Maybe Bush's critics are doing the same thing. The Sharon agressive policy hasn't stopped terrorism --- terrorism has been a perpetual problem while Sharon's been in power, but people don't point their fingers at him and blame his policies every time Israel suffers a terrorist attack. But now that Bush is pushing a new policy, people point their fingers and blame him when there's a new terrorist attack. Why is his policy to blame for a problem that was there just as much under Sharon's policy?
I point my fingers at the PA and blame them. Where I find fault with the President is in his notion that the PA will be appeased if Israel doesn't respond to terrorist attacks.
Why is his policy to blame for a problem that was there just as much under Sharon's policy?
Honestly, I don't understand what you meant to say.
Bottom line: the "Bush Doctrine" is one of preemption. And rightfully so, IMHO. What Pres. Bush proposes for Israel is the exact opposite of what he proposes for the US. One or the other is right, but it can't be both.