Continuing to hype the threat posed by North Korea, despite their two ICBM tests being eventually conceded to both be failures, National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster insisted that the US is fully prepared to launch a “preventative war” against North Korea, to prevent them threatening the US.
The threat is with heavily fictionalized versions of North Korea’s missile program, but McMaster appeared undeterred about the war, saying he wasn’t going to confirm if North Korea really had missiles that could reach the US, before incredibly adding “I mean how much does that matter?”
You can read the rest @
Here is a discussion of the concepts of preemptive and preventative war:
Whether preventative war is legal or not, there seems to be no authority which could stop the US from engaging in the practice. "Our" Congress might, but they are VERY unlikely to do so.
The current situation prompts me to make a comparison to what the US did to José Padilla. He was convicted of aiding terrorists, basically for believing he could enrich uranium to build a nuclear bomb by spinning a bucket over his head. Never mind the fact that he had no access to uranium in the first place, or that his scheme was physically impossible.
Kim Jong-un, on the other hand, DOES have access to fissionable material and the ability to make a bomb or EMP device, and he is developing the ability to deliver it. Does his situation demand preventative action, when Padilla's clearly did not?
Most probably will say "YES", but I first would ask why we didn't defuse the situation back when we had the chance?
That would have been REAL prevention.