Editing Bush Doctrine (section)

===Foreign interventionism===
{{Main|Foreign policy of the George W. Bush administration|l1=Foreign policy of the George W. Bush administration}}
The foreign policy of the Bush Doctrine was subject to controversy both in the United States and internationally.<ref name="eubushadm" /><ref name="ispowerstruggle" />

[[John Mearsheimer]] argues in his book ''[[The Great Delusion|The Great Delusion: Liberal Dreams and International Realities]]'' that a liberal hegemonic policy like the Bush Doctrine is ineffective at achieving its stated end goals and is doomed to lead to more war, anti-Americanism, and a global retreat in democracy.

Some critics of the policies were suspicious of the increasing willingness of the U.S. to use military force unilaterally.<ref name=ChicagoTribune_Rowley_20020624>{{cite news |url=http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0624-01.htm |date=June 24, 2002 |work=Chicago Tribune |title=Critics Say Bush Doctrine Might Provoke 1st Strike |first=Storer H. |last=Rowley |access-date=May 23, 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070614032610/http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0624-01.htm |archive-date=June 14, 2007 |df=mdy-all }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://consortiumnews.com/2004/041204.html |title=The Bush Doctrine's Vietnam Paradox|first=Nat |last=Parry |date=April 12, 2004 |publisher=[[Consortium for Independent Journalism]]}}</ref>

[[Robert W. Tucker]] and David C. Hendrickson argued that it reflects a turn away from international law, and marks the end of American legitimacy in foreign affairs.<ref name="ForeignAffairs_Tucker-Hendrickson_200411">{{cite journal|first= Robert W. |last=Tucker |author2=David C. Hendrickson|author-link=Robert W. Tucker |title=The Sources of American Legitimacy |url= http://ics.leeds.ac.uk/papers/vp01.cfm?outfit=pmt&folder=339&paper=2025|journal=[[Foreign Affairs]] |volume=83 |issue=6 |date=November–December 2004|pages=18–32|doi=10.2307/20034134 |jstor=20034134 }}</ref>

Others have stated that it could lead to other states resorting to the production of [[Weapon of mass destruction|WMDs]] or terrorist activities.<ref name=Nation_Falk_20020715>{{cite news |first=Richard |last=Falk |author-link=Richard A. Falk|title=The New Bush Doctrine |date=2002-06-27 |url =http://www.thenation.com/doc/20020715/falk |work=[[The Nation]] |access-date=2008-11-26}}</ref>  This doctrine is argued to be contrary to the [[just war theory]] and would constitute a [[war of aggression]].<ref>{{cite journal|first=Neta C. |last=Crawford |title=Just War Theory and the U.S. Counterterror War|journal=Perspectives on Politics|year=2003 |volume=1|pages=5–25 |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]]|doi=10.1017/S1537592703000021|s2cid=15197825 }}</ref><ref name=Parameters_Record_2003>{{cite magazine |first=Jeffrey |last=Record |url=http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/parameters/03spring/record.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/parameters/03spring/record.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=dead |title=The Bush Doctrine and War with Iraq |pages=4–21|magazine=Parameters |volume=XXXIII |issue=1 |publisher=U.S. Army War College |date=Spring 2003}}</ref> [[Pat Buchanan]] writes that the invasion of Iraq had significant similarities to the 1996 neoconservative policy paper ''[[A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm]]''.<ref name="Buchanan">{{cite journal |first=Patrick J. |last=Buchanan |author-link=Patrick J. Buchanan |url=http://www.amconmag.com/03_24_03/cover.html |title=Whose War? |journal=[[The American Conservative]] |date=March 24, 2003 |access-date=December 23, 2006 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090105221904/http://amconmag.com/03_24_03/cover.html |archive-date=January 5, 2009 }}</ref>

Political scientist [[Karen Kwiatkowski]] in 2007 wrote in her article "Making Sense of the Bush Doctrine":

<blockquote>We are killing terrorists in self-defense and for the good of the world, you see. We are taking over foreign countries, setting them up with our favorite puppets "in charge," controlling their economy, their movements, their dress codes, their defensive projects, and their dreams, solely because we love them, and apparently can't live without them.<ref name="makingsense">{{cite web |url=http://archive.lewrockwell.com/kwiatkowski/kwiatkowski170.html |title=Making Sense of the Bush Doctrine |first=Karen |last=Kwiatkowski |author-link=Karen Kwiatkowski |website=[[LewRockwell.com]]|date=January 15, 2007|access-date=2008-09-18}}</ref></blockquote>