Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
jesbion

"Is there a "Bush Doctrine" here?

Rate this topic

67 posts in this topic

For those of you who don't know me, I am new at this game, but enjoy the discources and rambling and discussions that bring to light new information and sources that, eventually increase all our knowledge. Of course, there is also the "friendly" barter, that give vent to inspiration and anger or aggression.....

But, I am puzzeled by what seems to be common knowledge, most especially among the liberal "magicians", of just what is the "Bush Doctrine"!

 

Is this just because I am conserative, or is this a common failing of the general population....Personally, I think it is common ground among the "Bush haters" and not really talked about among conservatives...

 

So, really, is this a general term, or is it something that is written down on paper! And how am I supposed to know what the Bush Doctrine is if it's just a general term used by liberals...to denote their hate for all that Bush stands for?

 

Most importantly, how can I understand, how someone can determine what the President will do according to what others think of him? It really doesn't make any sense to me! Is this "Bush Doctrine" really coherent in defining a direction, or are you simply trying to define the man?

 

Maybe you think I am baiting the question, but I assure you I am not familar with the term.....maybe I should Google it, huh? kooky.gifkooky.gifkooky.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jesbion,

you are skipping down a path in ignorant bliss.....

there IS an actual Bush Doctrine,

and it was highly touted by the Right during the feel good times of Kicking Iraqi ass and pulling down statues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View Postjesbion,

you are skipping down a path in ignorant bliss.....

there IS an actual Bush Doctrine,

and it was highly touted by the Right during the feel good times of Kicking Iraqi ass and pulling down statues.

 

 

So, essentially, you are saying, it was an informal term, originally used to compliment Bush for taking the war to the ememy...then, it has become an even more generalized term used to describe pre-emptive thinking....seems to me that it's use has not only taken a pejorative bent, but is still an ambigious term used in context to define a broad policy.....and that is what Palin was supposed to know? Whooh! Glad to know you think in such suppositions!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View Postno I am saying bush took a fairly EXPLICIT stance in his formal policy with respect to fighting Terrorism world wide.

 

this rather detailed position became known as the Bush Doctrine.

 

 

Can you really give me a defination? I finally did look it up at wikapedia, but even there it was so generalized that it meant nothing....at least the Truman Doctrine was explicit, and the Powell Doctrine had enumerated and composed points, ten in all, I seem to remember! kooky.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View PostCan you really give me a defination? I finally did look it up at wikapedia, but even there it was so generalized that it meant nothing....at least the Truman Doctrine was explicit, and the Powell Doctrine had enumerated and composed points, ten in all, I seem to remember! kooky.gif

 

 

Oh, I forgot, you did use the term EXPLICIT, didn't you? OR, was the word FAIRLY explcit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look I won't argue with you.

The bush doctrine as such was incredibly short lived.

It was supposed to end the political games of footsy that exist between the US and other nations....

It was supposed to put our relations with nations in stark pro or con footing based on THEIR actions in the war on terror.

 

but it was mired in hypocrisy almost instantly.

so much so that it was indefensible and nobody cited it as a reason for policy decision.

 

if you now want to claim that it was created by the left... knock yourself out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View PostWelcome Jesbion, you need a thick skin and fire proof suit to play here, I hope you have them........

 

 

John, I'm old and short of stamina, so I like to throw the first blow, and put enough in it to settle the fight, quick! thanks for the advise and admonition!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Look I won't argue with you.

The bush doctrine as such was incredibly short lived.

It was supposed to end the political games of footsy that exist between the US and other nations....

It was supposed to put our relations with nations in stark pro or con footing based on THEIR actions in the war on terror.

 

Think what you are giving me, is an emumeration of the reasons Bush went to war and how it failed, in your opinion....No, I am not concerned with argument, unless there is some knowledge to be gained! Hopefully, that is the base of it and it is not baseless....

Maybe I should be clear... How can the press critise Palin for not understanding an ambigious term, they don't even understand it or can't articulate it themselves?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is where we find sticky ground. I believe that the War in Iraq was conceived through back-door policies in an effort for W to put his stamp on history. But I also believe that he thought it would eventually make the world better.

 

New data released this week shows that (paraphrased):

 

Al Qaeda has a very weakened following.

 

suicide bombings are at the lowest level in a decade.

 

Middle Eastern public sentiment is swaying against Bin Laden and swaying for Democratic governments.

 

So, while I do believe the war was "forced" in a less than honest manner, I also believe that this experiment could work IF given the time and effort to succeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View PostNew data released this week shows that (paraphrased):

Al Qaeda has a very weakened following.

 

They've been saying this for years now.

 

suicide bombings are at the lowest level in a decade.

 

Its Ramadan right now.

 

Middle Eastern public sentiment is swaying against Bin Laden and swaying for Democratic governments.

 

According to what data? And its not like anyone but extremists had any sentiment for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.