In Episode 66 of Logic Dictate Hot Topics*, host *Steve Gibson breaks down why reviving a modernized version of the Monroe Doctrine—dubbed the “Donroe Doctrine”—is not only unnecessary, but strategically dangerous.

From Cold War history and the Cuban Missile Crisis to modern flashpoints like China and Taiwan and Russia and Ukraine, Gibson explains how claiming spheres of influence invites adversaries to justify their own expansionist policies. Using Venezuela as a case study, he highlights why surgical, transactional foreign policy works better than sweeping ideological doctrines.

This episode challenges conventional thinking on U.S. power, deterrence, and global security—and makes the case for precision over overreach.

👉 Learn more through the sci-fi political thriller *Logic’s Dictate*, published by Mindstir Media
🌐 https://www.logicsdictate.com
📘 Read_Logic’s Dictate_for only $0.99: https://amzn.to/4oAo6AJ

Welcome back to *Logic Dictate Hot Topics*, where we cut through political noise and examine global power through logic, strategy, and common sense.

I’m *Steve Gibson*, and today we’re tackling a dangerous idea that’s quietly resurfacing in foreign policy circles—the so-called _Donroe Doctrine_. It’s being framed as a modern extension of the Monroe Doctrine, but in reality, it may be handing our geopolitical rivals a justification to do exactly what we’re trying to prevent.

This episode isn’t about ideology. It’s about security, leverage, and knowing when not to overreach.

If the United States claims the right to control its hemisphere…
what stops China from claiming Taiwan?
Or Russia from claiming Ukraine?

Today, I’ll explain why reviving doctrines built on “spheres of influence” doesn’t strengthen American power—it weakens it. And why smart, surgical foreign policy beats sweeping declarations every time.