WAPO: BUSH TO REAFFIRM PREEMPTIVE WAR STRATEGY TODAY!

Bush to Restate Terror Strategy
2002 Doctrine of Preemptive War To Be Reaffirmed

By Peter Baker
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, March 16, 2006; Page A01

President Bush plans to issue a new national security strategy today reaffirming his doctrine of preemptive war against terrorists and hostile states with chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, despite the troubled experience in Iraq.

The long-overdue document, an articulation of U.S. strategic priorities that is required by law, lays out a robust view of America's power and an assertive view of its responsibility to bring change around the world. On topics including genocide, human trafficking and AIDS, the strategy describes itself as "idealistic about goals and realistic about means."

The strategy expands on the original security framework developed by the Bush administration in September 2002, before the invasion of Iraq. That strategy shifted U.S. foreign policy away from decades of deterrence and containment toward a more aggressive stance of attacking enemies before they attack the United States.

The preemption doctrine generated fierce debate at the time, and many critics believe the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq fatally undermined an essential assumption of the strategy -- that intelligence about an enemy's capabilities and intentions can be sufficient to justify preventive war.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/15/AR2006031502297.html

THE NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY
National Security Strategy Overview (From The White House)
http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss/2006/
National Security Strategy of the United States 2006 (pdf File)
http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss/2006/nss2006.pdf

:tinfoilhat:
:hide:

You always find so much great stuff to bring back to DU. It would be great to be able to read all of it in one place.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20060315-2202-bush-nationalsecurity.html

and to think I was worried about climate change, our demise will be nuclear proliferation:eyes:

for a strike on Iran.

The American People have decided the President is simply batshit insane.

:)

Thanks for the update, kpete.

Sounds exactly like the run up to the first enormously successful preemptive war. :sarcasm:

Same shit, different country.

-chef-

said there is no evidence Iran has nuclear weapons. Several people pointed out that yes they do, it's all over the news and the government said so. And you can guess what I said.

I'm so SICK of that word - Condi and Cheney throw it out a lot also. It's a code word for "MANLY", i.e., strong, sturdy, vigorous, bold, firm and unyielding. Our economy is robust, right? Not.

The question here is whether this "reporter" just forgot to put quotes around the word, or whether he's been brainwashed into using this flattering adjective on his own. I don't think Bush has laid out a "robust view" of America's war strategies. The adjectives I would use are illegal (under the principles of international law), blood thirsty, apocalyptic, offensive, horrifying, etc.

If the Washington Post thinks Bush's plan is a "robust view", that opinion should be on the editorial page.

are this delusional. Is it time to throw the bucket of water on him yet?

this was discussed this morning on c-span. It really brings out the bloodthirsty chicken hawk freeper callers.