The Bush Doctrine v. The Bush Legacy
How Will History Judge The Wartime American President?
Dec 28, 2008
When placing the well documented, if not always all too well thought out Bush Doctrine, next to the still very fluid Bush Legacy, comparisons between the two are possible. Some of the findings in terms of U.S. foreign policy initiatives and the history that these seemingly at times, artificially produced national security related actions have currently produced and are likely to produce in the future, appear to run contrary to the very principles or the doctrine and eventual outcomes that President George W. Bush and his administration officials actually had in mind.
The Wartime President
Bush who literally defines himself through his role as a wartime president, perhaps felt he had a special responsibility in the wake of the September 11th, 2001terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, D.C.And in assessing his role as Commander-in-chief of all U.S. armed forces, it was important to prevent any further aggression on the U.S. homeland as well as expand the U.S. armed forces ability to disrupt, capture, or kill any responsible parties for those horrific crimes against humanity and to dissuade any government harboring or supporting terror organizations that sought to strike out at the U.S. homeland or other U.S. interests around the globe. The U.S. as a leading member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), pushed for and won the consideration of the September 11th attacks to be declared an attack against all NATO member nations. In turn, this along with an out pouring of well wishes from around the world prompted an emergency session of the allied nations and for the first time in history, NATO countries invoked Article 5 of the Washington Treaty. Which seems clearly to bring to mind the part of the Bush Doctrine that relates to the U.S. foreign and National Security policy that aggressively seeks to protect the U.S. Homeland and its vital interests from countries that harbor or give aid or comfort to terrorist groups, and shortly after came the U.S. led invasion of Afghanistan. So far so good.
The Preventative Wartime President
The somewhat controversial policy related to the Bush Doctrine that has all of the history and legacy buffs buzzing is the later additional elements related to preventative war. The basic tenants hold that the U.S. should depose foreign regimes deemed dangerous or that represent a potential threat to the national security interests of the U.S., even if that perceived threat was not immediate. Also, a policy of spreading the U.S. style or form of democracy is included as a a way to win hearts and minds in the combating of terrorism is also a principal tenant, as well as to pursue U.S. Military interests and objectives in a unilateral way if deemed necessary. Many of theses policies were organized in and implemented under laws like The USA Patriot Act, and and expansion U.S. Code Title 18, Part I Chapter 113B Terrorism, and an enhanced interpretation and comprehension of the U.S. Constitution: Article II, section 2. Powers and Duties of the President.
The Bush Doctrine v. Bush Legacy
Unfortunately, the big three of debt, deceit, and death may best describe the Bush legacy, although it certainly did not start out that way. After Iraq and its then dictator Saddam Hussein came back on many people's radar including Vice President Dick Cheney. Through his office and with a number of his allies in the Bush administration a concerted effort was made by a number of neoconservatives to invade Iraq and the controversial Second Gulf War and occupation of Iraq started on March 20th 2003 and has yet to conclude. It was thought by many in this neoconservative group that the Iraqis would welcome U.S. and other allied troops with open arms and that those same troops would become liberators. Instead they were viewed as occupiers and formed shortly after the U.S. led coalition. The insurgency disrupted almost all the the Bush Administrations plans and for a time it seemed as if the war was a total loss a coalition force casualties mounted and much the planned Iraqi reconstruction produced marginal successes, coupled with some very spectacular failures. With a PBS news report by Bill Moyers stating that coalition force deaths at 4,146 and with more than 30,000 injured, and with UN estimates upwards of 500,000 or more Iraqis killed and injured it seems the legacy of death has ben secured. As for the debt and deceit, the U.S. is currently going through an economic hardship of epic proportions not necessarily caused by the war but perhaps can be seen by many as a contributing factor. And we all know now that the pretense and so-called irrefutable evidence presented by the Bush Administration for a war with Iraq was all based on false intelligence. So, unfortunately it would seem that this negative part of the Bush legacy remains all too intact as well.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
