It was repoprted that during an interview by Charlie Gibson an interviewer hand picked by the Rove gang interview on ABC, Gov. Sarah Palin seemed unprepared for a question about Bush’s foreign policy doctrine of preemptive war.

This is good !! How ready is the Igloo Princess !!!! Not very I woiuld say.


Gibson: Do you agree with the Bush Doctrine?


Palin: In what respect, Charlie?


Gibson: What do you interpret it to be?


Palin: His world view?


Gibson: No, the Bush Doctrine enunciated in September 2002 before the Iraq war.

Then The Igloo Princess gets on a role ::

Palin: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell-bent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way though. There have been mistakes made. And with new leadership - and that’s the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy - is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better.

__________________
" Sarah Palin HAS elected BARACK Obama THE PRESIDENT"

LOL .... don;t bother reading to see if their might already be 7 or 8 threads on this topic. Just make a new one.

__________________
Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have ... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases.
-Thomas Jefferson

asked about Russia she responded " you know Charlie you can see Russia from here" ..

__________________
" Sarah Palin HAS elected BARACK Obama THE PRESIDENT"

What is interesting is that The Bush Doctrine is a fantasy of the left. No one can answer the question unles you are a Bush hater equipped with all of the DNC talking points.

__________________
Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have ... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases.
-Thomas Jefferson

finish her quote. We wouldn;t want you to be dishonest, now.

__________________
Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have ... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases.
-Thomas Jefferson

You could ask 100 politicians what the Bush doctrine is and get 101 different answers. It's not a technical term. Even Gibson's definition wasn't correct. preemption was added later. It will be interesting to see if this pays the dividends democrats want it to.

You mean like all those Bush hating librules over at the AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE?

The Bush Doctrine

Home > Short Publications > The Underpinnings of the Bush Doctrine
The Underpinnings of the Bush Doctrine

By Thomas Donnelly
Posted: Friday, January 31, 2003
NATIONAL SECURITY OUTLOOK
AEI Online (Washington)
Publication Date: February 1, 2003

National Security Outlook
The Bush Doctrine, which is likely to shape U.S. policy for decades to come, reflects the realities of American power as well as the aspirations of American political principles.



Does the Bush Doctrine represent a new course for American policy or simply an elaborate justification for the administration's actions? Why attack Iraq but not North Korea? What is the real role of preemption? What is wrong with the tried-and-true concepts of deterrence?

If nothing else, the Bush Doctrine, articulated by the president over the past eighteen months in a series of speeches and encapsulated in the new National Security Strategy paper released in September, represents a reversal of course from Clinton-era policies in regard to the uses of U.S. power and, especially, military force. So perhaps it is no surprise that many Americans--and others in the rest of the world as well--are struggling to keep up with the changes. Indeed, it often appears that many in the administration cannot keep up with the president. But in fact the Bush Doctrine represents a return to the first principles of American security strategy. The Bush Doctrine also represents the realities of international politics in the post-cold-war, sole-superpower world. Further, the combination of these two factors--America's universal political principles and unprecedented global power and influence--make the Bush Doctrine a whole greater than the sum of its parts; it is likely to remain the basis for U.S. security strategy for decades to come.


This does not mean that American leaders will be freed from the need to make unpleasant choices; North Korea's recent actions remind us of ways in which the possession by others of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles places limits on policy options. But the expansion of "the American perimeter"--those parts of the world where a liberal, democratic order is accepted as the norm--is likely to continue, even accelerate; having, at last, determined to reform the politics of the greater Middle East, we will find it difficult and dangerous to stop with half measures. The Bush Doctrine continues a tradition that can be traced to the Monroe and Truman doctrines. It is an attempt, in a new century and under new strategic circumstances, to "foster a world environment where the American system can survive and flourish," as Paul Nitze put it in 1950, in the famous "NSC 68" memorandum.[/quote]

The real story is, Gibson got the answer wrong. Sorry.

You know what, you are right. Palin had a closer answer to what the Bush doctrine was.

Well, the thing is, it's vague. It depends on who's defining it. It's not a technical term and people define it differently. I wonder how Bush or McCain would describe it.