Ending the Doctrine of Preemption

by Ryan on October 15, 2009

in International Relations,War on Terror

Why stop in the middle of a castration, right?  Just keep going and finish it off!  President Bush’s doctrine of preemption is the basis for staying on offense in the War on Terror, while announcing that we would not make the mistakes of the 1990s and ignore or tie our own hands regarding gathering threats.  It may be vague and tend towards the unilateral, but it certainly keeps our enemies nervous and uncomfortable!  Our friends also know where we stand when we identify a gathering threat — it’s convenient for them too. 

Well, the Pentagon is likely to suggest to the Prince of Peace, the Most Merciful and Beneficent Barack Hussein Obama (mm mm m), that this seven-year-old doctrine should end.  However, like Gitmo, they have no plan to replace it!  On-the-job training is cool if you have a job filing papers all day, but not for the Defense community.  Why does this Administration keep castrating our ability to defend ourselves or stay on offense?  We’ve reserved the right to preemptively use nuclear force since Harry Truman.  To those of you with a public school education, that was the late 1940s.  The concept of “first-strike” preemption did not begin with George W. Bush.  Yet, it may end with Obama.

The current Administration is weakening our position without a viable alternative, unless we return to the days of complacency before 9/11.  Hey, maybe if we get attacked again, that’ll be another crisis Rahm and Barry won’t waste!

Leave a Comment

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Previous post:

Next post: