(no subject)
In response to a radically changed world situation since the Islamist attacks of 9/11, the United States under George W. Bush has adopted a broad new approach to national security. The Bush Doctrine, as this policy has come to be known, emphasizes the need for preemption in order to “confront the worst threats before they emerge.” It also stresses the need to transform the cultures that breed hatred and fanaticism by-in a historically stunning move-actively
This sweeping redirection of policy has provoked intense controversy, especially but not only over its practicality, and especially but not only over its application to Iraq. At issue as well are the precise nature of the threats faced by the United States and the West, the specific tactics adopted by the Bush administration in meeting them, American capabilities and staying power, relations with traditional allies, the larger intentions and moral bona fides of U.S. foreign policy, and much else besides. Opinion on these matters is divided not only between the Left and the Right in political and intellectual life but, quite sharply, among American conservatives themselves.
Rest of Commentary Article Here
So, I thought that, given the imminent return of Cindy Sheehan to the protest circuit and the current active debate surrounding the authorization and conduct the Iraq War, it would be a good time to re-introduce this topic to the community and see where we all stand. Besides, it has been dreadfully dull and I think this may produce some heat, if not light. So. Commentary asked four sets of pretty general questions and I think they are a good frame for a debate on the Bush Doctrine, the War on Terror and Iraq. Reading the assembled authors at their site is interesting, if somewhat less than user friendly. I am going to respond in the comments, and we can each defend our own positions as best we may.
1. Where have you stood, and where do you now stand, in relation to the Bush Doctrine? Do you agree with the President’s diagnosis of the threat we face and his prescription for dealing with it?
2. How would you rate the progress of the Bush Doctrine so far in making the U.S. more secure and in working toward a safer world environment? What about the policy’s longer-range prospects?
3. Are there particular aspects of American policy, or of the administration’s handling or explanation of it, that you would change immediately?
4. Apart from your view of the way the Bush Doctrine has been defined or implemented, do you agree with its expansive vision of America’s world role and the moral responsibilities of American power?
This sweeping redirection of policy has provoked intense controversy, especially but not only over its practicality, and especially but not only over its application to Iraq. At issue as well are the precise nature of the threats faced by the United States and the West, the specific tactics adopted by the Bush administration in meeting them, American capabilities and staying power, relations with traditional allies, the larger intentions and moral bona fides of U.S. foreign policy, and much else besides. Opinion on these matters is divided not only between the Left and the Right in political and intellectual life but, quite sharply, among American conservatives themselves.
Rest of Commentary Article Here
So, I thought that, given the imminent return of Cindy Sheehan to the protest circuit and the current active debate surrounding the authorization and conduct the Iraq War, it would be a good time to re-introduce this topic to the community and see where we all stand. Besides, it has been dreadfully dull and I think this may produce some heat, if not light. So. Commentary asked four sets of pretty general questions and I think they are a good frame for a debate on the Bush Doctrine, the War on Terror and Iraq. Reading the assembled authors at their site is interesting, if somewhat less than user friendly. I am going to respond in the comments, and we can each defend our own positions as best we may.
1. Where have you stood, and where do you now stand, in relation to the Bush Doctrine? Do you agree with the President’s diagnosis of the threat we face and his prescription for dealing with it?
2. How would you rate the progress of the Bush Doctrine so far in making the U.S. more secure and in working toward a safer world environment? What about the policy’s longer-range prospects?
3. Are there particular aspects of American policy, or of the administration’s handling or explanation of it, that you would change immediately?
4. Apart from your view of the way the Bush Doctrine has been defined or implemented, do you agree with its expansive vision of America’s world role and the moral responsibilities of American power?