Zeev's Turnips Talk Politics (ZTTP)

[ergo sum]

The Bush Doctrine.

Why is it that some people in Bali actually think the CIA is behind the recent bombing? With the passage of the resolutions in the last year or so the Congress has essentially given the President the right to kill anyone anywhere in the world and all he has to do to justify this is claim they are "terrorists." Senator Byrd stood up, almost alone, and questioned not only the logic but also the constitutionality of these resolutions. The CIA is now empowered by the President not only to carry out this mission but can do so without even consulting with the President. The same CIA that those same people in Bali believe once sponsored the government of Suharto.
Personally I don't think you need to look much further than the recent Trade Embargo imposed over what the Russian people refer to as "Bush Legs", those are the left legs of chickens which it is claimed are the ones the hormone injections go in. Or, the statements made this last week by McDonalds that " it would close about 175 restaurants, slash up to 600 corporate jobs and pull out of three countries in the Middle East and Latin America as it struggles to turn around its U.S. performance and trim worldwide costs." How about the dates they sell in Cairo for Ramadan, the little ones, the worst ones, the ones only the poorest can afford those are refered to as "Bush dates." This is how the United States is seen around the world. This is also a part of the Bush Doctrine.



http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.pdf
In building a balance of power that favors freedom, the United States is guided by the conviction
that all nations have important responsibilities. Nations that enjoy freedom must actively fight
terror. Nations that depend on international stability must help prevent the spread of weapons
of mass destruction. Nations that seek international aid must govern themselves wisely, so that
aid is well spent. For freedom to thrive, accountability must be expected and required.

[snip]

It costs a lot to fight this war. We have spent more than a billion dollars a month -- over $30 million a day -- and we must be prepared for future operations. Afghanistan proved that expensive precision weapons defeat the enemy and spare innocent lives, and we need more of them. We need to replace aging aircraft and make our military more agile, to put our troops anywhere in the world quickly and safely. Our men and women in uniform deserve the best weapons, the best equipment, the best training -- and they also deserve another pay raise. (Applause.)
My budget includes the largest increase in defense spending in two decades -- because while the price of freedom and security is high, it is never too high. Whatever it costs to defend our country, we will pay. (Applause.)


From the State of the Union
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020129-11.html

We will work closely with our coalition to deny terrorists and their state sponsors the materials, technology, and expertise to make and deliver weapons of mass destruction. We will develop and deploy effective missile defenses to protect America and our allies from sudden attack. (Applause.) And all nations should know: America will do what is necessary to ensure our nation's security.
We'll be deliberate, yet time is not on our side. I will not wait on events, while dangers gather. I will not stand by, as peril draws closer and closer. The United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons. (Applause.)

One reaction
http://www.usatoday.com/news/comment/2002/02/01/ncoppf.htm
The Bush Doctrine is the natural development of a U.S.-centered world view in which the United States unilaterally pursues its objectives as it sees fit. The Kyoto Treaty can be ignored, the ABM Treaty violated, the Land Mines Treaty unsigned and the space-defense shield given massive funding, even if Sept. 11 demonstrated it would have been no defense at all against those acts of terror.

Another reaction
http://www.observer.co.uk/worldview/story/0,11581,672584,00.html
Hardliners in the US administration around Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld, his deputy Paul Wolfowitz and their ideological godfather Richard Pearle, are using the fall-out from the New York and Washington attacks to rework the United States understanding of state sovereignty in the developing world. The concerns with democracy and human rights that dominated foreign policy in the Clinton era never sat comfortably with right-wing Republican promotion of US interests to the exclusion of all else.
Instead, as the present attitude towards Egypt highlights, states in the developing world will be allowed to treat their populations as they please, as long as they conform to certain rules. These concern the suppression of all terrorist activity on their territory, the transparency of banking and trade arrangements, and the disavowal of weapons of mass destruction.

So what is your reation?

Be Well
Ergo Sum