Answer:
Before a joint session of Congress on September 20, 2001, President Bush declared a new approach to foreign policy in response to 9/11: “Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated.” Bush declared that the United States considered any nation that supported terrorist groups a hostile regime. In his State of the Union speech in January 2002, President Bush called out an “Axis of Evil” consisting of North Korea, Iran, and Iraq, and he declared all a threat to American security. British and French allies did not receive Bush’s declaration enthusiastically because they believed Bush’s language to be overly aggressive.
These remarks later matured into the policies known as the Bush Doctrine, officially traceable to September 2002, when the White House released the National Security Strategy of the United States. The doctrine generally focused on three points. The first was preventive war in which the United States would strike an enemy nation or terrorist group before they had a chance to attack the United States. It focused on deterring any potential attacker. The second point was unilateral action in which the United States would act alone if necessary to defend itself either at home or abroad. The third point embraced spreading democracy and freedom around the world, focusing on concepts such as free markets, free trade, and individual liberty.
Reactions to the Bush Doctrine were mixed. Neoconservatives within and outside his administration strongly supported the idea of the United States acting on its own to ensure the country’s security and to protect the American people—preemptively, if necessary. Some opponents believed the doctrine was overly bellicose and its emphasis on preemptive war was unjust. Others believed the emphasis on spreading democracy around the world was naïve and unrealistic. As the situation in Iraq became increasingly unstable, the ideas behind the Bush Doctrine receded in prominence, even within the Bush administration.
Explanation:
https://millercenter.org/president/gwbush/foreign-affairs
press the link for more help
An informative text is the author's purpose for writing. An author of an informative text is trying to inform their reader about a certain topic.
<h3>What are the informative text?</h3>
In an informational textual content, the author's reason is to tell the reader approximately a selected topic. An informational textual content differs from a persuasive textual content, wherein the author's reason is to steer the reader of his or her opinion, or factor of view.
- The author's point answer the why question.
- Authors use explanation to answer what or when questions.
Read more about the informative :
brainly.com/question/1382377
#SPJ2
i totally forgot how to read english while reading that
Answer:
B) By listing a chain of probable events, Obama provides the audience with logical reasons to support military action to prevent them.
Explanation:
It's the correct answer on Edge 2020
