posted
No, this isn't another "It's all about oil" rant.
As usually defined, the Bush Doctrine refers to treating states that harbor or aid terrorists as hostile, and using preemptive strikes against them. As examples of the doctrine in action, there was Afghanistan, and then Iraq, and then... it kinda lost its luster.
Lately, I'm hearing the term "Bush Doctrine" used to describe another of our Dear Leader's foreign policy quirks: refusing to bargain with enemies, period.
This stands in stark contrast with, say, James Baker's advice to "talk to your enemies, not just your friends." Indeed, Baker & the ISG's recommendation to engage Iran and Syria vis a vis Iraq is being described by some as the "end of the Bush Doctrine."
This new definition, I'm now certain, will be Bush's lasting legacy, and thus more worthy of the term "doctrine."
My advice to Bush, once he leaves office, is to write a big, fat textbook on international relations explaining how & why he chose to employ this policy. Is it something he learned at Harvard Business School?
Posts: 389 | From: Anchorage, AK | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Yes, the 'Bush Doctrine.' Holding regimes that harbor terrorists to account. The doctrine, of course, also carries the 'Bush Asterisk,' which simply states: Doctrine not valid in Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Syria and..."
-------------------- Meanwhile, at stately Wayne Manor... Posts: 1316 | From: Oregon | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
What I find interesting is that, despite his distaste for Syria, he found it OK for the CIA to whisk a Canadian citizen off to be tortured there.
quote:Originally posted by Greg of Winter: The doctrine, of course, also carries the 'Bush Asterisk,' which simply states: Doctrine not valid in Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Syria and..."
CAIRO, Egypt - Private Saudi citizens are giving millions of dollars to Sunni insurgents in Iraq and much of the money is used to buy weapons, including shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles, according to key Iraqi officials and others familiar with the flow of cash.
-Bush et al. have known about this for years and have done absolutely nothing about it.
-------------------- No man has a right in America to treat any other man "tolerantly" for tolerance is the assumption of superiority. -Wendell L. Willkie Posts: 3833 | From: Virginia | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Greg of Winter: The doctrine, of course, also carries the 'Bush Asterisk,' which simply states: Doctrine not valid in Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Syria and..."
That's partly what I meant by "lost its luster." The fact that this version of the doctrine is has been applied inconsistently is what makes me believe that the other version, about not talking to adversaries, should be the lasting definition. With that, at least, he's consistent.
Posts: 389 | From: Anchorage, AK | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
