Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
consequences of the war on terror
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: consequences of the war on terror
The United States of America, since the end of World War II, has believed itself to be a world "superpower." However, at the turn of the millennium, that title seems to have outgrown its welcome. The United States, over the past fifty or so years, has placed missionary to those nations in need of a democratic government. However, while the United States may have had the best interests at heart, or even on the surface, this foreign policy needs to be "revamped" to meet the needs of the international community, if the United States is to continue playing the Superman card.
In the "War on Terror" the Untied States begins a new round of undertaking in soil untouched before, at least, in the invasive manner it has been affected by. However, instead of forcing their power onto the nations being affected, the United States should adapt their foreign policy to this region, and understand its dynamics, rather than tailoring it to be biased and therefore fueling more radical perspectives of the people. Instead, the United States has formed a biased foreign policy towards the Middle East that negatively portrays Islam, and radical Islam groups have gained support from the legitimate people who are affected by the United States foreign policy and are in need of an outlet to react to the oppression, and thus, the foreign policy of the United States has backfired. However, there is a way to develop American foreign policy to be adaptive to the principles of Islam, and therefore, the Muslim world.
The current foreign policy of the United States that has developed over the past five years is undeniably questionable. During the current administration, there is overwhelming sense of evangelicalism that has fueled the biased view of Islam (Benjamin). A radical example of this viewpoint come from remarks made by General Jerry Boykin, who told a church group that he was sure America would prevail in the struggle against Bin Laden because "my God was bigger than his." Boykin has made his viewpoints widely public, in an effort to rally support for the war in Iraq. Additionally, as Boykin is a General in the United States Army, he also serves a representative of the American foreign policy.
However, the main problem with the current United States foreign policy is not that it includes an, although not explicitly stated, religious perspective, but that the policy on the "War on Terror.
Steven Hook and John Spanier's 2012 book titled “American foreign policy since WWII" serves as one of the most important texts that can be used in understanding the underlying complexities on American foreign policies. Like the first readings that are analyzed in class (American Diplomacy by George Kennan and Surprise, Security, and the American Experience by John Lewis Gaddis), this text also brings history into a more understandable context. Aside from being informative and concise in its historical approach, Hook and Spanier also critiques the several flaws and perspectives that occurred in the American foreign policy history since World War II.
Before the events of 9/11 the US had been attacked before and we were aware of possible threats. However, these threats, specifically those of Al-Qaeda were not taken seriously by American foreign policy makers or regular Americans alike, so on September 11, 2001 Americans were truly shocked by the scale of devastation and loss of life that occurred. The effect these attacks had on America was incredible. In the years that followed Americans became fearful and discriminatory of religious groups; the government created the Department of Homeland Security and enacted stricter search and seizure laws, and America’s foreign policy became defined by unilateral decision making and preemptive war.
In his essay, Rodriguez believes that the diplomatic affairs we see on the evening news are merely being disguised as a religious war. The fight over oil or land when in reality it is the fight between whose side God is on, the attacks under the control of Al Qaeda when perhaps it’s the greed for power or world domination. According to Richard, these religious wars are allowing terrorism to become prevalent; often times within the same culture (147).
The book A Concise History of U.S. Foreign Policy, by Joyce Kaufman, and the essay, American Foreign Policy Legacy by Walter Mead both acknowledge the history, and the importance of American foreign policy. The two argue that American foreign policy has always been an essential aspect of the prosperity and health of the United States. After reading these writings myself, I can agree that American foreign policy in the U.S. has always been detrimental to the success of this nation. Throughout history most Americans have had very little interest in foreign affairs, nor understood the importance. This essay will address the importance of foreign policy, why Americans have little interest in foreign affairs, and what the repercussions
...es when it comes to implementing controversial foreign policy decisions that directly affect Americans and those in different countries. The main aspect of the affair that greatly influences the United States’ government is ensuring that its past imperialistic motives do not become an integral part of American affairs once again.
Sullivan, Andrew. “This Is a Religious War.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 6 Oct. 2001,
The doctrine is a particular policy which advocated as government, or basically it is an idea to solve or to deal with some kind of problems or issues. There were twelve Presidential foreign policy doctrines that have been issued throughout the United State’ history since 1823. The Bush Doctrine was the eleventh Presidential foreign policy doctrine which was issued in 2001 by the 43rd President of the United States, George Walker Bush. The Bush Doctrine basically argues that the United States will go after the terrorists all over the world wherever they go and the countries which try to protect them, in addition, the United States has a right to practice preemptive attack for “confront the worst threats before they emerge.” (History News Network) In this paper, after discussing the historical context and origins of the doctrine, I will analyze this Bush Doctrine from three different perspectives. First perspective is whether the Administration followed a policy of isolation or internationalism. The second perspective is whether the president and his doctrine implemented policies that were Unilateral, Bilateral, or Multilateral in nature and the third perspective is whether Administration and doctrine were transactional or transformational.
Lampman, Jane. Christian Science Monitor. “New scrutiny of role of religion in Bush’s Policies”. March 17, 2003.
Most Americans believe that the troop presence in Iraq and Afghanistan is due to the terrorist attacks on the United States. And while it is hard to deny that the 9-11 attacks were the impetus for putting boots on the ground, it is imperative that the chain of events following the horror of September 11 are seen to reflect the willingness and wants of actors in control before the towers fell. In no field other than politics does the justification for action often come from a noteworthy event and the true cause stays hidden behind the headlines.... ... middle of paper ... ...
As we approach the next Presidential election the topic of American foreign policy is once again in the spotlight. In this paper, I will examine four major objectives of U.S. foreign policy that have persisted throughout the twentieth century and will discuss the effect of each on our nation’s recent history, with particular focus on key leaders who espoused each objective at various times. In addition, I will relate the effects of American foreign policy objectives, with special attention to their impact on the American middle class. Most importantly, this paper will discuss America’s involvement in WWI, WWII, and the Cold War to the anticipated fulfillment of these objectives—democracy, manifest destiny, humanitarianism, and economic expansion.
The United States was once a non-interventionist nation that minded our own affairs. However, this nation is now always involved with other countries’ problems because America just cannot seem to mind its own business. The United States needs to stop getting involved in what is going on abroad frequently and start fixing problems at home because those are America’s top priority to discuss and handle. If the United States is going to consider getting involved in Foreign Affairs, the involvement should be valid and reasonable. The United States needs to significantly reduce its involvement in events abroad and mind its own business.
The Bush Doctrine introduced after the 9/11 terrorist attacks addressed foreign policies that quickly became known as a doctrine focusing on terrorism. The positive side of this doctrine was the focus on combating global terrorism. It includes the ability to defend against terrorism and those countries which support groups to commit terrorist activities. Furthermore, it should be understood that a piece of the doctrine also attempted to instill democracy by making the world a safer place (Nacos, 2012). American’s were relying on the confidence and commitment of the government to prevent future attack and to maintain a safer nation. This part of the Bush doctrine is reassuring that the United States is focused on the safety and security of the American people, and as a nation the attention to fight terrorism was foremost.
religion as the main focal point in American Foreign Policy. It was pride in the state,
It is somehow strange for today’s reader to find out that the situation with America’s foreign affairs hasn’t changed much. As some clever people have said, “The History book on the shelf is always repeating itself.” Even after nineteen years, Americans think of themselves as citizens of the strongest nation in the world. Even after the September the 11th. Even after Iraq. And Afghanistan.
Eagle Rules? Foreign Policy and American Primacy in the Twenty-First Century. Ed. Robert J. Lieber. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2002. 152-172.