The doctrine of preemption has a long and distinguished history in the history of American foreign policy.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Preemption is the right of any nation in order to preserve its National Security; however, preemptive war is a tactic, not a strategy. When used as a strategy preemption dilutes diplomacy, creates an atmosphere of distrust, and promotes regional instability.
In the first place, when there is a policy of intentional aggression, inspired by a desire to get possession of the territory or the trade of another country, right or wrong, a pretext is always sought.
The precondition to freedom is security.
If there is one great power, and the great power has taken upon itself the right to preempt and is choosing for itself when and in what circumstances it's going to do that, obviously it leads people in the rest of the world to wonder how far this doctrine extends.
My view of foreign policy is that we need to be careful and circumspect about United States intervention in any foreign nation.
American foreign policy, for all its shortcomings, has underpinned political stability around the world.
Most foreign policies that history has marked highly, in whatever country, have been originated by leaders who were opposed by experts.
Foreign policy is all about a universe of bad decisions, imperfect decisions; every situation is different. The dynamics, the atmospherics, the people, the pressures, the geopolitical realities shift.
If you talk about preemption you better know things rather than think things.
Foreign policy is important.
No opposing quotes found.