Do you agree or disagree with the one percent doctrine?

Answer 1

disagree....hell there is a one percent chance the tooth faerie will appear

Answer 2

This is total BS.

Imagine what would happen in various everyday situations were the Cheney doctrine to be applied. A young man is in a bar and another man gives him a hard stare. If the young Cheneyite feels threatened and believes the probability to be at least 1 percent that the other man will shoot him, then he has a right to preemptively shoot him in "self-defense."

How about criminal trials based on this. One percent of the jury would be one juror saying he could have done it but I'm not sure and the rest with an adamant not guilty. But per the one percent doctrine, that would get someone a lethal injection.

Answer 3

If in your question you mean the one percent doctrine as espoused by Cheney and described by Susskind in his book, I don't think there's anybody who agrees with it. Certainly not Cheney. Even Cheney couldn't deny that there's a far more than one percent probability that global warming is a real threat, but he opposes doing anything about it. Really the 'doctrine' is just an excuse to ignore real intelligence and instead use military force against threats that exist only in your imagination.

Answer 4

what is it?? u might as well want to explain what it is!
so to help you i found the summary of the book:

The One Percent doctrine (also called the Cheney doctrine) was created in November 2001 (no exact date is given) during a briefing given by then-CIA Director George Tenet and an un-named briefer to U.S. Vice President **** Cheney and then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice in response to worries that a Pakistani scientist was offering nuclear weapons expertise to Al Qaeda after the 9/11/01 terrorist attack. Responding to the thought that Al Qaeda might want to acquire a nuclear weapon, Cheney observed that the US had to confront a new type of threat, a "low-probability, high-impact event" as he described it.
Suskind makes a distinction between two groups engaged in the fight against terrorism: "the notables", those who talk to us about the threat of terrorism (Bush, Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, et al.), and "the invisibles", those who are fighting terrorists (the CIA analysts, the FBI agents and all the other foot soldiers).[3][4]
The book advances the theory that Abu Zubaydah, a "top operative plotting and planning death and destruction on the United States" as Bush described him, was an insignificant figure.[5]
According to the book, Osama bin Laden apparently wanted Bush reelected in 2004, and therefore issued a video message which, in the US media, was described as “Osama’s endorsement of John Kerry.” Why he wanted Bush in office remains unknown. It is suggested by CIA analysts that it could be attributed to the fact that the controversial policies Bush advocated would help recruit Jihadists and would cause the image of USA decline globally due to aggressive foreign policy.[6]
The book also mentions a plot to attack the 34th Street-Herald Square subway station in New York City in March 2003. But, 45 days before an al-Qaeda cell, who had monitored surveillance of the station, were to release deadly cyanide gas into the tunnels, Ayman al-Zawahiri and other terror leaders scrapped the plan because it wasn't as deadly as 9-11 and therefore wasn't notable enough to compete with the impact of 9-11.

i havn't read the book so im not going to make any comment till i read the whole book. it seems to be very interesting. i'll read it!

Answer 5

Depends on how it is interpreted. If it means factor in how large the impact of a threatened act is along with how likely it is to occur, rather than just one or the other, than it makes sense.

If you are referring specifically to Ron Suskind's take on the doctrine in his book, then you need to take Suskind's interpretation with a grain of salt, the guy has his own agenda. Which doesn't necessarily make it wrong, but he shouldn't be used as a single source of information and analysis. Nobody should, really.

Answer 6

Its a fiction book, need i say more.