Preventive and preemptive war in the American national security perspective after the events of September 11, 2001 (theoretical and applied development)

Abstract

     This research aims to clarify the reality of the American ambition to demonstrate its strength and extend its influence abroad. Therefore, the United States found that deterrence is no longer the optimal formula for maintaining strength and a position of superiority. What is the benefit of the United States possessing armies And the fleets are exposed to threats and penetration, so it found that deterrence has collapsed and that the method of using military force is the best way to preserve its global interests. After the United States achieved a quick military victory in Afghanistan, it found that a show of force before the world is inevitable, as it may beAn incentive to launch other preventive wars, as happened in Iraq later, the tactic of preventive war prevents the enemy from making threats. The United States wants to eliminate the enemy before he threatens it, and it also sees in the method of preventive war that which restores the strategy of deterrence to its true position and appropriate place.For example, when the American response was weak to the bombing of its embassies in Kenya and Tanzania through missile strikes on sites in Sudan and Afghanistan, and this response did not create deterrence for the enemies, the United States found that the best way was to start the attack in order to not give the enemy a chance to threaten national security.The American found in the political systems in Afghanistan and Iraq the best opportunity to experiment and apply this tactic. The United States saw that this system harbors terrorism and seeks to possess weapons of mass destruction. In such a case, resorting to force would be the best way to prevent it from threatening it and to deter others.