Reviewing Insanity

by digby

Following up on my post from earlier today about the dangers of American bullyboy tactics, here’s a real jaw dropper:

The Pentagon is reviewing the Bush administration’s doctrine of preemptive military strikes with an eye to modifying or possibly ending it. The international environment is “more complex” than when President George W. Bush announced the policy in 2002, Kathleen Hicks, the Defense Department’s deputy undersecretary for strategy, said in an interview. “We’d really like to update our use-of-force doctrine to start to take account for that.”

As I wrote in that earlier post, the Bush Doctrine and the other primitive policies of violent aggression adopted over the past decade made America less safe.

And I’m confident that was one of the main reasons why a majority of Americans and pretty much the rest of the planet were vastly, overwhelmingly relieved when Barack Obama was elected. It’s why he earned the Nobel Peace Prize. The whole world was destabilized by America becoming a rogue superpower run by a bunch of nuts who declare they have a right to invade any country that looks at them sideways. The repudiation of that policy was intrinisic to Obama’s victory.

Am I the only one who’s surprised that this “review” is even necessary? Is there actual doubt that Obama has reversed that doctrine? Really?

Let’s hope this is just some pro forma exercize that will result in a whole new doctrine of sanity being laid out before too long. Because if it’s actually possible that Obama will formally endorse the Bush Doctrine then the primary rationale for his presidency in my mind will be gone. I’m cynical about campaign promises, but changing that insane doctrine was the one thing I assumed he would do once in office — and think the rest of the world did too.

Naturally, Very Serious People who thought we should invade Iraq, believe that Obama should fudge this:

Michael O’Hanlon, a defense analyst at the non-partisan Brookings Institution in Washington, said “the clear challenge for this administration is to find a balance between retaining the right, in extremis, to preempt, while avoiding association with the Bush administration.” “The only solution is to try to downplay this option and say it will be reserved for the most extreme cases and even then pursued only with as much international backing and legitimacy as possible,” O’Hanlon said.

Right, just paper it over with patent bullshit and pretend like Americans and the rest of the world are dumb as doormats. It’s what works on the Village, after all.

This one is non-negotiable. Obama must say that American will abide by International Law, which defines preemption as an imminent threat, not some “gut” feeling by a bunch of throwback neocon psychos and silly Chicken Littles like O’Hanlon. I’m shocked that the Bush Doctrine is still in effect at all. Actually endorsing it, no matter how many promises that he will be super-duper careful, is completely unacceptable.

.