually enter the war because Japan had expansionist aims in the war. they figured striking hard at the heart of the Navy, as close to the Us as possible, would deter their involvement.

Yes it was a pre-emptive strike, no it did not work/

-Did we have in WW2 preemtive strikes?

Yes, too many to name off hand but the effort by (Norwegian?) forces to destroy the Germans nuclear technology was a pre-emptive strike against an ability they had yet to acquire, but the war was already in progress.

-Hiroshima and Nagasaki...preemtive strikes?

No, those were terrorist attacks against civilian cities in retaliation for Pearl Harbor

-Fukushima..preemtive strike?

Umm, no, it was a Tsunami and earthquake that damaged a nuclear plant.

-Did Hitler inventeted that concept?

No, Hitler invented the "blitzkrieg" by which he decimated his enemies as it translates to "Lightening War" meaning a massive all out attack using land, air and sea (mosty land and air for Hitler). Technically Hitler would have seen his attacks on Poland and other nations as pre-emptive as eventually they would pose a threat, but only in retaliation for Germany's expansion.

Is OWS a preemptive strike used by Gov.?

No, OWS is a mass movement with no real organization, started by Occupy Wall Street on September 17 to demand action against the unjust corporate influence over the government, and the poverty it has caused. It's not a preemptive strike at all. Now, the government will attempt to use it as a justification to crack down on dissent and protests, but it's not a preemptive strike on their part.

-Is there any international law to allow something like that?

Attacking anyone is a crime, doing it with an army would be against international law.

-Will WW3 have a preemtive strike(s)?And if yes how will be to justify(accountable) ,and by who...

Yes. Against Iran, Syria, Pakistan and probably Turkey.

It will be strikes against them as a "preemptive" measure to protect against their nuclear weapons. It will be done by NATO, Israel & the US, or just Israel by itself.

It will be justifiable just like Iraq was, with completely fabricated evidence.

reply to post by phishyblankwaters
You are so Smart....I wonder if George Gush use preemtives....!

Originally posted by listerofsmeg

none on your list is pre emptive, it's retaliation.

What about Pearl Harbour?

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters

-Hiroshima and Nagasaki...preemtive strikes?

No, those were terrorist attacks against civilian cities in retaliation for Pearl Harbor

More so to prevent the slaughter of another hundred thousand US/Japanese Soldiers and a longer drawn out war.

Originally posted by diamondsmith
reply to post by phishyblankwaters

 

You are so Smart....I wonder if George Gush use preemtives....!

Yep. He's one of the smartest friends I have; all-around.

The Oklahoma City Bombing in 1995 had some of the attributes of a premptive strike in that it stopped the popularity and growth of the militia/constitutional government movement and facilitated the infiltration of all militia groups by the FBI,DEA,ATF and such.

In the time before the bombing most of the Republican Talk Radio was constitutionalist and even conspiritorialist with refernces to PNAC, the Federal Reserve, and the excessive force used at Ruby Ridge and Branch Davidian Waco. After the bombing Talk radio transformed into party line Republicans.

Preemptive strike ?

1. done before others can act: done before somebody else has had an opportunity to act so as to make his or her planned action pointless or impossible

2. military intended to prevent attack: intended to eliminate or lessen an enemy's capacity to attack a preemptive strike

a. Relating to or constituting a military strike made so as to gain the advantage when an enemy strike is believed to be imminent

In our common usage Preemptive Strike is describing military action undertaken when is believed that an attack is imminent.

However, it is also a mind control term used by the establishment to justify an act of aggression perpetrated on the next domino to fall in an imperialistic conquest, as the United States did in 2003 with Iraq.

Back to your OP.

Pearl Harbor possible could have been the same tactic employed by Imperialistic Japan to justify the attack, as the United State used 58 years later.
Hiroshima, Nagasaki, were definitely NOT preemptive since a state of war was already in place.

Hitler did not employee preemptive strike either, Hitler and Nazi Germany were at peace and under no threat of imminent attack in 1939.

Yes, we will witness the use of preemptive strike (soon) which possibly will begin WW III.
However the only sovereign nation that is under threat of imminent attack in the World is Israel. All of its bordering neighbors are posed for attack and in the process of increasing weapon stocks. Each nation that surrounds them have openly called for the destruction of not only the nation but its people as well. The United States under the leadership of Obama may NOT come to the aid of Israel in a timely manner. Under the Obama administration the relationship once enjoyed by Israel and the United States has cooled, the majority of the people of the United States still support Israel, but we know that the government of the United States rarely follows the will of the people presently.

Israel finds itself between a rock and a hard place, Shaky relations with the United States, surrounded by Nations who openly call for your destruction, I see a recipe for a justified preemptive strike.

reply to post by brokedown
OK I understand this so...next question is..will be Hilary Clinton next president to achieve this???I am so dumb!

reply to post by CALGARIAN


i beleive it was retaliation against the trade sanctions followed by an embargo aimed at curbing japans military.
not all acts of war are made with weapons.

Generaly in conventional warfare the defender has an advantage. An attacking force usually needs an edge in numbers or technology to beat a prepared defender.

Sometimes an attacker is vulnerable while he is amassing his forces and supplies or setting up his technology and that is the golden moment for a prememtive strike.