Kerry, What About The Bush Doctrine Now? The Rumsfeld Doctrine? Chalabi?

[DrFunkenstein]

According to Wikipedia(?), the Bush Doctrine is based on 4 tenets that arise primarily, if not exclusively, from Cheney's Pentagon hawks. The 4 tenets are:

------------

Preemption
A policy of pre-emptive war, should the US or its allies be threatened by terrorists or by rogue states that are engaged in the production of weapons of mass destruction.

Unilateralism
The right for the US to pursue unilateral military action when acceptable multi-lateral solutions cannot be found.

Strength Beyond Challenge
The policy that "America has, and intends to keep, military strengths beyond challenge", indicating the US intends to take actions as necessary to continue its status as the world's sole military superpower. Called the Hearst doctrine.

Extending Democracy, Liberty, and Security to All Regions
A policy of actively promoting democracy and freedom in all regions of the world. As Bush stated at West Point, "America has no empire to extend or utopia to establish. We wish for others only what we wish for ourselves -- safety from violence, the rewards of liberty, and the hope for a better life."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_Doctrine

Given the fallout of the Iraq war that the Left had correctly predicted well before the debacle began in earnest, what can be made of this doctrine now that the media can finally read the handwriting on the wall?

If Bush is going to make this campaign about values, shouldn't it also be about ideas - particularly if he established an entire shift in foreign policy named after himself?

Personally, I think Kerry should mention the Bush Doctrine in every third breath. In the words of the finally-retired Gephardt, it has proven a "miserable failure." Considering the political amnesia Americans generally suffer from, it is important to revisit the build up to the war, especially since Bush is trying to shift the blame onto George Tenet.

---

Secondly, while Kerry is at it, it wouldn't take much to bring up the Rumsfeld Doctrine in the same breath, especially since he is part of the honchos at the Pentagon responsible for the Bush Doctrine.

Here is what Brookings had to say about the Rumsfeld Doctrine:

"(T)he doctrine of overwhelming force espoused by Colin Powell, secretary of state, will soon be replaced by a new Rumsfeld doctrine emphasising high technology, special operations units and sheer brainpower to defeat future foes."

http://www.brookings.edu/views/op-ed/ohanlon/20030429.htm

Considering that the Rumsfeld Doctrine resulted in inadequate troop support, over-stretched supply lines, and a disastrous inability to maintain security and stability over the opening days of the invasion (think "looters") that set the tone for the occupation once the Iraqi forces quickly fell into the rope-a-dope.

What would, oh, I don't know, General Shinseki might say:

Neither Mr. Rumsfeld nor Mr. Wolfowitz mentioned General Shinseki, the Army chief of staff, by name. But both men were clearly irritated at the general's suggestion that a postwar Iraq might require many more forces than the 100,000 American troops and the tens of thousands of allied forces that are also expected to join a reconstruction effort.

"The idea that it would take several hundred thousand U.S. forces I think is far off the mark," Mr. Rumsfeld said.

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/consequences/2003/0228pentagoncontra.htm

How far off the mark might that be, you friggin' idiot?

Kerry should nail these guys like $7 hookers for the blood they've shed in pursuit of their truly moronic ideas.

And don't even get me started on Chalabi! The phrase, "willing dupes," should be hammered into the media's brain with a jackhammer. It's a goddamned shame that it is not. Let Tenet take the rap, and not one word about Chalabi! It boils my blood.







"Rumsfeld and his colleagues believed that the C.I.A. was unable to perceive the reality of the situation in Iraq. “The agency was out to disprove linkage between Iraq and terrorism,” the Pentagon adviser told me. “That’s what drove them. If you’ve ever worked with intelligence data, you can see the ingrained views at C.I.A. that color the way it sees data.” The goal of Special Plans, he said, was “to put the data under the microscope to reveal what the intelligence community can’t see."

If Special Plans was going to search for new intelligence on Iraq, the most obvious source was defectors with firsthand knowledge. The office inevitably turned to Ahmad Chalabi’s Iraqi National Congress. Special Plans also became a conduit for intelligence reports from the I.N.C. to officials in the White House.

There was a close personal bond, too, between Chalabi and Wolfowitz and Perle, dating back many years. Their relationship deepened after the Bush Administration took office, and Chalabi’s ties extended to others in the Administration, including Rumsfeld; Douglas Feith, the Under-Secretary of Defense for Policy; and I. Lewis Libby, Vice-President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff. For years, Chalabi has had the support of prominent members of the American Enterprise Institute and other conservatives.

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0506-06.htm

And then we get started on the Tora Bora fiasco - hiring warlords to take terrorists with predictable results. Kerry referred to Bush's decision as "risk-averse." Which is a nice way of saying he has no balls.

C'mon, Kerry, let America know that Bush is all strut and no tut. And then tell us that you'd get it right THE FIRST TIME!!!

[Sugarbleus]

1. Great articles...I too wish,

hope Kerry comes forth with some scathing stuff. Afterall, there's plenty to choose from to throw back at the Bush regime.

I'm going with him in November BUT I'm still waiting for him to SAY SOMETHING DEAFENING, DEEP, PITHY, PROFOUND....INSPIRING. All I've seen so far is the two johns blowing smoke up each other's butts.

They had an enormous rally in NC on Saturday and while people fainted in the heat, they droned on and on about ?????????? how wonderful the other guy was. What's that all about? After 45 mins I was yelling into the TV for Kerry to STIPULATE WHAT HE'S GOING TO DO EXACTLY, Please! Their speeches so far, maybe Edwards is a bit better, are bland and vague. Perhaps they are saving up their best shots for a little later on. I sure hope so. I was uninspired and left the room frustrated after 45 mins of that rally--there were 25,000+ people there but nothing that got them all jazzed up. Geeez

Shit or get off the pot.

[coloradodem2005]

2. Interesting.

Safety from violence is what Bush wishes for the rest of the world? What is war? Violence. How safe were/are the Iraqis from violence since March 2003. Quite unsafe.