Note: This post is included on the website due to the bolded concept below.
Charles Gibson of ABC News, in his interview with Sarah Palin during the 2008 political season, inquired if she agreed with what had been colloquially referenced as the Bush Doctrine. Some believe that this question played a pivotal role in the election.
Mr. Gibson in that interview defined the doctrine as simply “Preemption”; however, this was a somewhat limited view. Due to events in the Middle East over the last two weeks or so, some clarification might be appropriate: in that not much in terms of Foreign Policy or international strategy has really changed–from one administration to the other.
The National Security Strategy (September 2002), the actual document which became known as the Bush doctrine was promulgated by the U.S. National Security Council.
Some of the precepts of the “Bush Doctrine” include: “champion aspirations for human dignity, strengthen alliances to defeat global terrorism and work to prevent attacks against the US and its friends, work with others to defuse regional conflicts, prevent the enemies of the US from threatening it, its allies and friends with weapons of mass destruction, ignite a new era of global economic growth through free markets and free trade, expand the circle of development by opening societies and building the infrastructure of democracy, and develop agendas for cooperative action with the other main centers of global power.”
Have things really changed through the millennia: or is peace through trade and commerce still the order of the day?