Don´t think US´s pre-emptive strikes are only “non-judicial” killing of some “bad guys” including at least one US citizen. They include modified power supplies that explode killing who ever happens to be near but most importantly the development of the cyber warfare Stuxnet worm attacks on Iran. Justified by the claim, not only made with no support just like the "Saddam had WMDs" claim was, but actually refuted by the IAEC´s on site investigations.
Again the real motivation for this hostile action is oil related - the soon to open Iranian oil bourse – selling oil for other than dollars. Even with the sanctions and US pressure on third parties, Iran is producing 500,000 barrels of oil per day 49% of which goes to China, and much to India, which just received 15 billion dollars from Japan to pay with.
There is a huge and growing barter trade for Iran´s oil. For example, tea is central to meals in Iran and India supplies it by the boat loads for oil, etc. The whole US economy hangs on the preservation of the PetroDollar system and the associated re-cycling of these dollars to buy US treasury bonds. That is why, in self defense, the US is making both covert and open war against Iran, but not yet sending the Israeli fighter bombers in with covering support from the two US carrier groups now in or near the St. of Hormuz. Here is part of what the NY Times has just printed:
“…Obama accelerated attacks related to an effort begun by the George W. Bush administration. The Stuxnet worm, long rumored to have been developed by Israel or the U.S., escaped from Iranian computers in mid-2010 and compromised computers across the Internet. Obama considered shutting down the cyber attacks after Stuxnet began compromising other computers, but decided to continue with the program, according to the Times. …
The report that the U.S. and Israel were behind the Stuxnet attack didn't surprise Snorre Fagerland, senior virus analyst with Norman, an IT security vendor in Lysaker, Norway. The Stuxnet worm was "orders of magnitude" more complex and sophisticated than previous cyberattacks, he said, and the creation of the malware would have needed significant resources. It would have taken a team of 10 to 20 people to write Stuxnet, Fagerland said.
The report of U.S. involvement may lead to an increase in cyberattacks, with other countries stepping up their offensive cyber capabilities, Fagerland said. "It raises the stakes," he said. "That will cause others to think, 'They're doing it, so why shouldn't we?'"
Obama raised concerns that the Stuxnet program, code-named Olympic Games, would embolden other countries, terrorists and hackers to use similar attacks, but concluded that the U.S. had no other options available
against* Iran, the Times story said. …”
This quote from;
http://www.computerworld.com/s/arti...tacks_on_Iran?source=CTWNLE_nlt_pm_2012-06-01
* On difference between "intentionally
against" and "unintended consequences":
{from post 20} Billy, I don't accept initiation of any even non-violent type of competition against other people as ethical so it would take some extremely serious intention of doing malice against a country for war to be justified. ...
{from post 21} I agree completely. China is seeking to improve its power and influence in the world. Any damage to US and EU is an unavoidable consequence, not the driving purpose of Chinese policy. ...
For even more details on the Stuxnet program, see:
http://blogs.computerworld.com/2025..._against_iran?source=CTWNLE_nlt_pm_2012-06-01 including:
“…"In the summer of 2010, ... it became clear that the worm, which was never supposed to leave the Natanz machines, had broken free, like a zoo animal that found the keys to the cage." Sanger's sources claimed it was due to Israeli "going too far" and modifying the code that broke loose after a computer was hooked to the Internet and was then "replicating itself all around the world."
Some officials want to use cyber weapons to "disrupt Chinese military plans" and for more aggressive cyber attacks against North Korea, forces in Syria, and Qaeda operations around the world, but President Obama is concerned about the risks. The USA's infrastructure depends upon computer systems, exploitable SCADA systems, and is vulnerable to attack. Sanger reported, "
It is only a matter of time, most experts believe, before it becomes the target of the same kind of weapon that the Americans have used, secretly, against Iran." …”
Billy T comment: "What goes around, comes around" & Biblically: "As yea sow, so shall yea reap."
PS to Kittamaru Perhaps you are correct that James could only chose one of the reasons you listed. (I doubt that as James has a great deal of power.) If, however, even he is so restricted then a better choice would have been: "Posting Violent, Abusive or Pornographic Content"
