Instapundit (www.Instapundit.com) reader Randy Flowers had a great "Global Test" poll. Since I'm still learning to link, I've just reproduced it in full.


Global Test for Pre-emptive Military Action by the U.S.

1. Is the U.S. President a Republican?

2. Could this action possibly stabilize oil production?

3. Are France and Germany supplying the intended target with weapons or advice?

4. Would any small time thugocracy with a seat on the Security Council feel threatened?

5. Are family members of high ranking U.N. bureaucrats benefiting financially from the status quo?

6. Is this action likely to enhance America’s power in the world?

7. Would this action further the goals of free market/free trade advocates?

8. Would this action make the U.N. look weak and inconsistent?

9. Would this action divide the countries of the European Union?

10. Would this action be seen as offensive to a world religion (other than Christianity and Judaism)?


To this, I would only add the following:

If the answer to any of the above is "Yes," then DO NOT DEFEND AMERICA. Hold a summit, ask for a U.N. declaration, beseech the favor of Kofi Annan and seek rapprochement with Jacques Chirac. Make it clear that you will NOT take action unless and until the French, Germans and all members of Security Council nations have pledged at least 100,000 troops, unlimited funds and their blessing upon all U.S. military missions -- past, present and future.