Not real excited about that. :(
I'm still against pre-emptive war. As a Chrisitian, I don't see how one could ever be for pre-emptive war. Take Israel. I'm a supporter of Israel, and believe they live quite precariously stuck there in the Middle East. I realize they have many enemies who believe they don't even have a right to exist. However, if they had the capability to wipeout their enemies - just strike them pre-emptively and do away with them - I would consider that a great evil. Of course, I believe that they have every right to defend themselves quite vigorously. I'm definitely not a pacifist.
With the arrival of international Islamic terrorism and possible access to nuclear weapons, the world faces a whole new reality.
Used to be that waiting until you were attacked involved little incremental risk (vs acting pre-emptively). Nations could afford to wait until provoked.
Now, the equation has changed. Instead of artillery shells falling on open fields and concrete battlements, the initial "provocation" may well be a mushroom cloud in a major urban area.
Terrorists with nukes risk millions of lives, not a few thousand.
Moreover, we're confronted by an enemy for whom "containment" is impossible. And "Mutually Assured Destruction" meaningless.
Given a nuke, they will use it. Sacrificing their own lives in the process. And without regard for the consequences their homeland might suffer.
If you're responsible for a nation's security and the lives of its citizens, the only responsible course in this case is to employ pre-emptive war whenever the risk seems to be growing into a short odds proposition.
Prior to 9/11/01, you were dead right. Now, I believe you need to re-evaluate your position.