| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Home Front: WoT | |
| Is the Bush Doctrine Dead? Why the critics are wrong, including the neocons. | |
| 2006-08-23 | |
| A good dash of perspective (with lots of quotes) in these days of darkness and doubt, I think. Moderators, this desperately wants to be p.49'd. The final paragraph summarizes the writer's point neatly. In recent months, we have been bombarded with reports of the death of the Bush Doctrine. Of course, there have been many such reports since the doctrine was first promulgated at the start of what I persist in calling World War IV (the Cold War being World War III). Almost all of them were written by the realists and liberal internationalists within the old foreign-policy establishment, and they all turned out to resemble the reports of Mark Twain's death--which, he famously said, had been "greatly exaggerated." Nothing daunted by this, the critics and enemies of President Bush are now at it yet again. This time, however, their ranks have been swollen by a number of traditional conservatives who were never comfortable with the doctrine bearing his name and who have now moved from discomfort to outright opposition.
Are we then to conclude that the latest reports of the death of the Bush Doctrine are not "greatly," if indeed at all, exaggerated, and that it has at long last really been put to rest? | |
| Posted by:trailing wife |
| #2 The Bush Doctrine - fight terrorism; democraticize ME politics - suggests variable application of either element, as circumstances warrant. I forsee reliance on military options, over nation building. I don't see that being inconsistent with the doctrine. |
| Posted by: Snease Shaiting3550 2006-08-23 20:17 |
| #1 Podhoretz truly gets it. The ankle-biters spin their memes, mangle the words, toss in their pet irrelevancies, make idiotic and pointless comparisons to past events and situations, bang the drum for their favorite icons, and skew the intent in hopes of layering their special interest into the mix. It's a difficult task to keep it straight, even with the Internet's nearly-infinite and nearly-perfect memory. This is not Truman's or Reagan's day, the threats and the resources and the tactics MUST fit the reality of today. That Bush fails in the eyes of those who want it now, the immediate gratification junkies who are so blinded by their lazy logic that they can't see there's damned little difference between them and the Moonbats in regards to simple intellectual honesty, rational thought, and the eventual effects, there is nothing to say. Either you trust that he's going to do the right thing - or you don't. Funny thing is, despite all the dire dread BS that passes for thought, here and elsewhere, we and Israel are still here, the asshats haven't been victorious in any sense of the word, the Mad Mullahs are still yapping, not tossing nukes, Islamonazi deaders keep piling up, and the game is still on. Most of the impediments to action against the perceived direst threats, such as Iran, are in OUR hands -- every November. Want the Mullahs decapitated? Then running off to be a Libertarian or sitting out the election is self-defeating, not to mention just stupid. Regardless of anyone's pet issue, what issue is for all the marbles? There's a whole pile of marbles. Only one issue is for all of them. The rest are singles. Maybe they're Big Juju to some, many, or most, but they are still secondary to stopping the spread of nukes and the Muzzbats who want them. Thanks TW, and thanks Norman. The Bush Doctrine is not dead and should not die or be diluted by myopia. Fire away. |
| Posted by: flyover 2006-08-23 16:10 |