Military Action or Act of War?
As reported in the August 27, 2013 New York Times, the military action that President Obama is considering is characterized as “limited” and meant to “deter and degrade” Syria’s military capabilities. The strike is “not aimed at ousting Mr. Assad from power or forcing him to the negotiating table” nor crippling Syria’s sizable military forces and infrastructure.
Does this remind anyone of another military action that was also “limited” and meant to “deter and degrade” another military. The “military action” I’m thinking about was carried out on December 7, 1941.
The attack on Pearl Harbor was a surprise military strike conducted by the Imperial Japanese Navy against the United States Pacific Fleet to prevent the fleet from interfering with the planned military actions in Southeast Asia of the Japanese Empire.
The Japanese were not trying to oust President Roosevelt or force our surrender or to cripple the entire military.
Why is the “limited” military action that is meant to “deter and degrade” Syria’s military capabilities not an act of war?