Dear Condi:

[heidi]

You said:

I heard Senator Kerry say that there was some kind of 'global test' that you ought to be able to pass to support preemption, and I don't understand what that means... I don't understand 'proving to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons'...

My short reply: No, dear, of course you don't.

My longer reply: No, dear, clearly you don't understand the concept of "legitimate reasons", but here's a little crash course in legitimate reasons for invading another country and destroying its infrastructure:

Legitimate reason: A country is gathering a certain type of rod that can only be used in the nuclear weapon creation process.

Not a legitimate reason: A country is gathering a certain type of rod that would have to be sliced down in size by a third, then de-anodized, before said rods could be used in the nuclear weapon creation process, and you are aware thatstaff for your own government intelligence agencies are having a dispute about the actual nature of those rods, but you don't bother to actually know the nature of the dispute.

Legitimate reason: A country has attacked you.

Not a legitimate reason: A country that is entirely or at least significantly unconnected to the country that attacked you is sort of just sitting there.

Legitimate reason: A country's leader has assasinated someone in the top 2 of the current line of succession, or made an actual attempt thereon.

Not a legitimate reason: A country's leader has planned an assasination attempt against your dad, a former head of state. (Note: this may be a reason to Not Discourage assasination of said leader, but not a reason to actually bomb the civillians, or even the army).

Legitimate reason: They have oil. You want it.

I know there are others, but I need to go make dinner.

No love,
Heidi


PS - Hey, flist - feel free to come up with some more legitimate and illegitimate reasons

Comments

[no-remorse.livejournal.com]

Well, if I take a close look at your legitimate reasons, I see that pretty much every country in the world has a legitimate reason to invade the US. Some countries have actually more than one.

[plaidphoenix.livejournal.com]

Legitimate reason: They are a threat to their defenseless neighbors and are destabalizing the region.

Not a legitimate reason: So we can put their leaders on a deck of cards.

[malachan.livejournal.com]

Legitimate reason: to help a dire humanitarian situation.
Not a legitimate reason: to cause a dire humanitarian situation by botching the war up so badly.

[sundancekid.livejournal.com]

I am desperately trying to get my hands on one of those buttons that says "Invade Texas Next -- They've Got Oil Too."

[verstehen.livejournal.com]

OMG that's the best slogan! Where did you see those?

[sundancekid.livejournal.com]

This girl had a pin that said that on her backpack. I asked her where she got it, but her mom brought it from DC. Even Google didn't help me.

[verstehen.livejournal.com]

Oh, that sucks! Thanks, though.

[laleonaenojada.livejournal.com]

When in doubt, go to your local highschool or college that has a button-making machine and DIY!

~A

[photosinensis.livejournal.com]

Legitimate reason: there is ample evidence that an active genocide is happening right now in the country.

Illigitmate reason: The leaders of that country did attempt genocide 10 years ago, but have since desisted, and not because they were successful.

[(Anonymous)]

A country that is entirely or at least significantly unconnected to the country that attacked you is sort of just sitting there.

Not even that. It's a country that is entirely or at least significantly unconnect to the country that was supporting and/or hosting members of the militant unit that attached you is sort of just sitting there.

And:
Legitimate reason: They have invaded another country without legitimate reason.

Not a legitimate reason: to finish off what Daddy started.

~Xander.

[(Anonymous)]

Ahem. I can spell. Really. Unconnected and attacked. See?

Sigh.