No Hank you *don't* understand my argument. I never said that we should go to war only after the enemy kills Americans. We should go to war if an "imminent" threat of attack exists even if no Americans have been killed. Thus, your premise is entirely wrong. Not even Dubya is making the claim that Iraq posed an imminent threat, at least not anymore and you, most of all, should remember what Mother Ayn said: "check your premises."
What is your alternative to the imminent threat standard I propose? A blank check for the president, be he or she Hillary, Bill, or Dubya, to attack any "evil" dictator willy nilly?
When the threat against America is immenent, it's too late. After 9-11, any nation that proclaims itself the enemy of the USA and wishes Americans any kind of harm should be taken at their word and dealt with.