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
The absurdity of Harrison’s exaggerated handicaps ridicules society’s obsession with equality.
The correct option is B.
<h3>Who was Harrison Bergeron?</h3>
Harrison Bergeron is a short fiction story written by Kurt Vonnegut in 1961.
This story suggests that total equality is not a worthy goal to pursue.
He was shot dead because he was not wearing the handicap and influencing other people to do the same.
Thus, the correct option is B.
Learn more about Harrison Bergeron, here:
brainly.com/question/13994558
Mod·al verbnounGRAMMARplural noun: modal verbsan auxiliary verb that expresses necessity or possibility. English modal verbs include must, shall, will, should, would, can, could, may, and might.
Answer:
yes yolo
Explanation:
who cares nothing matters we are tiny people on a planet in this huge solar system nothing matters do what you want
I'm guessing he's talking about the good and the bad sides of this world we live on.
Like Heaven and Hell the basic good and bad
Why?
Think of a person whose killing people (which is bad) but to protect his loved ones (which is good)
We all have different names from different perspectives
In the real world your name could be
John Johnson
In your world or better known online your name could be
Alan Norman
Hope this helps
