View Single Post
Old 09-12-2008, 12:12 PM   #1
Spinal Tap
dicktowel.com
 
Spinal Tap's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Paradise City
Posts: 9,995
Posting Frequency


Casino cash: $256509
My Mood


Spinal Tap is top drawer
Spinal Tap is top drawerSpinal Tap is top drawerSpinal Tap is top drawerSpinal Tap is top drawerSpinal Tap is top drawerSpinal Tap is top drawerSpinal Tap is top drawerSpinal Tap is top drawerSpinal Tap is top drawerSpinal Tap is top drawerSpinal Tap is top drawerSpinal Tap is top drawerSpinal Tap is top drawer
Bush doctrine applied pre-9/11

The Sarah Palin interview has gotten quite the response from radio personalities, news reporters, and planeteers alike. I've heard a lot of people say that Palin didn't know what the Bush doctrine is, and how bad she screwed up when asked if she believed in it. I'd say that one could go either way on that question, but that's not the premise of this particular thread.

The Iraq war has gotten everybody pretty fired up against the Bush-doctrine, which Charlie Gibson believes is the belief that the United States should engage in pre-emptive wars if it sees fit to do so.

I'm assuming that most people on this board thinks that the Bush doctrine is the wrong way to approach foreign policy and global threats. The Iraq was is proof positive that it can certainly get you into hot water if you're not careful with it's application.

If the United States had information on 9/10 that Al Queda was plotting their attack, and a pre-emptive strike against Afghanistan would have prevented it from happening, would you have supported that strike? You have to assume that 9/11 never even happened, and that your country just decided to attack another on the basis of credible information that an imminent threat was upon us.

I think that this is an interesting question, because we obviously have the benefit of seeing the outcome of that fateful day, and that is sure to skew your thought process. But like I said, strip away the reality of the events of 9/11, and tell me if you would have supported a pre-emptive strike.

If you answer NO, then you have the blood of 3,000 Americans on your hands.

If you answer YES, then you should essentially support the war in Iraq, because at the time, we were told that they were an imminent threat to our security.
__________________
This signature taken from the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, 1/24/05

"Most of the North Shore was so quiet, you could hear cars starting over the whisper of tens of thousands of shuffling feet. One of the louder fans, in an outburst of helpless rage, screamed that he wanted to kill somebody. Another stomped on his Terrible Towel. Others muttered things that aren't fit for print."
  Spinal Tap is offline Reply With Quote