The Bush Doctrine is a phrase used to describe various related foreign policy principles of United States president George W. Bush, created in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks. The phrase initially described the policy that the United States had the right to treat countries that harbor or give aid to terrorist groups as terrorists themselves, which was used to justify the invasion of Afghanistan.[1] Later it came to include additional elements, including the controversial policy of preventive war, which held that the United States should depose foreign regimes that represented a threat to the security of the United States, even if that threat was not immediate (used to justify the invasion of Iraq), a policy of supporting democracy around the world, especially in the Middle East, as a strategy for combating the spread of terrorism, and a willingness to pursue U.S. military interests in a unilateral way.[2][3][4] Some of these policies were codified in a National Security Council text entitled the National Security Strategy of the United States published on September 20, 2002.[5]

Central to the development of the Bush Doctrine is its strong influence by neoconservative ideology,[6] and it is considered to be a step from the political realism of the Reagan Doctrine.[6] The Reagan Doctrine was considered key to American foreign policy until the end of the Cold War, just before Bill Clinton became president of the United States. The Reagan Doctrine was considered anti-Communist and in opposition to Soviet Union global influence, but later spoke of a peace dividend towards the end of the Cold War with economic benefits of a decrease in defence spending. The Reagan Doctrine was strongly criticized[7] by the neoconservatives, who also became disgruntled with the outcome of the Gulf War[6] and United States foreign policy under Bill Clinton,[8] sparking them to call for change towards global stability[9] through their support for active intervention and the democratic peace theory.[8] Several central persons in the counsel to the George W. Bush administration consider themselves to be neoconservatives.

First, the term “Bush doctrine” has been commonly used for years to refer to Bush’s policy of pre-emptive war. That is how everyone familiar with American national politics understands it.

Second, Palin never referred to any 16 paragraph document. She described her understanding of the Bush doctrine as “his worldview.”

You can try to explain Palin’s fumbling by claiming that she was so much MORE knowledgeable than Gibson that she had trouble communicating with him.

But it’s just plain bullshit.

Oh and Gibson did not know what “the Bush doctrine” was himself (Looking at his notes from his pimple faced director) and it was a broad question, you dummies, he was clearly trying to set Palin up to make her look bad, but it did not work, at worse we have what you premature losing liberals are crying about now, you can talk about it all you like but it did not help you one bit the so called Bush doctrine is 16 Paragraphs and Gibson like all you knuncleheads only focused on one area of those 16 paragraphs the reason Sarah palin asked the question so keep it up the more you fight the more you make her look Good.

The difference between Sarah Palin and Dan Quayle? Lipstick.