Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush Preemptive Strike Doctrine Under Review, May Be Discarded
Oct 15, 2009 | Tony Capaccio

Posted on 10/15/2009 10:46:12 AM PDT by Joiseydude

Bloomberg article, link only


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 10/15/2009 10:46:13 AM PDT by Joiseydude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Joiseydude

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aw4BqFAVbkf8


2 posted on 10/15/2009 10:46:34 AM PDT by Joiseydude (I'd rather die on my feet, than live on my knees. Live free or die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joiseydude
Well, makes sense with Russia firmly announcing nuclear preemptive strike policies.
3 posted on 10/15/2009 10:47:33 AM PDT by IrishCatholic (No local Communist or Socialist Party Chapter? Join the Democrats, it's the same thing!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joiseydude

To be replaced with the new “Preemtive Surrender” policy of the Obama administration.


4 posted on 10/15/2009 10:49:29 AM PDT by Never on my watch (The lunatics are in the White House - meet me on the dark side of the Moon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Never on my watch

OOPS - Preemptive Surrender


5 posted on 10/15/2009 10:50:32 AM PDT by Never on my watch (The lunatics are in the White House - meet me on the dark side of the Moon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Joiseydude
"The Sept. 11 terrorist strikes prompted Bush to alter U.S. policy by stressing the option of preemptive military action against groups or countries that threaten the U.S. Critics said that breached international norms and set a dangerous precedent for other nations to adopt a similar policy."

B*****, that policy has been in place all over the world for centuries. Who in their right mind would ever give up the right to save lives by acting first???

Idiocy, just plain outright dumb@ss dangerous idiocy...

6 posted on 10/15/2009 10:54:18 AM PDT by Abathar (Proudly posting without reading the article carefully since 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Never on my watch

“Preemptive Surrender”. OK that was funny.


7 posted on 10/15/2009 10:55:34 AM PDT by mentor2k
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Joiseydude

I always thought it curious to label this as some sort of “doctrine” that Bush came up with out of the blue, rather than what it is - an age-old, strategic reality.


8 posted on 10/15/2009 10:56:18 AM PDT by americanophile (Sarcasm: satirical wit depending for its effect on bitter, caustic, and often ironic language.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Never on my watch

LOL!


9 posted on 10/15/2009 10:56:44 AM PDT by americanophile (Sarcasm: satirical wit depending for its effect on bitter, caustic, and often ironic language.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mentor2k

My favorite excuse to my parents when I did something to my brother was “It was preemptive revenge mom!”


10 posted on 10/15/2009 10:57:43 AM PDT by Abathar (Proudly posting without reading the article carefully since 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Joiseydude

“The international environment is “more complex” than when President George W. Bush announced the policy in 2002, Kathleen Hicks, the Defense Department’s deputy undersecretary for strategy, said in an interview. “We’d really like to update our use-of-force doctrine to start to take account for that.”

No, Kathleen, the world is NOT more complex! It is simply that this administration is more cowardly and has no conviction regarding it’s CONSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY to PROTECT AND DEFEND!!!


11 posted on 10/15/2009 10:57:50 AM PDT by G Larry ( Obamacare=Dying in Line!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joiseydude

12 posted on 10/15/2009 10:58:50 AM PDT by roses of sharon (Call the NFL and welcome their new Commissioner, Al Sharpton.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon

Pefect target for my size 12 boot.


13 posted on 10/15/2009 10:59:52 AM PDT by Joiseydude (I'd rather die on my feet, than live on my knees. Live free or die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Abathar

Those who think that Humans infest the Earth.


14 posted on 10/15/2009 11:02:19 AM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Joiseydude

Right, a vicious America hating country that wants to attack America (like Japan WWII, Al Queda, etc) will now not attack us because they know we can’t strike first???

What absolute dangerous nonsense.


15 posted on 10/15/2009 11:06:41 AM PDT by Williams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joiseydude

In war, one side always preempts the other. Why do we have to be on the short end of the stick?


16 posted on 10/15/2009 11:17:23 AM PDT by Blue State Insurgent (She is our Joan of Arc and we are her Guardian Captains.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blue State Insurgent

NO No no
You hzve it wrong. Odumbo’s cower and hide policy versus russia’s newly stated preempt with nuke policy will result in all the nations in the world now being on our side.
I mean who wouldn’t want to stand with a coward facing a russian nuke?


17 posted on 10/15/2009 11:35:26 AM PDT by RWGinger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson