Bush Doctrine and Reality Doctrine

Osama Bin Laden compound. A terrorist attack to kill an ambassador, but not to avenge this? Remember this in elections to come.
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

As we all prepare for whatever it is that the news media and liberal moderator have in store for Mitt Romney at this evening’s Town Hall debate on foreign policy, it seems appropriate to revisit America’s policy of the last decade—the Bush Doctrine. For good or bad, George W. Bush is the author of this policy and while there may be some good, the bulk of the Bush Doctrine has been a disaster.

The Bush Doctrine and why it failed

This writing is not meant to demean Bush in any way. In fact, it was he who knew that for the long term, that means for generations to come, something had to be done to stop Islamic terrorism from continuing on the path of murder and evil.

So, after 9/11 and countless other Islamic atrocities, before and since, Bush decided to take terrorism on from the standpoint that all people, anywhere in the world, yearn to be free and live in peace. I suspect that he knows now, that is not true.

History has taught man that humaneness and humanity are two words that never coexist when people are ruled by government thugs instead of government being ruled by the people.

The Bush doctrine developed and Iraq became the initial testing ground for it. Afghanistan was already raging but that was more about, whether some like it or not, payback than anything else. Iraq was preemptive and provided a good starting ground for a future of peace.

It did not work.

George W. Bush, promulgator of the Bush Doctrine

George W. Bush at Ground Zero after 9/11. Hosted on Tea Party Advocate Tracking Hub

The idea was of course to set up a true democratic and free country in Iraq. Have them prosper and become the envy of the rest of the Middle East and that in generations to come, other Islamic countries would follow and sometime, even 20 or 30 years into the future, the dread, the murder, the fear, the oppression would cease to exist in that part of the world and the export of terrorism to the west would end.

That will never happen.

On paper and in Bush’s heart, even though it required a long-term commitment in material and American lives, it seemed a plan worth implementing.

We know now, it wasn’t.

After years of American boys being killed or sent home without limbs and hundreds of billions of dollars washed away into the bloody sands of Islamic rat hole countries, Iraq is slipping back to meet the past, instead of moving forward into modernity.

The Bush Doctrine has failed.

The Islamic Middle East is not like the rest of the world. They do not yearn to be free. They do not want to live in peace. They want infidels dead or converted to that murderous cult they call a religion. Ten years or a hundred years, nothing will change them and nothing will bring them to peace.

Except:

The Reality Doctrine.

Islamic Governments of the world, this is our new doctrine. Keep your thugs and fanatics home or face our wrath. You have been warned and any consequence of this doctrine will be of your doing.

  1. Any country that supports terrorism and has, helped or abetted any man or group, that has killed an American here at home or abroad, will be declared a terrorist state.
  2. That country, with the approval of Congress, will come under attack from our Air Force and our Navy. The attack will be relentless in taking out government buildings, railroads, bridges, factories, military installations on the ground or on the sea.
  3. Every hard target will be given a 2 hour notice to give the dictators time to move their people out of harms way.
  4. After the complete annihilation of the specified targets, America will go home and leave your miserable country to rebuild on its own without one dollar of support or one American soldier on the ground. Not one American boy will lose his life or leave a limb in the hell hole of any Islamic country.
  5. After 5 years, 10 years or however long it takes to re construct your infrastructure, if you choose to go down the same path, we will be back.
  6. Any country that supports terrorism and allows that activity on their soil will receive not one dollar of American money. We will no longer borrow hundreds of billions of dollars and then give it away to our enemies or any country that supports our enemies

Now of course this is just dreaming and the Reality Doctrine will never be implemented. However, if it was, this doctrine would surely be tested by our enemies. But just once.

Reprinted from Tea Party Advocate Tracking Hub.

[subscribe2]

18 Responses to Bush Doctrine and Reality Doctrine

  1. Fergus Mason says:

    “Any country that supports terrorism and has, helped or abetted any man or group, that has killed an American here at home or abroad, will be declared a terrorist state.”

    You better start bombing yourselves then, because by giving legitimacy to scum like Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness, and letting their fundraisers hide behind charitable status in the USA, you supported the Provisional IRA. They killed Americans.

    • Terry A. Hurlbut says:

      The confederates involved were prosecuted. Why do you so often forget that I was alive at the time?

      • Fergus Mason says:

        “The confederates involved were prosecuted.”

        A couple were. However there are plenty PIRA scum at liberty in the USA whose extradition back to the UK to face justice has been blocked by US courts. Gerry Adams has been a regular visitor to the White House under every US president since Reagan left office. Weapons from the USA – including military weapons – continue to turn up in Northern Ireland. Your country has at least tacitly supported these terrorist vermin.

        • Terry A. Hurlbut says:

          You know I have no brief for Bill Clinton, and less of a brief for Barack Obama.

          • Fergus Mason says:

            “You know I have no brief for Bill Clinton, and less of a brief for Barack Obama.”

            Both Bushes were also presidents who came after Reagan. Both Bushes also had Adams at the White House and tolerated NORAID’s fundraising efforts. Did any of the Republican candidates condemn NORAID? Did any guarantee to return wanted terrorists to the UK? The UK has just sent you Abu Hamza and his vile associates; the least you can do in return is ship us all the fugitive PIRA we’ve been asking you for.

  2. Reg Cheeseman says:

    This is a provocative article that should spark some interesting debate, but step four of the “reality doctrine” shows its based in some kind of computer game fantasy.

    Let’s assume the first three steps are practicable and that they won’t, like Bush’s half-baked police actions, generate a greater reaction. We’ve spent several billion dollars of taxpayers’ hard earned money on these campaigns.

    Normally, we turn a few bucks when we invade a country. Western banks lend them the money to reconstruct, using western contractors, with western companies running the infrastructure and bidding for rights to use the country’s natural resources.

    With more money going out and less money coming in, who pays for all these fireworks?

    Step four also misses a more obvious point. The US is not the only global agent. The US won’t step in to reconstruct? The EU will. China will. Russia will. India will. Brazil will. Who knows, maybe someone will succeed where Nasser and Gaddafi failed and a pan-African union will. The US is less and less and less economically self-sufficient and more and more dependent on global trade – becoming the kid that breaks everyone else’s toys won’t help.

    So, stimulating and provocative, but very far from “reality”.

  3. JT says:

    Amazing. Kehoe manages to out-crazy even himself. Sure, the way to instill peace in the world is by bombing everybody else back into the stone-age. With no thought as to what that is going to do to the world economy, not to mention the ongoing resentment that would instill, which would result – eventually – in somebody taking the mad-dog US out with a pre-emptive nuclear strike.

    And yes, the US should bomb themselves first, because there is more than enough evidence of them supporting terrorist organisations – the IRA, Contra, UNITA, hell, even Osama and his Mujahadin.

    • Terry A. Hurlbut says:

      What contributions does any country make to the world economy, that sponsors acts of that kind? Answer: none, or at least none that we could not do without. That is why they sponsor acts of that kind: so that they can steal that which they have no value to trade for, or merely destroy that which they cannot have.

      • Reg Cheeseman says:

        Remind us who sponsored the “strategy of tension” in Italy in the 70s and 80s?

      • JT says:

        Let’s have a little thought experiment here – let’s say that the US goes down this path. Says to hell with the UN, and NATO, and the EU, we’re going to do what we like. And off they go and bomb some little country most people can’t pronounce that’s populated by brown skinned people, back into the middle ages. And in so doing, they kill a couple of Russians, Frenchmen, English, maybe an Israeli and a North Korean.

        By your same logic, you should have no problem at all with these countries declaring the US to be a terrorist state and launching bombs of their own against it.

        • Terry A. Hurlbut says:

          That’s what declarations of war are for, among other things: to tell everybody to stay out of what will now become war zones.

          • Fergus Mason says:

            “That’s what declarations of war are for, among other things: to tell everybody to stay out of what will now become war zones.”

            So you think the USA has the right to tell, say, British or Russian nationals where they’re allowed to go?

            Sorry, I can’t see that catching on somehow.

          • Terry A. Hurlbut says:

            We have the right to tell certain foreign nationals,

            This is going to be a war zone. Go here, if you insist, but at your own risk. We shan’t be responsible if something happens to you because you had to go right into the middle of no-man’s land.

          • Fergus Mason says:

            “We have the right to tell certain foreign nationals… We shan’t be responsible if something happens to you because you had to go right into the middle of no-man’s land.”

            No you don’t.

            You’ll find that the Geneva Conventions, to which your government is a signatory, are very clear about what responsibilities combatants have to non-belligerent nationals caught up in their attacks. If you choose to attack military targets in another country it is up to you to ensure that every reasonable precaution is taken to protect civilians in the area, and just saying “Get out or you’ll get bombed” is not a reasonable precaution.

            Washing your hands of responsibility is not an option. It is, in fact, the first step on the road to war crimes.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.