Is "The Bush Doctrine" even a common phrase?

College Confidential Community
1

<p>Let me preface this post by saying, yes, I know what "Doctrine" means, and I know that Bush is the president. So don't try to pwn me by misunderstanding my post and then getting 20 people to agree with you because it's not gonna work.</p>

<p>Usually a leader's policies aren't referred to as a doctrine until they make it to the history books and are seen as influential over time. Not many presidents have doctrines that you hear about. Monroe is one. But many influential presidents had some influential policies that don't have the word doctrine associated with them, like Johnson. </p>

<p>So being that Bush is a horrible president who didn't really even come up with half his policies probably, it stands to reason that his policies shouldn't have his name attached to them. Kissinger received a lot of credit back in the day. You don't exactly hear about the Nixon Doctrine, do you? Maybe we should call it the Cheney Doctrine eh?</p>

<p>If a lot of people really do call it the Bush Doctrine, when did this start, and why? Is Charles Gibson just an ass?</p>

2

<p>we have had a lot worse presidents. FDR is one of them.</p>

3

<p>

</p>

<p>Not even worth a rebuttal.</p>

4

<p>“Is Charles Gibson just an ass?”</p>

<p>Absolutely.</p>

<p>The question was so vague that experts don’t even know what he was asking. If Bush was asked to explain the doctrine, I doubt he could explain it correctly. In basic terms, it was Gibson’s bad attempt at a “gotcha question”.</p>

5

<p>I thought so, but the spinsters sure as hell didn’t make it seem like that. I regret waking up to that guy as a kid lol.</p>

6

<p>There are between 4 and 7 definitions of the “Bush Doctrine”. Note, Bush never said “This is my doctrine…”. This term was defined (differently) by pundits such as Norman Podhoretz and Charles Krauthammer.
You’ve probably heard of the Monroe Doctrine and Truman Doctrines. Did you know there are also many other ‘doctrines’? Here is a short list:</p>

<p>Johnson Doctrine-declared that domestic revolution in the Western Hemisphere would no longer be a local matter when “the object is the establishment of a Communist dictatorship”.</p>

<p>Carter Doctrine-The United States would use military force if necessary to defend its national interests in the Persian Gulf region.</p>

<p>Kennedy Doctrine-we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.</p>

<p>Eisenhower Doctrine-the United States would use armed forces upon request in response to imminent or actual aggression to the Middle East.</p>

<p>Clinton Doctrine-We cannot, indeed, we should not, do everything or be everywhere. But where our values and our interests are at stake, and where we can make a difference, we must be prepared to do so.</p>

<p>Nixon Doctrine-the United States henceforth expected its allies to take care of their own military defense.</p>

<p>Now go impress your friends.</p>

7

<p>Yeah see, this is journalists making up BS. It’s up to historians to determine whose doctrine may be recognized so they may place them in their books in an emboldened fashion for nerds to study.</p>

8

<p>[Charles</a> Krauthammer - Charlie Gibson’s Gaffe - washingtonpost.com](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457.html]Charles”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457.html)</p>

<p>Take it from the man that coined the term.</p>

9

<p>

</p>

<p>For non-morons, yes. You couldn’t be alive in 2002 or 2003 without hearing “Bush Doctrine”.</p>

10

<p>

</p>

<p>Fail__________</p>

11

<p>

</p>

<p>Lol, too bad Sarah Palin couldn’t adequately explain it.</p>

12

<p>Nope, you fail.</p>

13

<p>I feel so sorry for Bush supporters.</p>

14

<p>Just like you feel sorry for people who make under $32,000 a year? Or was that futurenyustudent?</p>

15

<p>Anybody who has followed American foreign policy the past 7 years should know what the “Bush Doctrine” is (and that’s simply by reading papers like the NYTimes, WaPo, etc.).</p>

<p>The fact that Palin had no idea shows her ignorance.</p>

16

<p>Sarah Palin cannot possibly be uninformed, because she reads infinity newspapers a day.</p>

17

<p>Sarah Palin once visited the Virgin Islands. They are now known simply, The Islands.</p>

<p>Sarah Palin did not kill that moose. The moose killed himself when he caught wind of Sarah Palin.</p>

18

<p>Yep, people that don’t know the Bush Doctrine are very ignorant.</p>

<p>The New York Times and the Washington Post are the epitome of fine journalism. Yep.</p>

<p>She’s so clueless!</p>

<p>*The New York Times got it wrong. And Charlie Gibson got it wrong.</p>

<p>**There is no single meaning of the Bush doctrine. In fact, there have been four distinct meanings, each one succeeding another over the eight years of this administration – and the one Charlie Gibson cited is not the one in common usage today. It is utterly different.
**…
I know something about the subject because, as the Wikipedia entry on the Bush doctrine notes, **I was the first to use the term. ***
[Charles</a> Krauthammer - Charlie Gibson’s Gaffe - washingtonpost.com](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457.html]Charles”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457.html)</p>

19

<p>Charles Krauthammer is a biased writer if I ever saw one, and most people will agree at least roughly with Charlie Gibson’s interpretation of it. Just say “pre-emptive strike/war” and you’re golden, but Sarah Palin couldn’t even do that. And if there are multiple answers out there, it should’ve been easier and not harder for her to get it in the ballpark.</p>

20

<p>Honestly, you make no sense. She wouldn’t have been ‘golden’ in the face of such a super loaded question no matter what. Having multiple answers means nothing, Charlie Gibson does not know of these, and he’d still say PWNED LOL.</p>