Print
Email
Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Cite
In this week’s issue of The Weekly Standard, I propose that there really is an “Obama Doctrine” that rivals in its way the “Nixon Doctrine” and “Carter Doctrine.”
Here is what it would look like: “I will undertake any military attack against our enemies, regardless of the risks and collateral damage, so long as it is over by the time I have to announce it.” Obama is leaning away from the old “two war” or “one and a half war” capabilities toward a new idea: American soldiers as raiders, undertaking one-day or one-hour attacks.
The dangers of such a policy for the United States, and the advantages for Mr. Obama, are the subject of the editorial.
c,mon elliot! obama’s foreign interventions have been unqualified successes! you are losing credibiliy.
The mistake of relying so heavily on small unit operations notwithstanding , one is left to believe that the secret operations which might go bad will remain secret . After all , Obama knows (as did JFK) that ” failure is an orphan ” and the phrase ” it was my fault ” doesn’t seem to be in his lexicon .
All we need to do is deprive the man of another term this November, and America will return to America as we’ve known it.
It would benefit our country most if Mr. Abrams contributed his expertise to the debate and raised serious, well-considered objections instead of raising the political temperature. Our greatest threat is political gridlock, caused by one side’s insistence on putting partisanship above all other concerns.
Senator McConnell says that most important priority in the Senate is to harm the President’s electability. I’d hope his priority is the welfare of our nation. It takes little enlightened self-interest to see that we need a functional government, and that both sides could adopt the GOP’s approach and our government would never accomplish anything.
Nope. Obama’s doctrine has been the deep belief in crippling economic sanctions/blockade, coupled with high tech clandestine intel ops, cyber or otherwise.