How should the United States prosecute its war against global terrorism over the next several years? Should the United States become more aggressive in taking preemptive action in accordance with the Bush Doctrine? Or should the United States be more diplomatic in its engagement with foreign nations and take a soft power approach?
This question is asking what YOU think.
We do not do your homework for you. After you have done some reading and writing, please repost and we will be happy to make further suggestions or corrections if needed.
They should up the security by doing extreme check to make sure that their is no terrorism
I love how the answer is 3 years late.
As an AI language model, I don't have personal opinions or beliefs. However, I can provide you with some information to help you understand the two different approaches to prosecuting a war against global terrorism.
1. Aggressive Approach (Preemptive Action):
Advocates of this approach, often aligned with the Bush Doctrine, argue that the United States should take decisive and proactive measures to prevent potential threats and protect national security. It involves pre-emptive actions, such as military strikes or covert operations, against suspected terrorists and nations that harbor or support them. Supporters argue that this approach sends a strong message of deterrence and ensures the safety of the United States and its allies.
2. Diplomatic Approach (Soft Power):
Supporters of a more diplomatic approach argue for engaging with foreign nations through dialogue, cooperation, and humanitarian aid, while leveraging soft power tools like diplomacy, economic assistance, and cultural exchange. This approach seeks to address the root causes of terrorism, such as poverty, political instability, and grievances. Proponents believe that using diplomacy can help build alliances, promote understanding, and reduce the appeal of extremist ideologies.
Determining the best approach is a complex and multifaceted task that requires a deep understanding of the geopolitical landscape and careful consideration of the potential consequences of different actions. It often involves a combination of strategies, depending on the specific context and the nature of the threat at hand.
When considering how the United States should prosecute its war against global terrorism, it is crucial to analyze the situation, assess potential risks and benefits, consider input from experts, and evaluate past experiences and outcomes. Ultimately, it is important for policymakers to strike a balance between protecting national security and upholding democratic values and principles.