Palin On The Bush Doctrine
Posted on September 11, 2008 at 6:09 pmFrom President Bush’s National Security Strategy, September 2002:
“While the United States will constantly strive to enlist the support of the international community, we will not hesitate to act alone, if necessary, to exercise our right of self defense by acting preemptively against such terrorists, to prevent them from doing harm against our people and our country.”
Salon reports that Sarah Plain could not give a decent synopsis of the Bush Doctrine of foreign policy:
GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush Doctrine?
PALIN: In what respect, Charlie?
GIBSON: Bush — What do you interpret it to be?
PALIN: His worldview?
GIBSON: Well, the Bush Doctrine, [unintelligible] September 2002, before the Iraq war.
PALIN: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hellbent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though…
GIBSON: The Bush Doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a pre-emptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with that?
PALIN: Charlie, if there is legitimate and enough intelligence that tells us that a strike is imminent against the American people, we have every right to defend our country.
SEE ALSO:
Video
Full transcript
Kay Brooks
Sean Braisted
Tim Chavez
Conservatarian
Andrew Sullivan
Matt Y
Comments
8 Responses to “Palin On The Bush Doctrine”
I really don’t know what to say after watching that interview. It goes beyond ridiculous that someone with an obvious lack of understanding of foreign policy, or for that matter recent history, could be the president. What has this country become?
It has become obsessed with media ready yahoos! Just because you are pro life and can throw out smart ass comments and one liners you are not ready to be President. The US, if not the world, is truly run by C students. I wanted so much more from Senator McCain. I just don’t think I can vote for him now.
I won’t say it isn’t alarming — I feel the same way about Obama — but I also know how quickly people can be brought up to speed by those who endure from one transient administration to another. The important thing is the candidate’s own, um, worldview.
David Gergen said tonite the Bush Doctrine is not the way to say that phrase but more the Doctrine of preventive war and Palin did fine in her answer, This is David Gergen on CNN , and if you look at the Bush Doctrine it is vague in the beginning meaning more we would treat nations friendly to terrorists as the enemy . Palin more then held her own so far in the interview.
Charlie Gibson defined it wrong the Bush Doctrine is not preemptive war waged in response to evidence of an imminent attack, but in response to the possibility that a country that was not attacking us now might attack us at some point in the future. and that is preventive. So the question was wrong if you want to get really correct.
I just read the qualifications that George Bush, Sr. and Dick Cheney brought to the Republican ticket(s) during those previous elections as Vice-Presidential candidates…impressive national and international credentials on both parts. And now, Palin is offered up as the best option? Sorry, I am not buying it. This wreaks of ‘politics-to-get-elected’.
The republicans are already going after Sweet Charlie as being partisan and mean. Translation? Sarah screwed the pooch.
[...] The republicans are already going after Sweet Charlie as being partisan and mean…. [...]
Thank god Palin didn’t know the B.Doctrine!!! If by any chance she acquires the VP seat, we don’t want her to copy ANYTHING that this president has done, said, or written!!!! Thank you.