Dave Smith wrote:
>
> ... but the fact remains that
> landing troops in Pakistant, getting involved in a fire fight. killing
> people and removing the body...... is an act of war.

Exactly. And as Bush said in his speech immediately after 9/11 if
you're not with us you are against us. Pakistan is free to respond by a
decalarion of war if they wish. It's okay, I'll wait. Tick, tick,
tick. Still waiting ...

Is anyone taking bets that Pakistan will respond to this act of war with
a declarion of war? Let me know the odds I might go ahead and bet
against it. I might get $1.02 out of my $1.00 bet when the time of the
bet expires and they have made no declaration of war.

Does anyone remember when the volcano went off in the Carribean in about
1994 St Julline wasn't it? US troops went in and helped UK citizens
evacuate. It turns out the UK had decided that since they had not left
at the eruption in the 1980s they were to be allowed to suffer at that
eruption. The UK ambassodor quietly informed the US that it was
technically an act of war to invade UK territory like that. Rescuing
folks from a volcano is technically an act of war when it's a
territorial violation. The UK no more declared war on the US then than
Pakistan will now.

It was equally an act of war to harbor Bin Laden in the first place.
With acts of war it doesn't matter if there was knowledge before hand.
That's why Afghanistan was invaded. The Taliban might or might not have
known but it did not matter. The attack was launched from there
territory so they were held responsible. The US is free to respond by a
declarion of war if they wish. I't's okay. I'll wait. Tick, tick ...