Before Part 1 of the the Gibson-Palin interview aired, ABC News teased it by making it about war against Russia. Ben Smith, however, correctly notes that in this respect she was stating the obligation of mutual defense of NATO members.
It seems to me the lede should have been something about Gov. Palin's lack of familiarity with something that's been talked about for years in foreign policy circles: the Bush Doctrine. Marc Ambinder calls the exchange Palin's "deer in the headlights" moment. I haven't seen the video yet (UPDATE: it is here), but here's the relevant portion of the transcript:
GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?
PALIN: In what respect, Charlie?
GIBSON: The Bush -- well, what do you -- what do you interpret it to be?
PALIN: His world view.
GIBSON: No, the Bush doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq war.
PALIN: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made. And with new leadership, and that's the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better.
GIBSON: The Bush doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with that?PALIN: Charlie, if there is legitimate and enough intelligence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country. In fact, the president has the obligation, the duty to defend.
Is this not more newsworthy than the Russia comment? I expect the Obama campaign to pounce on the Bush Doctrine issue more than Russia. I wonder why ABC News did not highlight it.