Posted on 09/14/2008 4:23:20 PM PDT by markomalley
Sarah Palin may be excused for not knowing "the Bush doctrine." The term was thrown at her like a curve ball during an interview last week by ABC's Charles Gibson, whose own description was incomplete. But her assertion of a potential new "doctrine" – one she might bring to the White House – is far less pardonable.
She said during that interview that the United States "must do whatever it takes" to fight terrorism. This implies the same amoral existentialism that terrorists use. It goes against the very principles of Western civilization that the jihadists seek to destroy.
Ever since these Islamic radicals began attacking US citizens and others, some in the American security establishment have practiced this unprincipled "doctrine." Just think of the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq or the use of torture against top Al Qaeda figures.
But her do-anything approach appears to go beyond the set of foreign policies put forth by President Bush and that have been dubbed by the media and others as "the Bush doctrine."
When first in office, Mr. Bush set his mark as president by unilaterally withdrawing US support for a few international agreements, such as the Kyoto accords on global warming. Then after 9/11, he warned countries backing terrorists that they are vulnerable to attack. This led to the ousting of the Taliban rulers in Afghanistan.
(Excerpt) Read more at csmonitor.com ...
It goes to show you that the real enemies are the liberals, who would sell the muzzies the rope to hang themselves with.
And JFK said we should "pay any price, bear any burden..."
And JFK said we should "pay any price, bear any burden..."
And JFK said we should "pay any price, bear any burden..."
How long must we endure such IDIOCY?!?
Which does he mean by this sloppy thought: that the Jihadists wish to destroy Western Civilization or that they wish to destroy a principle of not "doing whatever it takes"?
Neither works.
Certainly "doing whatever it takes" is, by definition, what will stop the Jihadists from destroying Western Civilization.
On the other hand, certainly the Jihadists are more opposed to the principle of "doing whatever it takes" then they would be to something the author would consider more palatable. Which at the most must be "doing less than what it takes".
I suppose she could be accused of plagiarizing from Malcolm X (”by any means necessary”), but that should win her points.
The Palin Doctrine?
“There’s plenty of room for all God’s creatures...right next to the mashed potatoes.”
LOL. Sounds good to me.
More and more I’m amazed at how sophomoric and undisciplined some of these high-falutin’ professional journalists are. Less and less I revere and respect their being published in widely read journals, as if they carry some kind of imprimatur based on circulation and being the “gatekeepers” of public discourse.
Why does the lame and unfounded “logic” in this article pass for professional writing?
The internet is so wonderful in that amidst all the sloshing, dirty bathwater, we have some truly talented amateur babies that really give the professionals not only a run for their money, but often just plain outclass, outgun, and outwrite the “professionals.”
So I guess we should not do what ever it takes? What should we about terrorism? Call a dinner party? These elites may have forgotten that the most important function of a national government is self defense! I will rest more secure in a dangerous world with likes of Sara the Moose hunter at the helm than any of the bree and cracker crowd.
Obviously, JFK was amoral, according to these intellectual idiots.
I subscribe totally to the proposirion that a national leadership's (any nation) first and most important duty is the safety of its citizens.
Citizens vote for their leaders; they do not vote for the Christian Science Monitor or any other self-appointed arbiter of "proper political structure."
This is one clear instance where the separation of church and state is rightfully viewed as absolute.
I have my faith and my duty to my conscience. My view of my country is entirely and distictly separate.
As even an infidel from Turkey so accurately stated:
"Everybody must know that the Turkish armed forces will not tolerate the use of the opportunities of democracy by the enemies of the system as a means to dynamite the basic principles of our state...”
retiring Chief of Staff General Huseyin Kivrikoglu, Turkey
That holds true for external and internal enemies of our country, as well as well-meaning domestic "Christian" idiots.
Right. I guess the author figures we should do “less than what it takes” or “almost what it takes” or maybe “nowhere near what it takes.”
But judging by the attitude of the Left, including many of these “journalists” and editors(NYT, et. al.), we should just surrender altogether, or even covert to Islam and become jihadists ourselves in the war against the evil, imperialist Great Satan, America...sheesh.
Call out media lies: The Impy Doctrine.
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.