The terrorist onslaught of September 11 launched against the United States was one of the most important events in the history of the United States. The onslaughts in the bosom of the United States’ most industrialised and commercialised metropolis proved that United States. despite being considered as the most powerful state in this epoch can still be vulnerable to terrorist menaces. Therefore. the September 11 onslaught in 2001 against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon was considered as an aggression against the United States’ leading. in footings of political. economic and military domination.
As such. the Bush disposal was speedy in reacting to the onslaughts launched against the United States. Immediately motivating the terrorist onslaughts. Bush and his advisors came up with new set of policies and Torahs that were directed towards minimising the possible new menaces that the state may come across. In add-on. certain steps were implemented to sabotage the strength of terrorist motions within the United States boundary lines and within the district of their Alliess as good.
And as such. the steps that the Bush disposal initiated clearly redefined the function that United States has to partake within the international community ( “The War Behind Closed Doors. ” 2003 ) . The Bush Doctrine. which was subsequently adopted as the America’s official national security scheme was one of the most of import and influential paperss that was implemented in the United States.
The policies and schemes that were sought to be implemented were focused on beef uping and guaranting international economic. political and military ties. which the Bush Doctrine has believed can decrease terrorist menaces and in bend. beef up international defence against “enemies” ( “The National Security Strategy of the United States of America. ” 2002 ) . However. as the Bush disposal progresses in implementing the policies set Forth within the Bush Doctrine. such actions incited a figure of negative promotions and contentions for the Bush disposal.
Critics have seen the Bush Doctrine as a foreign policy that undermines the freedom and autonomy of smaller states to take their ain fate. Bush statement which said: “you’re either with us or against us” implied that it there was no any pick but to take side with the American authorities regardless of what other authoritiess believe will profit their people ( Browne. 2004 ) .
As such. the drastic steps carried out by the American authorities through the Bush Doctrine were found to be rather unneeded harmonizing to international critics. Most of the critics have found the menaces against United States as undue and hence. the United States revenge as irrational and motiveless ( Donnelly. 2003 ) . References Browne. H. ( 2004 ) . The Bush Doctrine: Selective Bullying. LewRockwell. Retrieved August 24. 2008. from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. lewrockwell. com/browne/browne9. hypertext markup language
Donnelly. T. ( 2003 ) . The Underpinnings of the Bush Doctrine. American Enterprise Institute. Retrieved August 24. 2008. from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. aei. org/publications/pubID. 15845/pub_detail. asp The National Security Strategy of the United States of America. ( 2002 ) . The White House. Retrieved August 24. 2008. from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. whitehouse. gov/nsc/nss2. html The War Behind Closed Doors. ( 2003 ) . Frontline. Retrieved August 13. 2008. from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. phosphate buffer solution. org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/iraq/etc/synopsis. hypertext markup language