|
The "Bush Doctrine" of preemtive strikes is, in a historical sense, a very poor one. If one understands the history of U.S. politics and military proceedures you will see that when our Presidents make great and dramatic changes in our policies these changes become "Doctrines". These doctrines have great long term influence on our nation and in turn the world. They are much like legal precedent in our judicial system. Something that is justifiable in one situation can become justifiable in a similar situation. Ergo, if the U.S. perceives a nation to be a potential threat it has the right to intervene (i.e. attack) and eliminate the threat. This may sound like and intelligent and safety conscience way of dealing with the world.
However, this sets a rather frightening precedent. Let's assume that President Bush has no intention of using this Doctrine of preemption again(while this is laughable, just go with me). How do we determine that future administrations may not use this doctrine to embroil us in actions throughout the world in the name of U.S. National Securtiy. If a nation comes too comfortable with its dominance and the responsibilities that come with it, it is a recipe for distaster.
In addition if, preemptive strikes are legitimate by us, can we fault China for attacking Taiwan, since Taiwan is trying to increase its military capabilities? Can India attack Pakistan or vice versus in the belief that terrorist attacks stem from the other country and that it is known that their enemy had WSDs? Why can't Syria invade Israel? They are certainly a threat to Syria(in Syria's opinion) and are probably the only nation in the Middle East with WMDs.
This is simply a huge can of worms that President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary Rumsfeld and Mr. Wolfowitz have opened. Let us hope that we elect a new President who can help to put a lid on this and keep the worms from getting out.
__________________
Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so."
-Douglas Adams
|