[quidnunc]

Quote:

In other words, "the perceived need for American self-justification before the international community" (I'm translating from French) has evaporated.

And high time too!

[EternalVigilance]

Wouldn't be hard to come up with a more colorful name for this new policy than "We don't care"...LOL...

[Joe Boucher]

ping

[thulldud]

Actual discussion on matters of significance is reserved to allies.

High time for this, too, eh?!

[backhoe]

Bush Doctrine Unfolds :

To find all articles tagged or indexed using Bush Doctrine Unfold , click below:
	click here >>>	Bush Doctrine Unfold	<<< click here
(To view all FR Bump Lists, click here)

[goodnesswins]

How hilarious....of course LEADERS care NOT what people THINK or FEEL (after evaluating a situation/issue).....LEADERS do what is RIGHT!

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Conclusion:

For decades, foreign powers have been able to influence U.S. policy simply by fomenting anti-American displays. This is what Arab regimes do, to put pressure on the U.S. State Department -- it's called the "Arab Street" -- and what President Chirac did in touching off a frenzy of anti-Americanism in the "European Street" as a way to pressure President Bush to stand down, and Prime Minister Blair to fall down. The Americans and British went into Iraq anyway and the former, at least, seem now convinced that anti-Americanism should no longer be either subtly or overtly rewarded. It will instead be subtly ignored, or overtly punished.

[Brilliant]

The rest of the world doesn't seem to understand that the US policy change is a reaction to the failure of the rest of the world to deal with real security threats, like al Qaeda and Saddam. As pointed out by the American leftists, there are plenty more real security threats besides al Qaeda and Saddam, but we can't take them all on at once.

[ALOHA RONNIE]

.."IS it SAFE?" = HILLARY on Armed Services Committee..

http://www.TheAlamoFILM.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=629

[Wolfstar]

This is an exceptionally insightful article. I especially like this observation:

Again: the policy is not one of retribution, or for that matter of "unilateralism," per se. Its ultimate purpose is to call bluffs.

The author also observes that the new attitude in Washington may outlast the Bush administration. Maybe, but only if our Dubya is reelected so he has a chance to fully inculcate this new approach to foreign policy into our national bloodstream, so to speak.

Certainly, had Algore been elected, our response to 9/11 would have been the usual limp-wristed, panty-waist stuff that Dems do. The Taliban and Saddam Hussein would still be in power, and our nation's enemies would be all the more emboldened. But as long as President Bush is in office, we have a chance to turn the tide of radical Islamism forever. To me, nothing — not the economy, not tax cuts, not gun control, not any of the usual issues that matter to me — are as important as the lessons learned from 9/11 and the anthrax attacks. For these reasons, I intend to do everything I possibly can to help ensure Dubya's reelection.

[William McKinley]

The Americans and British went into Iraq anyway and the former, at least, seem now convinced that anti-Americanism should no longer be either subtly or overtly rewarded. It will instead be subtly ignored, or overtly punished.

Sounds like a plan for the left here as well.

[edwin hubble]

quidnunc

Great Post!!

A powerful analysis of a sea change. One that the leftist-'progressives'-internationalist-liberals are stunned into silence over. They are either numb or caught off balance trying to grasp what is going on.

All the while, evidence of France's and Russia's treachery is unfolding (tomorrow's papers).

And we now move with a quiet confidence.

From farther along in the article:

"In other words, "the perceived need for American self-justification before the international community" (I'm translating from French) has evaporated.

(snip)

...Again: the policy is not one of retribution, or for that matter of "unilateralism," per se. Its ultimate purpose is to call bluffs.

For decades, foreign powers have been able to influence U.S. policy simply by fomenting anti-American displays. This is what Arab regimes do, to put pressure on the U.S. State Department -- it's called the "Arab Street" -- and what President Chirac did in touching off a frenzy of anti-Americanism in the "European Street" as a way to pressure President Bush to stand down, and Prime Minister Blair to fall down. The Americans and British went into Iraq anyway and the former, at least, seem now convinced that anti-Americanism should no longer be either subtly or overtly rewarded. It will instead be subtly ignored, or overtly punished."

[Enterprise]

A couple of years ago President Bush was greeting a crowd of people and a goofball said something like "I think you aren't doing a good job" (My words) and President Bush responded with "Who cares what you think?"

I laughed then, and it is even more enjoyable now. France, Germany, Russia, the Arab street, the United Nations, and soon maybe even the liberals - "Who cares what you think?"

[sweetliberty]

"The Americans and British went into Iraq anyway and the former, at least, seem now convinced that anti-Americanism should no longer be either subtly or overtly rewarded. It will instead be subtly ignored, or overtly punished."

This whole article is just great. I really hope that this is exactly what is happening. We need to get back to basics and protect our sovreignity before we lose it.

[driftless]

I'm always amused by protests from foreigners and even some Americans about how our actions is this or that crisis will "inflame" certain countries and its citizens and cause them to think negatively about us. My thoughts have usually been on the order of "well what have these protesting countries done to help solve the crisis", and I'm afraid my other very strong feeling is for all these protesters to "get stuffed". I really don't care what they think, because I know that they are mostly guided by base self-interest and couldn't care less about solving a particular crisis if it does not benefit them.

We have very allies that we can trust to help us, and it seems that we now have a few less allies unless they change their attitudes. France continues to dig a deep hole for itself. Very shortly it might find itself in one that is too steep to climb out of.

[sweetliberty]

This is a really good article.

[Faraday]

Lying, diplo-speak, papering over differences, ignoring realities...these harvested ever increasing terrorist attacks, culminating in 911. The great triumph of the Bush foreign policy is that it cuts through all of this with truth telling and clear national self-interest. The Kyoto Treaty was rejected. The ABM treaty was abrogated. The UN is put on the defensive, (while ignoring the UN's inanities like the South Africa conference.) The ICC is not only not endorsed, but exposed as anti-American in nature. And most importantly, we say what we'll do, and do what we say. This is leadership, pure and simple. Those with sense follow.

[Nick Danger]

Its ultimate purpose is to call bluffs.

I think there is more to it than that. Everything the author says makes sense, but so does this:

The idea that a new, enlightened future is taking shape in Brussels, where diplomats schmoozing each other over wine and Brie have made war a thing of the past, has become an almost dangerous obsession among those whom, until someone has invented a more pretentious expression, I will call "Euroweenies", or alternatively, "weasels."

We have seen serious people, who ought to know better, looking down their long snouts at us, huffily explaining that "dialog has replaced war," and that we Americans are all cowboys and knuckle-draggers for thinking otherwise.

This haughty fiction can maintain itself so long as it never encounters an outsider who won't play by its rules. The entire strategy falls on its face, however, when "he who is to be subdued" refuses to engage in "dialog."

Too many in Europe seem to have forgotten that there are still such people in the world. Hans Blix was so impressed by Saddam Hussein's willingness to engage him in "dialog" that it never occurred to Blix that he was being played like a fiddle. His entire effort became one of expanding the "dialog," for its own sake. The process had become an end unto itself; results almost did not matter.

So long as European leaders believe this pleasant fiction, they will never take steps to adequately defend themselves militarily.

It is better for them, and us, if the country that confronts Europe with the "I got yer dialog right here" scenario is the United States, instead of, say, China in 2022.

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

Perhaps if you take an inverse of an Osama Bin Ladin quote you can get phrase for this new policy;

The "World" is a paper tiger.

[arthurus]

The last couple of lines in the piece is a caveat that would be laid to rest if we deal decisicely and soon with North Korea.
Our preeminence will not last very long if we allow our nation to utterly change character with the unrestricted immigration we are now experiencing, legal and illegal.

[MEG33]

My admiration grows and grows for David Warren's columns.