(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...Read it slowly . . . think about it . . . .partisanship aside . . . thinking cap on . . .
Stewart : It seems like Bush has started a new doctrine, the Bush Doctrine…[which] sets the standard for preemption. Now the first time you exercise a new doctrine, wouldn’t you want to be very sure of yourself because that will set a standard, no?
Hayes : I think the idea behind the Bush doctrine is that if you support or harbor terrorists, we’re gonna come after you. We’ll consider you a hostile regime. I don’t think that frankly in the aftermath of September 11th, I really don’t think that’s an unreasonable doctrine.
Stewart : Here’s the problem. It’s not unreasonable, but it’s not he point. The point is…I’ll list you four things :
developing weapons of mass destruction,
inflammatory rhetoric against the United States,
supporting and harboring terrorism,
and oppression of their own people.
Now here’s the problem with your doctrine. You can’t tell me what country I just named. And that’s a problem when you’re talking about war. You don’t know if I’m talking about Iraq, Iran, North Korea, or Sudan. [What Do YOU Think? Comment on this Post!] [Testify!]
