It is difficult to state that the national security apparatus is underperforming when you have clear statistical results: no attacks in the last five years. This means that something must be functioning at full parameters there and that the informational community is also operating with those in other countries to obtain these results (the attacks planned for London and stopped are a good example in this sense).
On the other hand, a counter argument to this statement is that the war is not against national terrorism: it is a global war on global terrorism, the U.S. have pledged to wipe out terrorism on a global scale and this, as shown in the article, is not yet giving full results. Indeed, the attacks in London and Madrid are a good example in this sense, if we consider only some of the most important cases of extremist Arab terrorism.
As to the Bush administration policies on the international scene, these...
" that one administration official observed, "I can assure you a young generation of terrorists is being created" (Zaharna 2003). At present, "The current [Israeli-Palestinian] conflict is mortgaging the future of both nations. A new generation of Palestinians is coming of age. More than 50% of the population of the West Bank and Gaza is under the age of 15," which means that the U.S. must act now before a new
Foreign Policy of President Reagan Before the disastrous Vietnam War, the U.S. held an undisputed dominant position worldwide, recognized locally as well as by other nations. The nation's historic actions towards defending freedom, by restraining the fascist faction during the Second World War, followed by organizing a large free-state coalition for combating communism, were supported by profound and sweeping domestic consensus. This consensus was destroyed by America's decision to wage war
It is hard to determine what was the foreign policy used by the George W. Bush administration in the Iraq War. The U.S. foreign policy was shaped by outside factors up to the 9/11 events. The presidential administrations preceding George W. Bush's were aware that they had to adapt their foreign policies on account of their interests and of the interests of the international public. Surprisingly, at the apex of
" When and if the U.S. cuts back on the use of fossil fuels to reduce global warming, other nations may well follow our example. To wit, when we allow the United Nations to conduct searches for potential weapons of mass destruction in our own country, or in countries we have disputes with, other nations may follow and allow inspectors into their country as well. It is idealistic to believe that
Foreign Relations Summary of chapter on "Alternative Futures: The United States as an Ordinary State" In this chapter, the author argues that (despite appearances to the contrary), there are always choices as to the future direction of any state. America seems to be committed to a war on "terror" by the events of September 11th and the subsequent conquests in the Middle East. This author argues that no such commitment exists, but that
American foreign policy change from 1940 to the present? Before the 20th century, the U.S. had a strong tradition of isolationism and non-interventionism. Beginning with American participation in World War I and continuing with its involvement in World War II after the invasion of Pearl Harbor, the U.S. increasingly began to conceive of itself as not only a player on the international stage, but also the ideological promoter and protector
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now