See the person wey dem won vote o!. . . . . education don miss road!



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z75QSExE0jU


In her first major interview as the Republican vice presidential nominee, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin was stumped when asked about the so-called "Bush Doctrine," unable to answer whether she agreed with the six-year-old U.S. policy of military preemption.

Asked by ABC News' Charlie Gibson whether she supported the Bush Doctrine, Palin stared blankly for a moment before turning the question back on Gibson. "In what respect?"

The ABC anchor responded, "Well, what do you interpret it to be?" clearly testing her knowledge of the policy that has been in place since September 2002, before the Iraq war.

Palin couldn't say, offering an answer that didn't even mention preemption. "I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell-bent in destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made, and with new leadership, and that's the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better."

Gibson, who clearly felt he had not received a sufficient answer to the question he had asked, proceeded to define the Bush Doctrine for the governor. According to Bush's National Security Strategy from September 2002: "While the United States will constantly strive to enlist the support of the international community, we will not hesitate to act alone, if necessary, to exercise our right of self defense by acting preemptively against such terrorists, to prevent them from doing harm against our people and our country."

Thus, Gibson pressed Palin. "The Bush Doctrine is we have the right to self-defense, pre-emptive strike against any country we think is going to attack us," he noted. "Do you agree with it?"

Finally, Palin came close to offering an opinion on preemption. "Charlie, if there is enough intelligent and legitimate evidence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country," she said.

@Ibime,

Do you know my doctrine? Or better still, do you know Obama's doctrine?

I honestly don't see how relevant your question is to the topic at hand. . . except there is something about you and Ibime, some of us don't know.

Going on the premise that. . .

1) You are not the present President
2) Ibime is not running for VP.
3) He's not sitting across from Charles Gibson on National TV, trying to make people see and understand why he is the best person for the position of Second in command of the United States of America.

I have to wonder what exactly does Ibime's knowledge of Obama's doctrine have to do with anything? Or better still, what does knowing your doctrine have to do with anything?

No Profanity - Check
No Sarcasm  - Check
Whew!

@Sisikill,

I honestly don't see how relevant your question is to the topic at hand. . . except there is something about you and Ibime, some of us don't know.

Going on the premise that. . .

1) You are not the present President
2) Ibime is not running for VP.
3) He's not sitting across from Charles Gibson on National TV, trying to make people see and understand why he is the best person for the position of Second in command of the United States of America.

I have to wonder what exactly does Ibime's knowledge of Obama's doctrine have to do with anything? Or better still, what does knowing your doctrine have to do with anything?

Thanks for the questions. The issue is that the inital question is very vague! She clearly wasn't sure what he meant which is why she was asking if the guy was asking about Bush's world view. That is a very vague question.  Assuming Palin had answered the question by talking about preemptive strike, the guy could turn around and say he was talking about his economic doctrine, or any other doctrine for that matter.

Besides, the use of the word 'doctrine' is very derogatory. The word should have been "policy".

And the important thing here is that her view is no differnet than Bush's or even Obama. They all believe in preemptive strikes when actionable intelligence dictates it necessary to defend the country.

My guy, the Bush doctrine is one of these foreign policy theories that I expect every VP or President to know. It is studied in Political Science classes and taught in Universities. If I ask an economist for their view on Keynesian economics or a Republican for their view on Reaganomics, I expect an educated reply.

Look, the Bush Doctrine has its own wikipedia entry. . .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_Doctrine


Anyway, just watched the 9/11 forum and I thought McCain was more composed than Obama.

Every keen observer must have recognized that S. Palin is a mumu.

If I was a Republican strategist I would throw a party tonight and invite each and every one of you to attend. If you live in Europe I will send you flight ticket and give you diplomatic immunition to bypass customs. Here is why, . . .

In her first major interview as the Republican vice presidential nominee, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin was stumped when asked about the so-called "Bush Doctrine," unable to answer whether she agreed with the six-year-old US. policy of military preemption

Oh really? Bush Doctrine? Mint and package it as "Bushism" make it admirable; a new strategy in global politics. You are unintelligent and unlettered if you have not studied and understood what Bush Doctrine is. Vindicate Bush for invading Iraq pre-emptively.

Palin couldn't say, offering an answer that didn't even mention preemption. "I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell-bent in destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made, and with new leadership, and that's the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better."

Palin had no clue. Don't candy-wrap it, dont spin it, dont give it lip service, she is like me and millions of other Americans, we had no clue there was something called Bush doctrine, period!

Gibson, who clearly felt he had not received a sufficient answer to the question he had asked, proceeded to define the Bush Doctrine for the governor. According to Bush's National Security Strategy from September 2002: "While the United States will constantly strive to enlist the support of the international community, we will not hesitate to act alone, if necessary, to exercise our right of self defense by acting preemptively against such terrorists, to prevent them from doing harm against our people and our country.
Thus, Gibson pressed Palin. "The Bush Doctrine is we have the right to self-defense, pre-emptive strike against any country we think is going to attack us," he noted. "Do you agree with it?"

How did that become Bush doctrine? Thats what American forces did when they went into Sudan and bombed out a pharmaceutical plant. Thats what they did when special forces were air dropped into Somalia. Thats a standing Pentagon policy and has always been implemented long before Bush became President.

By calling it Bush doctrine is a setup! Watch out!! If Obama camp allow that question and particularly that term to gain momentum, then they will be caught in the trap. It will be hard for Barack in his official capacity as a Senator to vote NO if Bush went to congress for support to attack Iran pre-emptively. If you believe in it and your campaign used it as a talking point against Palin, then how much are you willing to risk to be portrayed as "All Talk, No Action" candidate? If I were Obama, I would steer clear of that Bush doctrine shyit. Yeah she gaffed but hey, its a gamble to touch on it. Let it be!

Chei! Chei! Chei!

Ibime, I don watch that video way you post. I swerragad the kep remind me of wan loki redneck babe way man pikin dey use hold body those days. The mumu woman no fit even answer simple question. Chai! I don sorry for America finish. Dis wan na George Bush sista!

Tayo-D:

@Ibime,

Do you know my doctrine?

Yes.
As a matter of fact I know it. For any one who no know Tayo doctrine na im be this._{{Clears throat}}
Your doctrin including that of your sister Kobo na to argue.
Hehehe.




Hitting Cons wherever I find them. Viva la revolucion.

@topbanana,

Your doctrin including that of your sister Kobo na to argue.

You have said it all. Case closed.

Negro_Ntns:

How did that become Bush doctrine? Thats what American forces did when they went into Sudan and bombed out a pharmaceutical plant.

Mba. . . that was in reaction to the bombings in Kenya.

The Somalia thing was a peacekeeping mission or so I believe, I am not sure.

Look this 'Bush doctrine' is a new and groundbreaking theory in the world of foreign affairs. Several journals, papers, PHD theis have been written on it. . . .if I lie, google search it. . . . infact, just click on the wikipedia link I provided, you will see that this 'Bush Doctrine' no be small thing in the world of political science.

We are talking about the central tenet of George Bush foreign policy here. . . if Mrs Palin doesn't know that, then what is she doing trying to replace Cheney?. . . .look what that wikipedia link has to say:

During an interview on September 11, 2008 with Charles Gibson of ABC News, Republican Vice-Presidential nominee Sarah Palin was asked about her opinion of the Bush Doctrine. Palin appeared to be unfamiliar with the policy, and, once provided with the definition, demurred from providing her opinion.[24] As the Bush Doctrine is a major part of the outgoing Bush Administration's foreign policy, as well as the current foreign policy of the United States Department of Defense, several policy experts voiced strong concerns regarding Palin's fitness for office following the interview's broadcast.[25][26][27]

Ibime,

You and wikipedia! Let me clear some misconceptions for you before I respond to the points you made. Anybody can create Wiki article. I have a subscription in it and I can go there and creata an article and call it "IBIME - An African Astronaut". Before you know it, the internet will be bombarded with blogs about your mission to Pluto. Lmao. So calm down about wiki. Ok?

Now, Sudan was hit because of speculation that terrorists were hatching a plan to attack US interests in the Gulf of Aden. It was not hit for what happened in Kenya but for what they thought was getting ready to happen. We will never know if the intelligence was right or not because an American military asset was indeed hit around Aden, only that the bad noys came out of Yemen and not Sudan. But who is to say that they did not shift base to evade surveillance?

If you don't know why Somalia was hit, why then did you contend what I said?
Do me a favor, file for Freedom Of Information release on Somalia and you will get the picture.

Preemptive strike is not a Bush Doctrine. Calling it that will be like saying white man started slave trade.

You are sounding as if Bush Doctrine is an academic "must read".

Admit it, you didn't know what the doctrine was before that question. Agreed, you know a lot about it now that you have been on the internet and researched it. If you didn't know that preemptive strike existed before Bush, then hardly true that you knew about the Bush doctrine.

Negro_Ntns:

Admit it, you didn't know what the doctrine was before that question. Agreed, you know a lot about it now that you have been on the internet and researched it. If you didn't know that preemptive strike existed before Bush, then hardly true that you knew about the Bush doctrine.

I don't have to know what Bush Doctrine is. I am a mathematician, not a politician like Sarah Palin.

Negro_Ntns:

You and wikipedia! Let me clear some misconceptions for you before I respond to the points you made. Anybody can create Wiki article. I have a subscription in it and I can go there and creata an article and call it "IBIME - An African Astronaut". Before you know it, the internet will be bombarded with blogs about your mission to Pluto. Lmao. So calm down about wiki. Ok?

The strength of a wikipedia page is backed by the strength and number of its references. Please visit the page again. When I did google search on Bush Doctrine, I found many academic papers on it and even modules on Political Science degrees. Guaranteed, it is a new theory, but I expect a web analyst to understand how Page Ranking works even if he graduated in 1995 and Page Ranking came out in 1998-2000.

Negro_Ntns:

Preemptive strike is not a Bush Doctrine. Calling it that will be like saying white man started slave trade.

You are sounding as if Bush Doctrine is an academic "must read".

Newton introduced the term 'gravity'. However, if you ask any fool on earth they know that whatever goes up must come down. Even a dog knows this. That is why when you throw a stick, he knows he must catch it because it will come back down. However the difference between a dog and a scientist is that a scientist can define gravity whilst a dog cannot. Therefore we must call him what he is - a dog! Even if he wears lipstick! 

I am sure McCain, Obama and Biden know exactly what the Bush doctrine is. Sarah Palin simply doesn't belong in this category. It is her academic history that rankles with me more than anything.

The strength of a wikipedia page is backed by the strength and number of its references. Please visit the page again. When I did google search on Bush Doctrine, I found many academic papers on it and even modules on Political Science degrees. Guaranteed, it is a new theory, but I expect a web analyst to understand how Page Ranking works even if he graduated in 1995 and Page Ranking came out in 1998-2000.

From a mathematician, wrong answer! The strength of reference materials are supported not in their strength of numbers but rather, by the credibility of its source. The individual must determine if their search for information and reference is to gain truth or to acquire information. Your repeated mention of wikipedia, even on issues that philosophically lack merit is disturbing. Example is the Bush doctrine.

What doctrine of Bush, if any is worth learning for enlightenement? His atrocities are many _ illegitimate war, systematic torture, wholesale distabilization of the middle east region, etc, For what he has done, many other leaders would have been labeled war criminals and probed for possible prosecution. I know on that point you are going to google and wiki and tell me US is not on the treaty. Yeah, I know that! Still, it does not absolve him of committing those crimes.

I would not be surprised that there are academic papers and teachings of the doctrine in universities. Bush has no legacy. What are you going to put in his Presidential library? He needs a tangible legacy and what better way to formulate one than to coin a friendly term for a criminal action and deploy it internationally by his stooges _ Karen Hughes; Paul Wolfson; Richard Perle; Zalmay Khalilzad; Robert Gates and the rest of them. The universities where it is taught got some grant for it, I bet you! It is being sold, not researched! You bring information but you dont probe for truth. Thats unnatural for a scientist. Maybe you should become a Politician where google and wiki can better serve your opinions.

Newton introduced the term 'gravity'. However, if you ask any fool on earth they know that whatever goes up must come down. Even a dog knows this. That is why when you throw a stick, he knows he must catch it because it will come back down. However the difference between a dog and a scientist is that a scientist can define gravity whilst a dog cannot. Therefore we must call him what he is - a dog! Even if he wears lipstick!

Newton was not the first to write on gravity. Newton developed on works that was already begun by philosophers and astrologers and astronomers. Long before Isaac Newton was born, Astronomers had already standardized the effect of the pull of one body against another and also established how to invert that force of pull. They studied magnetism and relational laws of bodies both in static and in motion and concluded mathematically a relational formula; mc².

I am sure McCain, Obama and Biden know exactly what the Bush doctrine is. Sarah Palin simply doesn't belong in this category. It is her academic history that rankles with me more than anything.

Again, here you go equating Bush doctrine as an academic work. Bush himself is far from academic scholarship, let alone establishing academic principles. You are right Palin does not know the answer but that laxity should be attributed to the fact that she is not aware or lack information on the policy, rather than a question of academic ability or aptitude.

Bush doctrine is nothing more than a Bush's goverment policy, period, no more no less!

Negro_Ntns:

From a mathematician, wrong answer! The strength of reference materials are supported not in their strength of numbers but rather, by the credibility of its source. 

Ibime:

The strength of a wikipedia page is backed by the strength and number of its references.

By strength, I mean credibility.

Go and check the wikipedia link again and test the strength of its references.

Negro_Ntns:

Bush doctrine is nothing more than a Bush's goverment policy, period, no more no less!

Yes - and you would expect an aspiring VP to know the foreign policy of the previous government.

Ibime:

Yes - and you would expect an aspiring VP to know the government policy of the previous government.

which funny enough is the same party she is campaigning under. Bush is the defacto head of the Republican party, you cant be the VP nominee and have no idea what policy your party head is running.

Negro Ntns has espoused his hatred for the Bush Government and roundly condemned his actions. He is a pan-African and his name would suggest that he loves Negro Nations. He hates Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity and abhors Karl Rove politics. Which leads me to ask - exactly what is it that make Negro Ntns a Republican?

Negro, answer please. Is it the conservative values or is it their strict adherence to Laffer Curve economics? Or are we in different tax brackets?

Yes - and you would expect an aspiring VP to know the foreign policy of the previous government.

which funny enough is the same party she is campaigning under. Bush is the defacto head of the Republican party, you can't be the VP nominee and have no idea what policy your party head is running.

Palin knows the policy. It is the term _Bush Doctrine_ that threw her off. If she had been asked "what was Bush's principle for attacking Iraq"? She would have answered correctly that the government perceived an imminent threat from Iraq and so we preemptively attacked. As would most people, the term doctrine is leading you to think of a theory or principle of knowledge; which in this case is nothing more than a mere policy of one administration. The doctrine is not a party platform agenda. It is a neocon agenda lifted directly from their manifesto written in a publication titled "The New American Century". Although the Pentagon has always reserved the right to employ it if necessary in a military threat. The interviewer ought to be censored. This is like asking an aspiring rapper, do you know the Jayzee doctrine, as opposed to do you know Jayzee's style of rap?


lol, Ibime, I love Karl Rove. I love him for his strategic maneuvering, his mental game and the way he always have the Democrats befuddled even in their own moves. I had a good time in 04 watching him cripple their strong stance against Bush. Kerry camp will come up with a strong and viable idea and Karl will twist it as a bad idea. Next thing you know, the Democrats are shying away from their own idea. Then he will hijack it and reformulate it and present it as Bush stance against Kerry. That will infuriate the Dems and they will cry foul! Oh my!! The same pattern all over again in 08 with McCain and Obama.

I am not Republican, you are right. I am not Democrat either. I have favorites in both parties but my priority is the platform agenda. What is it that a party is proposing and how capable are they to implement it given their past performances with similar proposals. Politicians are liars and unreliable but somehow somewhere they get some things done that are tangible and effective for the bottom line. This year, the Republicans have that appeal.

@Ibime,

Yes - and you would expect an aspiring VP to know the foreign policy of the previous government.

Actually, she articulated the pre-emptemtive strike policy of Bush as soon as she realises the question was about that. What threw her off was the phrase "Bush doctrine". Like I said before, the phrase is a derogatory way of saying "Bush policy".

I hear Obama camp is mum over the Palin interview.  Thank God, Democrats are finally learning to smell traps and sidestep it with no fatality.  

For this evasive move, I'm going to advance a Pawn for Obama, against McCain's Knight on the Palin choice.

Palin is a clueless dimwit who knows fuckall!

I lean democratic, however, I think the "Bush doctrine" question is unfair. Bush comes up with stuff everyday that baffles even his loyalists. There is nothing that has being designated as "Bush doctrine" that is universally accepted as such. Palin's intelligence or lack of should not be judged based on the Bush doctrine question. The thought of Palin being the president if McCain is incapacitated is scary. She has no clue on foreign affairs. Her comments on attacking Russia is irresponsible and should be condemned.