If the power to order a preemptive strike falls into the wrong hands it can be used to garner political, economic, and strategic strength when no actual threat of terrorism existed.

With regard to the retaliation policy, the U.S. can benefit from it because it allows a reaction to terrorist attacks, that will in turn serve as worldwide notification that attacks on the U.S. will not be tolerated. The problem with a retaliation policy is that even though it may seem like the right move, it could also trigger another world war if there is a global disagreement about the retaliation.

Both the retaliation and preemption policies have strengths and weaknesses. As long as the government officials charged with using the policies are fair, objective and human in...

well.
The use of preemption can mean the difference between the United States people being safe or being the victims of another 9-11 attack. A retaliation policy served the U.S. well following the attack on Pearl Harbor as well as the more recent events of 9-11. The policy sends a clear message to the world that the U.S. will answer back with power and strength if anything tests its resolve to maintain its way of life. The policy helps protect the U.S. through not only actual events, but the promise of military events if a terrorist attack occurs.

REFERENCE

Beres, Louis, Rene (2002) the newly expanded American doctrine of preemption: can it include assassination? Denver Journal of International Law and Policy