Bush’s new “2006 National Security Strategy”
Bush’s new “2006 National Security Strategy” has more flaws than Port Security.
Iran is not our top security threat. That position is held by natural and bioengineered plagues. And, it is within that context that US policy toward Iran, making them more enemy than friend, that creates our greatest national security threat.
It’s possible that Bush might succeed in stopping Iran from developing nuclear weapons, but it is just such an effort that will only drive Iran to develop biologicals. And, there is no way on God’s green earth that we can prevent Iran from developing biological weapons and using them to end our civilization as we know it. .
Defending his approach of "preemptive war” is both insane and suicidal. It is the most offensive and dangers foreign policy our nation has ever developed. In short, it is an invitation to global lawlessness and Armageddon.
There are signs of evolution in Bush’s policy. Neoconservative policy has mutated into a more realistic policy by putting a greater emphasis on "effective diplomacy" to achieve "transformational democracy” and goes out of its way to say that using “force would be a last resort."
In essence, Bush’s new security strategy is essentially basic liberal ideals emphasizing democracy, prosperity, and international cooperation as the building blocks for global peace. They still don’t see that any future preemptive efforts that might succeed in preventing an attack will only provoke dozens more.
Bush declares in the introduction of the report that American security strategy is founded on two pillars: "promoting freedom, justice, and human dignity" and "confronting the challenges of our time by leading a growing community of democracies." And more than in the 2002 report, Bush speaks of global challenges beyond the military and security threats. "Many of the problems we face - from the threat of pandemic disease, to proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, to terrorism, to human trafficking, to natural disasters - reach across borders," the introduction states. "Effective multinational efforts are essential to solve these problems." This is what foreign policy liberals have been saying all along.
If even one nation adopts pre-emptive doctrine as a realistic approach to dealing with threats, when threats are virtually impossible to detect before use, every person in every nation of the world is at risk. Weaponized smallpox or bird flu makes no distinction between good or evil people, Christian or Muslim, American or Iranian. Essentially, we are all just a warm piece of meat. Reheating preemptive doctrine in any form is not really evolution but instead our first serious step toward extinction.
Iran is not our top security threat. That position is held by natural and bioengineered plagues. And, it is within that context that US policy toward Iran, making them more enemy than friend, that creates our greatest national security threat.
It’s possible that Bush might succeed in stopping Iran from developing nuclear weapons, but it is just such an effort that will only drive Iran to develop biologicals. And, there is no way on God’s green earth that we can prevent Iran from developing biological weapons and using them to end our civilization as we know it. .
Defending his approach of "preemptive war” is both insane and suicidal. It is the most offensive and dangers foreign policy our nation has ever developed. In short, it is an invitation to global lawlessness and Armageddon.
There are signs of evolution in Bush’s policy. Neoconservative policy has mutated into a more realistic policy by putting a greater emphasis on "effective diplomacy" to achieve "transformational democracy” and goes out of its way to say that using “force would be a last resort."
In essence, Bush’s new security strategy is essentially basic liberal ideals emphasizing democracy, prosperity, and international cooperation as the building blocks for global peace. They still don’t see that any future preemptive efforts that might succeed in preventing an attack will only provoke dozens more.
Bush declares in the introduction of the report that American security strategy is founded on two pillars: "promoting freedom, justice, and human dignity" and "confronting the challenges of our time by leading a growing community of democracies." And more than in the 2002 report, Bush speaks of global challenges beyond the military and security threats. "Many of the problems we face - from the threat of pandemic disease, to proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, to terrorism, to human trafficking, to natural disasters - reach across borders," the introduction states. "Effective multinational efforts are essential to solve these problems." This is what foreign policy liberals have been saying all along.
If even one nation adopts pre-emptive doctrine as a realistic approach to dealing with threats, when threats are virtually impossible to detect before use, every person in every nation of the world is at risk. Weaponized smallpox or bird flu makes no distinction between good or evil people, Christian or Muslim, American or Iranian. Essentially, we are all just a warm piece of meat. Reheating preemptive doctrine in any form is not really evolution but instead our first serious step toward extinction.
posted by Chuck Woolery at 5:30 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home