The Disastrous Consequences of the Obama Doctrine
April 3rd 2011 13:40
In the history of the United States of America, many men who have had the honor of serving as President of the United States of America have been forced to make tough decisions that set the course of international foreign policy.
A standard that was to be adhered to by every person who would secure Presidential office after their term of service ended and would set the tone of foreign policy for the United States of America and the rest of the world.
For some Presidents, their doctrine was simple in terms of protecting American interests and drawing the line in the sand for foreign nations who trampled on the sovereignty of American interests and its neighbors while others set the stage for global initiatives that clearly stated the actions that would provoke conflict.
From these doctrines, decade long conflicts were given terms of engagement, nations outside of the United States of America were administered a clear warning that their actions would result in aggression from one of the world’s largest super powers and long term military engagements didn’t have to be labeled as wars to be justified.
While a doctrine is helpful in conveying a message to the American people and nations across the globe; not all doctrines succeeded in reaching their long term goals.
The theory of containment in the Kennedy Doctrine worked for the idea of a world engaged in nation to nation conflicts but did nothing for the pieces of the puzzle that were left when the Soviet empire fell and rogue nations, dictators and networks of terror became the enemy.
After the 9/11 attacks President George W. Bush created the Bush Doctrine that clearly defined his reasons for waging war on Taliban leadership and later invading the nation of Iraq by stating any nation harboring terrorists or posing a risk to the world with chemical and biological weapons risked having action taken against them from the United States of America and having their leadership powers taken away.
Long after the failed scavenger hunt for chemical and biological weapons in Iraq turned into a defensive against insurgents and Iranian influences and the invasion of Afghanistan left the world without the capture of the most wanted fugitive on Earth; the only thing accomplished from these missions is the directive for regime change against nations that pose a risk to the United States of America and the World.
From the failings of the Bush Doctrine the American people were promised change in the way we handle foreign policy from both sides of the aisle.
A promise from political leaders to not rush into another war and weigh the risk and benefits of disposing dictators and rogue leadership with the lessons learned in Iraq and Afghanistan.
From a wave of anger against the way these wars were handled and the way government decided to run itself; the American people elected what was termed as a “Breath of Fresh Air” that could set the course of American foreign policy down the right path.
A path that wasn't about the lust of disposing leadership in foreign nations we didn't agree with but was about using the powers of the Presidency to protect the interests of the American people and the rest of the world without making situations worse in a region where American troops are stuck in a pair of long term engagements.
The Obama Doctrine was born in the year 2011 with the rise of instability in the Middle East from a growing concern over food costs and availability that has created a landscape for revolution.
Revolutions across the Middle East region against Dictators, Religious leaders and Rogue Regimes who have outlasted Presidents, Nations and Empires to rule with an iron fist until economic circumstances in their home countries brought reality crashing down.
In what became his defining foreign policy moment President Barack Obama chose to fall back on the principles of his predecessor in dealing with dictators by stating that is the duty of the United States of America to be involved in a situation where a dictator or rogue leadership is using its power to abuse the people seeking their rights to democracy.
While this may sound like a directive that could be used across the globe to protect citizens of nations dealing with ethnic conflict, genocide, civil war and revolution; President Obama only used what could be set up as a doctrine for this particular instance to justify the use of planes to bomb targets in Libya.
Targets that will help the rebels reach the aims of the Bush Doctrine in regime change.
While it is admirable for the United States of America to be involved in helping oust a dictator that has been causing destruction across the globe since the 1970’s it is another measure for anyone to try and predict what will happen the when the people of the nation of Libya achieve the goal of freedom.
Freedom left in the hands of Freedom Fighters who will possess American weaponry and will be able to wage war on each other in a civil war, use them against a neighbor who may be a different religious sect or use their new found power to appoint a new dictator with more radical views.
The problem with the Obama Doctrine has nothing to do with the premise of aiding a nation fighting for reform nor does it have anything to do with the idea of a third war in the middle East.
The problem comes from the habits of war that have been displayed time and time again when the idea of military might overcoming the archaic devices of the enemy replaces the common sense thinking of what happens after the smoke has cleared.
For too long our leaders have jumped from A-Z without thinking of anything in between.
A thinking that has allowed radicals, rogue nations and dictators to fill in the gaps in between when our resources are over stretched with the messes we are forced to clean up from past mistakes.
While the year 2011 may not be a time when the issue of troops hitting the ground in Libya comes into the conversation; mistakes made by further involvement and seeking regime change may affect the idea 5, 10 or 15 years down the road with disastrous consequences.
Mistakes that will come from further de-stabilization of a region that is already exploding with volatile situations just waiting to suck the world into a larger nightmare that is to come….
The conversation is on the Facebook Page Monday-Thursday with analysis of breaking news stories, special features and polls you can participate in with other Readers, Followers, Fans and Friends on my Social Networks.
To jump to the Khalfani King Facebook Page Click the link below and sign up for Updates by clicking the “Like” Button.
Click Here
Don't forget to vote and leave comments or questions to help further this conversation.
A standard that was to be adhered to by every person who would secure Presidential office after their term of service ended and would set the tone of foreign policy for the United States of America and the rest of the world.
For some Presidents, their doctrine was simple in terms of protecting American interests and drawing the line in the sand for foreign nations who trampled on the sovereignty of American interests and its neighbors while others set the stage for global initiatives that clearly stated the actions that would provoke conflict.
From these doctrines, decade long conflicts were given terms of engagement, nations outside of the United States of America were administered a clear warning that their actions would result in aggression from one of the world’s largest super powers and long term military engagements didn’t have to be labeled as wars to be justified.
While a doctrine is helpful in conveying a message to the American people and nations across the globe; not all doctrines succeeded in reaching their long term goals.
The theory of containment in the Kennedy Doctrine worked for the idea of a world engaged in nation to nation conflicts but did nothing for the pieces of the puzzle that were left when the Soviet empire fell and rogue nations, dictators and networks of terror became the enemy.
After the 9/11 attacks President George W. Bush created the Bush Doctrine that clearly defined his reasons for waging war on Taliban leadership and later invading the nation of Iraq by stating any nation harboring terrorists or posing a risk to the world with chemical and biological weapons risked having action taken against them from the United States of America and having their leadership powers taken away.
Long after the failed scavenger hunt for chemical and biological weapons in Iraq turned into a defensive against insurgents and Iranian influences and the invasion of Afghanistan left the world without the capture of the most wanted fugitive on Earth; the only thing accomplished from these missions is the directive for regime change against nations that pose a risk to the United States of America and the World.
From the failings of the Bush Doctrine the American people were promised change in the way we handle foreign policy from both sides of the aisle.
A promise from political leaders to not rush into another war and weigh the risk and benefits of disposing dictators and rogue leadership with the lessons learned in Iraq and Afghanistan.
From a wave of anger against the way these wars were handled and the way government decided to run itself; the American people elected what was termed as a “Breath of Fresh Air” that could set the course of American foreign policy down the right path.
A path that wasn't about the lust of disposing leadership in foreign nations we didn't agree with but was about using the powers of the Presidency to protect the interests of the American people and the rest of the world without making situations worse in a region where American troops are stuck in a pair of long term engagements.
The Obama Doctrine was born in the year 2011 with the rise of instability in the Middle East from a growing concern over food costs and availability that has created a landscape for revolution.
Revolutions across the Middle East region against Dictators, Religious leaders and Rogue Regimes who have outlasted Presidents, Nations and Empires to rule with an iron fist until economic circumstances in their home countries brought reality crashing down.
In what became his defining foreign policy moment President Barack Obama chose to fall back on the principles of his predecessor in dealing with dictators by stating that is the duty of the United States of America to be involved in a situation where a dictator or rogue leadership is using its power to abuse the people seeking their rights to democracy.
While this may sound like a directive that could be used across the globe to protect citizens of nations dealing with ethnic conflict, genocide, civil war and revolution; President Obama only used what could be set up as a doctrine for this particular instance to justify the use of planes to bomb targets in Libya.
Targets that will help the rebels reach the aims of the Bush Doctrine in regime change.
While it is admirable for the United States of America to be involved in helping oust a dictator that has been causing destruction across the globe since the 1970’s it is another measure for anyone to try and predict what will happen the when the people of the nation of Libya achieve the goal of freedom.
Freedom left in the hands of Freedom Fighters who will possess American weaponry and will be able to wage war on each other in a civil war, use them against a neighbor who may be a different religious sect or use their new found power to appoint a new dictator with more radical views.
The problem with the Obama Doctrine has nothing to do with the premise of aiding a nation fighting for reform nor does it have anything to do with the idea of a third war in the middle East.
The problem comes from the habits of war that have been displayed time and time again when the idea of military might overcoming the archaic devices of the enemy replaces the common sense thinking of what happens after the smoke has cleared.
For too long our leaders have jumped from A-Z without thinking of anything in between.
A thinking that has allowed radicals, rogue nations and dictators to fill in the gaps in between when our resources are over stretched with the messes we are forced to clean up from past mistakes.
While the year 2011 may not be a time when the issue of troops hitting the ground in Libya comes into the conversation; mistakes made by further involvement and seeking regime change may affect the idea 5, 10 or 15 years down the road with disastrous consequences.
Mistakes that will come from further de-stabilization of a region that is already exploding with volatile situations just waiting to suck the world into a larger nightmare that is to come….
The conversation is on the Facebook Page Monday-Thursday with analysis of breaking news stories, special features and polls you can participate in with other Readers, Followers, Fans and Friends on my Social Networks.
To jump to the Khalfani King Facebook Page Click the link below and sign up for Updates by clicking the “Like” Button.
Click Here
Don't forget to vote and leave comments or questions to help further this conversation.
| 29 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
