U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision

¶ … U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process About Iran?

President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process is a lucrative feature that ensures maintenance of security and stability of many organs of management in the U.S.A. The existence of the state and sovereignty of the government of the United States is all dependent on the natural and synthetic features of its decision-making processes as concerns foreign issues. The U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process has suffered immense criticism from other states and governments

The manner in which the country has handled issues concerning other nations is statistical. For instance, actions against Iran and Iraq are tantamount to the relationship existing between the two countries now. Therefore, the existence of intensive U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process as concerns Iran and many other nations has attracted numerous analysis and proportions from the world history

Introduction

Several factors have been considered to be surrounding the natural trend of performance and relationship between many nations. Moreover, this includes the U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process

. The process has relative figures that state the amount of time and materials the states have consumed in order to reinstate the prospect of development and growth. The sovereignty measures intercepted between the U.S.A., and many other nations in the world has been built on tantamount relationships. As far as the country assumes and stands by its sovereignty and strategic management issues, it has lived to fruit the performance of growth and development of many other nations

. Within the management, policies are the government structure of governance and leadership as shown.

Decision making processes within the country of state affairs is critical to the relationship that will exist with other nations. The relationship between the U.S.A. And many other nations in the world is also dependent on a number of factors. Such factors touch on how the outside nations view and accept issues based on decision making in the world

. Through the formative structures and management issues within two and more states, it is evident that palatable grounds of growth and development are naturally acceptable between two and more states in the world. In most cases, it has been reiterated that measures to assure equitable plans of management have been established in order to foster equitable control of the foreign affairs between the U.S.A. And many other nations in the world

. The U.S. presidential decision making on Iran is now one of the most controversial president's activities in the U.S.A. Although all have their defenders and detractors, the activity, through not necessarily a polarizing endeavor, engages some decisions that have caused questions as people examine the innate intentions within the U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process. The U.S. presidents are known for their ability to communicate conservative ideals to the public, and have innate abilities to get people to follow the course of safe existence between the two nations. Some would say though that the decision-making processes have current alienation of the United States from the rest of the world, and has led to this moment in time in which the U.S. is reviled by many countries.

The president's chief objectives seemed to be to influence the relationship between the U.S. And Iran, and end communism as it had stood for the better seven decades. The diplomatic relationships between the U.S.A. And Iran have resulted in immense diplomatic activities and decisions benign made by the presidents of the two countries. The sound effects relayed from the U.S.A. drive the situations and activities in Iran. Therefore, the relationship between the U.S.A. And Iran is based on the decisions that are hard to be achieved.

The U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process is dependent on many factors that run through the many trends of management of the offices. For instance, the change of the presidency is not a direct measure of assuring growth measures in the country. The manner in which state affairs are handled is replicated from the innate perceptions that other nations have upon the existing states of growth and development in the country. The existing standards of managing the internal and external affairs in the country are reflective f the common activities of progression. For instance, they touch on the manner in which the U.S. has handled the internal affairs of many other states in the world. In most cases, many issues have influenced on the performance indexes between the U.S.A. And its rival nations like Afghanistan and the Iran

With the consideration of the natural trends of the existing decisions and other facets of international relations, it has been hard to ensure equitable growth and development of many factors of relation between the U.S. And other nations like Iran. For instance, the decisions that are made by the president as relates to another country have to be acceptable and within the sovereign structures in existence. During the reign of President Bush, it was possible to identify a number of decisions being made by the president, yet resulting in disputes and disagreements between the nation and many other organs of growth and development in the region

. With much reflection of the internal affairs in the U.S.A., the decisions made by the president are guided by other measures of management and growth that have to be given extra managerial skills in the country

Statement of problem

What factors affects the U.S. president foreign policy decision-making process about Iran?

Research protocol

The research was conducted within a period of one week. Within this period, all the relevant information from the field was replicated to study in order to analyze and establish summative remarks. The research was based on the establishment of relevant and up-to-date data that was relevant when it comes to handling the question at hand. In order to arrive at all the procedures that establish a common underrating of the U.S. foreign affairs, the research endeavored to establish the present trends of policies and leadership between the two nations and in the world.

Validity and reliability of the design

The research design will try to elicit relevant information that will make it reliable and valid. In order to foster aspects of validity, the study will reiterate on the innate facets that make the study realistic and relevant to the study. The present world is full of many challenges that are handled by the president when it comes to managing state of affairs in the world. The research design used is valid basing. This is based on the notion that it will relay information that is consistent with the present and future trends

. In order to arrive at an equitable ground where all the matters concerned are replicated by the study, the research design will make use of equitable information that include up-to-date information from the U.S. federal government reports

Measurement and design

The research will involve a number of measurements in order to elicit a reliable study and conclusions at the end of the research

Qualitative measurement: the study will involve qualitative research in order to reach all the relevant information within the field of study. Qualitative study involves the collection of data that are based on direct or first-hand sources. Such measurements will ensure that the study has revealed all the necessary information that is concerned with the establishment of good and reliable information in the field. This measurement protocol will establish a valid state of affairs that ensure equitable management of the resources available for study

Quantitative measurement: this measurement will seek to establish backup information that is related to the general performances of different parameters in handling the foreign matters of the country.

Sources of evidence to support arguments

Various sources are poised to be in support of the arguments in the study. Based on the research questions, it will be relevant to know that all the details and historical backgrounds of the U.S. internal and external affairs are evident to the study. The study relates how different measurements of growth and development have advanced towards the establishment of the U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process. This happens as concerns Iran and many other nations in the world.

Argument 1

Why the U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process is assessed based on the interests of the state without considering the immediate needs of Iran?

This argument tries to relay why there are many facilities of management. These are managements that have not been established in the U.S. As part of fulfilling the interests of Iran other than those of the U.S.A.

Argument 2

The U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process as concerns Iran is unsuitable when it comes to handling or maintaining the sovereignty of any nation

This argument will try to establish a fact that the problems between the U.S. And Iran are categorical of the mistakes made by the decision makers in both nations

Review of existing work and theories

Hypothesis

Methodology

The study will involve a number of research methods in the field. The research, methods will seek to establish a common basement of the U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process. Equitable regard will be accorded to the state of affairs that exist between the U.S.A. And Iran

Questionnaires

Questionnaires are samples of structured questions that will seek directive responses from the respondents in the field of study. In order to arrive at making decisions, there are several considerations that the president of the U.S.A. needs to know from the public and the secretary of state. Such questions will be included in the questionnaires. The questionnaires will be supplied to various respondents. These respondents are thought to have consistent information as regards the U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process matters in the world. Questionnaires are relevant when it comes to exhausting on the exiting trends of management in the country.

Interviews

Interviews refer to face-to-face approaches of seeking to elicit information from the concerned parties in the field. The interviews that will be conducted will seek to establish the views of the U.S. citizens. The views will consider many aspects as regards how the country has handled foreign matters and diplomacy in the past and at present. The interviews will solicit equitable data that will enable the researcher. This will enable him/her to dwell on making sure that it has fulfilled the innate responsibilities of getting relevant and up-to-date information in the field.

Interviewing is one of the most influential and functional ways of bringing out relevant views and concerns of the respondents on the topic. Through the interviews, the research will be able to establish common methodologies of decision making by the U.S. president. Moreover, the study research will establish the common approaches of managing the U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process through involvement of the public. Citizens are indispensable when it comes to ensuring that all the available measures of growth and development have been met. The citizen interaction with other nations is also a contributor of what considerations the president makes as regards foreign policies.

Sampling

Samples will be collected from various departments. These departments house information concerning how the U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process is made in the country. Through sampling, the study will seek to relay equitable examples that have been of utmost concern when it comes to management of the internal affairs in the country. In most cases, the research will endeavour into collecting samples of the various decisions that have been made by the present and previous presidents of the U.S.A.

Research on existing texts and theories

One of the foundations that will elicit equitable information to the study is the use of the exiting research materials. These materials relay how the state of affairs has been existing in the U.S.A. And with relation to other nations. The exiting standards of management in the U.S. are categorical of the historical backgrounds set in the past. The validity of this research method will be based on the stability and availability of the past record of work done by the past leadership. According to the research materials that are in the field, it is equitable to know that the state of affairs in the U.S.A. has not been dependent on self-interests and good relations that are forged by the president. The president of the U.S.A. has participated in ensuring growth and development of the diplomatic affairs between his/her nation and other states in the world

From the existing texts and written papers, it is evident that all the available materials try to establish how the president makes decisions based on the old states of work. In order to bring out the immediate and past methods of management, the study will reiterate on the validity and reliability of history in order to understand the state of decision-making protocols in the country

. The present trends of decision making by the president are dependent on what the past leaders decided. For instance, the decision made by President Bush is rudimentary and influential to what President Obama will make as regards Iran. Iran has been in constant battles with the U.S.A. In many perceptions. Therefore, the history will be relevant in relaying what the future prospects and decisions have to take and points of concern

Summary and synthesis of the arguments and findings

The existence and stability of the international relations between the U.S.A. And Iran are replicated on the nature of activities between these two nations. On order to arrive at a fulfillment that all the two nations are in good terms, the presidents are the figurative agents who supply decisions that affect on one another. The summary of the research will reiterate on measures to be taken as concerns the U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process. This will happen with regard to Iran and many other nations. Moreover, the arguments will be given a summative conclusion based on the nature or state of internal and external affairs between the U.S.A. And Iran.

Empirical data

U.S. - Iran Relations: An Analytic Compendium of U.S. Policies, Laws, and Regulations

The relationship between Iran and the U.S.A. continues to be on a struggle. The U.S.A. has been imposing sanctions on the government of Iran for the past years. This generation of hate and hostility has strained the presidential policies between the two nations. Little engagements are of any profit between these two nations. Distrust has resulted in immediate hate between the people of the two nations. Studies indicate that the present sense of imagination and treatment received from the opponent nations deserves a lot to make the two countries differ. The attacks of 9/11 are related to the tense relationship between the two countries.

Research questions

The study will resolve around handling a number of research questions. These are questions directed at reflecting on the innate correspondences and management details contained in the U.S. foreign policy decision-making processes. Moreover, the study endeavors to use a number of questions that are related to the relationship between the U.S.A. And other nations like Iran. The following are the study questions:

The U.S. president uses a number of considerations in order to influence on the policies touching the U.S.A. And Iran

The U.S. presidential policy takes the form of the Mexican presidential decision making process. Iran offers a vivid example through which the president of the united state has to involve numerous considerations in the society. The Mexican revolution of 1910 was the war that saw men, women and children pulling together to see a new dawn of liberation; the Mexicans and Americans were already tired with the dictatorship that the then president was subjecting them to; the foreigners were getting by far better treatment than the Mexicans themselves. At the very start of his regime, everyone knew Diaz to have good intentions for Iran, he helped create stability and bring crimes to a low level in the country, however, after a while he lost track and turned into a dictatorship. The most contagious issue according to the Mexicans was that land companies were taking control of extensive tracks of land. These are land pieces that belonged to Mexicans this was going to render up to 97% of them landless. The U.S. presidential decision making on Iran takes this avenue where numerous considerations have to be met by the president.

In a bid to have their grievances addressed, the Mexicans resorted to fight that Porfirio's regime. The government was further accused of neglect in addressing public service issues and needs of the middle and lower classes. The youth, as opposed to their parents, could not hold their patience anymore

. The likes of Madero and his team are being remembered for their effort in bringing back to normalcy the lives of many Mexicans. Their courage and selflessness is what remains to be remembered; despite the fact that they had no army in the first place, he had education and resources, he still could see the importance of counteracting the violation of human rights by the Diaz government. The decision-making process was marked by innate consideration of the many factors of production in the country. The diplomatic existence between the U.S.A. And Iran deserves planned protocols that ensure cordial existence between these two nations.

In an oversight, Diaz had a team that saw that they objectively remained in power for as long as they wanted, this heightened the anger in the stewards of democracy. Madero a serious one, declared his fight against Diaz's dictatorship and in November 1910 while in exile at the United States, he denounced the re-election of Diaz as the president, went ahead and declared himself the president. This marked the turning point of Diaz's politics of dictatorship. Madero's ascension to power was never an easy one. In the first place, he was facing a dictator whose power is backed by resources and a wide network of influential politicians and businesspersons who sided with him. The success of the lethal existence between the U.S.A. And Iran can be likened to the existence between the U.S.A. And Mexico during this period.

Successful revolutions were carried out in different states of Mexico, and these saw the peasants reclaim their rights from the ranchers and property owners. The return of Madero was highly reckoned by other rebel leaders for having jumpstarted revolution. The support of the citizens was on his back. The movement of trade items between the disputing nations enabled the two countries to be in solid agreement to affix the necessary challenges within the decision-making process

There is an encampment relationship between the U.S.A. And Iran that influences on the presidential policies between the two nations

As indicated by the empirical results, the civil wars that were fought by the U.S.A. have in Iran have brought unity among the entire Americans and in Iran. The first war brought hope in the name of the constitution under which the country would be governed. The changes in the American society from governance to art changed from dictatorship to listening and addressing the peoples' needs as was intended in the constitution. Such reflections are found within the presidential decision-making process. Credit goes to the people of America themselves from taking the progressive avenues within evaluating the incidences that could affect the country after relating with Iran. Such accruals determine what decisions the president will have to taken when it comes to making decisions as concerns Iran and other nations in the world. This was so vast a number compared to any other war that the Americans had fought.

The USA handles its foreign issues as concerns other nations apart from Iran

Whilst it seemed slavery was not a vice enough, the war with Iran sparked secession by some states. Some of the states had thought of seceding from the union and carrying on operations on the own. While the war may have seemed a boom for the Iranians who had the advantage of finances, war machinery, governance and the human power to fight, the southerners were largely disadvantaged on these grounds. In fact, the southerners lost many personnel in the war front, and even their political strength crippled never to rise again

When the world war ended, incidences of states wanting to secede became unheard of anymore. This was owed to the unity that the American people chose to build upon one another and in particular, after noting that the freedom they had fought for was worth keeping it. Today the Americans are more united than before and all that is partly due to civil wars. It is still the most celebrated occurrence in the history of the people of the United States to come from war to a more united nation. The current unity is evidence that nothing better than that would have happened to this nation after the civil wars. The pride of the Americans to date is the unity that is overwhelmingly found everywhere from sports industry, art and every other event calling upon the service of one man for his country. The sovereignty of the country is also guarded, and this is witnessed in the level of security that the country has put up. The presidential decision making process was boosted with the culmination of the strange relationships between the country and Iran. Though the entire process and war resulted in a shift of ideas in the process of decision-making, it had little significance in the normalized relationships between the U.S.A. And Iran.

The progress that America has had since coming to an end of these world wars is also some of the phenomena. This phenomenon can be used to explain the impact of unity that the country has enjoyed. This is transcended to the overall process of presidential decision-making process in the country. Currently, the Americans are proud to serve themselves with priority in order to grow their GDP. War it, not for these civil wars, there will probably be no reserve for Americans in the job opportunities found in their motherland when seeking employment with job seekers of other nationalities.

Evidence of unity to date are all over, for instance, the U.S.A. was so divided that it was more often referred with the phrase "the U.S.A. They referred to a notion that they are…" but after the war unity took the course and that changed to "the United States is…" this is attributed to the Northern states who never allowed secession at all cost

. In the end, the Americans appreciated the freedom they had fought for and to date, every American citizen guards this freedom. All these have contributed to the unity among the Americans. The repercussions of civil wars like devastated economy, slow industrialization pace, deteriorated sense of nationalism; all these needed to be restored, and it was only upon the southern and northern quotas to come to terms for the sake of the bigger nation.

In order to foster equitable growth and development in the state, there are some of the factors the U.S. presidential foreign policies has to consider

The U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process is affected by the existence of the Vietnam War. The American Vietnam War had its precedents in U.S. military history. At the end of this century when the war took roots, the American Army in the Philippines, a few years just after the end of its trials during the Indian Wars of the American frontier, where they continued to fight the enemy employing the guerrilla strategies. In the 1898, majority of the American troops in Cuba suffered the menace of tropical diseases that threatened to weaken them making them ineffective in the war. During the World War II in Pacific, though conservative in nature, majority of the American soldiers were subjected into the hardships of warfare that are faced in the tropics

. However, advances in military transport and weapons to be used in the war made the war in Vietnam a virtually new encounter for the American military soldiers as well the military leadership in the country.

This was particularly true for the Army of Medical Department as the one offered to work in Iran. Several America services were offered to work in Iran. These facilities demonstrate a state of change or difference between the two nations when it comes to diplomatic issues and policies. This became a new experience with the patient evacuation in the Korean War had only predicted the challenges it would tackle in the South Vietnam and Iran. The helicopter ambulances during the war in Korea had seldom-required flying over the enemy-dominated regions, and the territory of Korea, though jagged terrain lacked the thick forests and jungles, which obstructed the air ambulances in Vietnam. Whilst Army hospitals in Korea had been tremendously mobile, shifting with the army troops, the frontless war in Vietnam led to fixed location for almost all the hospitals in Vietnam

The French armed troops had used the helicopter during the war for the purposes of medical evacuation in their ineffective struggle in Indochina, however, because they had used aircraft that soon became outmoded, their experiences could provide little guidance to the American soldiers who came to Vietnam in 1962. Between August 1962 and May 1975 practically 60,000 Australian women and men, who comprise army, navy, and air force recruits served in the Vietnam War. Of that number, 521 died and approximately more than 3000 were evacuated with injuries, wounds or illnesses in what ranks along with Afghanistan as one of the greatest operational dedications in Australian military history.

The Vietnam War, in quintessence, was a disagreement between South and North Vietnam. It had wider insinuations since the North had a communist government. The U.S.A. And her allies, which comprise Australia saw the war as a vital element of the Cold War. This could happen by averting the increase of communism in South East Asia; North Vietnam, nevertheless, saw their enemies as a substitute of their French colonial masters who were stopping the nation's union strategies

. The policy making process within the United States was likened to that happening in Iran. The services are directed or offered to the nation with consequential measures if the country fails to be in agreed terms and conditions.

History

During the Vietnam War, (1962-1975) there was greater use of helicopter for Aero medical Evacuation to for rescue plans during the war. Rescue and combat helicopters during the war were used to fetch aviators who were shot down. The helicopters in support of the American army and navy fetched the wounded soon after the injury, and ferried them to treatment centers where AE played a crucial role in Vietnam whereby the level of mortalities during the war declined. During the war in Vietnam, approximately 4% of those who reach medical facilities with injuries died. The war in Vietnam clearly demonstrated fatality of 1% for the causalities reaching the medical treatment facilities. The existence of a stable enabled for the establishment of a strong process of deciding between the diplomatic acceptances between the United States and other nations like Iran

South Vietnam was a nation of jungles, mountains, jungles, as well as marshy plains, with few traveler roads or functional railroads. The terrain in this nation was much rugged thus hampering the rescue missions of the wounded civilians and soldiers in the war. The allied forces waged a frontless war in opposition to a rarely seen opponent. Still more than in Korea, helicopter evacuation confirmed to be both important and hazardous at the same time. The physical challenges of topography and Vietnam's tropical climate were worsened by the Viet Cong's guerrilla strategies. These are strategies that had no reverence for the red crosses on the doors of the air ambulance helicopters that assisted victims of the war. Therefore, the main challenge that hampered the rescue mission was the rugged terrain and the tropical climate that posed formidable challenges. Such movements and decisions are directed to the establishment of a common avenue of performance where every procedural avenue is linked to the Iranian stability in the common market.

In this state, the contemporary strategies of USA were mature and developed through the presidential policies concerning diplomacy with other countries like Iran and Iraq. The physical obstructions posed by forests, mountain and floodplain could be conquered only by helicopters during the war. The frontless nature of the Vietnam War also made the helicopter essential for medical evacuation. Air ambulance units found greater employment as the helicopter- employed for both as a transport vehicle and as a fighting machine - came to govern numerous phases of the Vietnam War

The Vietnam War saw noteworthy improvements in battleground medicine. Improvement in other fields of management reflects on how several scales of measuring the U.S. diplomatic performances are done. The scales of measurement are determinant to the decisions made by the president of the U.S.A. over Iran. In the World War II, a troop had an 85% an opportunity of endurance if a medic attended them within the first hour of being injured during the war, as compared with an approximated 28% in the World War I. The Korean War experienced the first large scale application of helicopters to evacuate wounded soldiers from the front lines for treatment at Mobile Army Surgical Hospital (MASH) units. The U.S. president had to adjust its existing mechanisms of performance in the field. In Vietnam, the medic's job on board 'Dust-off' helicopters was both to accompany them back to a field hospital and treat the wounded. Army men evacuated within the first hour of being injured in Vietnam had a 98% endurance rate. Medics were well-equipped for the first time in the Vietnam War as compared to other wars. Furthermore, to their medical kits, they took with them with grenades, semi-automatic rifles, and other weapons to secure themselves from any possible attacks. Red crosses on armbands and helmets were no longer worn, to avoid them being a noticeable target for adversary snipers.

Statistics from the Vietnam War substantiate that air ambulance crewmen and crewmen were at more risk of being wounded, injured, or killed during the war. This meant the recue team was more vulnerable than the soldiers and civilian, however, in most cases they were armed. Approximately 1,400 Army custom-built and warrant officers served as air ambulance pilots during the war in Vietnam, one of the most risky kinds of aviation in Vietnam. It is estimated that 40 aviators (both pilots and commanders) were killed by aggressive fire or crashes provoked by aggressive fire. In a separate incident, 180 were injured due to destructive fire. 48 were killed, and almost 200 wounded due to non-hostile crashes, several at night and in adverse weather whilst on evacuation missions during the war that led to a lot death scores

The U.S. president has to make decisions as concerns its foreign policy, with much concern of Iran and other nations

In the late April 1962, the 57th Helicopter Ambulance arrived in the state of Vietnam with five UH-1 "Hueys," which remained in Vietnam for over 11 years. The initial MedEvac was undertaken in 12 May 1962, whereby the Army Captain was the main ARVN advisor. In the early 1960s, there was little doctrine or structure for AE, which fit the requirement of Vietnam. In the course of the war, a command structure emerged from the Helicopter Ambulance detachments, which were based under the operational control of non-medical aviation units to committed air ambulance firms that had legions field-sited from the firm HQ, and other organizational structures.

During the war, air ambulances ferried majority of the injured, and sick army men who needed rapid movement to the medical facilities located in Vietnam, and in addition, majority of the Vietnamese military and civilian victims. As from May 1962, to March 1973 the air ambulances were able to move 850,000-900,000 allied military workforces and civilians in Vietnam

. The people of Vietnam, both military and civilians, comprised about 45%; and other non-Vietnamese population of allied military was approximately 5%, and these percentages varied as the war continued. The U.S. build-up was witnessed in 1965 and this proportion to about 21% in 1966.

The air ambulances ferried majority of the sick, wounded, and injured army men in the war and marines who need urgent treatment to nearby medical facilities to receive treatment. Civilians and military in Vietnam were also transported to these facilities to get treatment for the injuries and wounds sustained in the war. The use of MedEvac helicopters during the medical rescue in the war was hampered by the rugged terrain, as there was no landing zone for the helicopters. This means that the wounded civilians and soldiers were needed to be taken to more feasible lands, which practically consumed most of time and in some cases led to the death. This need a large number of the medical and other field personnel to carry the injured and this also extended the pain and time of the victims of the war. In the course of meddling through these challenges, a solution was arrived in the form of Personnel Rescue Hoist, improved and developed to a reliable rescue structure, which was established in mid-1966

The hoist that was used for rescuing the injured soldiers and civilians comprised of a winch on a support hinged to the roof and the floor of the helicopter cabin, normally situated inside the right door, which is designed at the rear of the pilot's seat. When the door is opened, the hoist in the helicopter, rotated on its support to a point the pulleys and cable outside the helicopter, clear off the skids, in order for the cable to be raised from and lowered to the ground. After the AH-1 was equipped with the significant electrical system, which the helicopter crew will quickly either remove or install the hoist meant for rescue. While on the winch mission, when the helicopter floated, the medical corpsman or the chief crew in the aircraft would use the hoist to harness or lower the litter to victims or casualties below.

The chief would in some cases lower a medical corpsman with the hoist to attend the casualties who quick medical attention. As the Vietnam War continued to grow in scale more, Huey units came into the several bases across South Vietnam, more Dust Off detachments and lastly more units were developed to deal with the worsening situations in the war. Almost immediately, other helicopter units made the Dust Off mission in their operational initiatives as a last resort. Therefore, the helicopters that played a key role in the war facilitated the rescue mission in Vietnam for both the wounded civilians and soldiers

Thesis statement

The U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process as regards Iran is affected by many factors.

Literature review

The U.S. foreign policy is a policy that touches on the general relationship between the country and many other nations in the world

. The U.S. appreciates the fact that there has to be an existing trend of standards that regulate how it interacts with other countries and their affairs. The country cannot be involved in all the factors and internal affairs in one or more nations. In most cases, the country appreciates the fact that it has to remain neutral in the internal affairs of all the nations in the world. Nonetheless, decisions have to be made as concerns the general performances indexes. The president is dethroned with the responsibility of facilitating the existing trends of relations between the existing government and many other governments in the world

The interaction between the citizens of the U.S.A. And citizens from other nations is reflected on the decisions that have been made by the president

. The decisions that are made by the president as concerns foreign affairs between the country and other nations have to be implemented by the citizens within and outside the country of concern. For instance, the president is accountable to the relationships that build between the citizens of Iran and the U.S.A.

. This is because the U.S. president has incurred many other structures of growth and management into the general perceptions and precepts of relating with these nations. The U.S. economy has been subdivided in order to cater for the different needs of the existing foreign policy. In order to foster a sustainable relationship in foreign matters, the country has set almost $711, 000 billion on matters relating to foreign policy, with much regard given to the existing relationship between the country and Iran

The U.S. secretary of state works hand in hand with the foreign affair minister in order to ensure that they have given equitable management and decision-making procedures to the president. Moreover, the U.S. secretary of state is responsible for the establishment of relationships between the country and other nations through the ministries handling foreign matters in those nations

. The secretary of state, who is more responsible to the president and the decisions that are made by the president, handles the state-to-state diplomatic issues

. During the reign of President George Bush, it was evident that the secretary of state was more concerned with the development of diplomatic steps between the U.S.A. And many other states in the world. The insuring state of affairs between the U.S.A. And Iran had not escalated in the past until after the generation of different scenes of wars and disagreements

The diplomatic foreign policies, most of which are given approval by the president, are categorical of the situations that are there at hand

. The president is accorded the ultimate authority on all the foreign matters since he or she can taken them even without much contribution from the secretary of state

For instance, the existing foreign policies in the U.S.A. include defining the national interests together with strategies that have been chosen in order to bring safety and achievement of goals set by the country. For instance, the current secretary of state in the U.S.A., John Kerry is responsible for making sure that all the offering policies and issues ate at the reach of the president in order to be given equitable consistency when it comes to acting on them. In most cases, many attributes have been focused on how the interests of the country have fared in Iran and other nations

. The questions that are raised on behalf of the country's state of affairs and interests are warning and demand a lot of contribution from the concerned authorities and countries. Moreover, the influences of what takes place between the two nations, like creation of nuclear weapons, is influential to the foreign policy decisions made

Conclusions

The U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process is categorical of many affairs. These affairs affect on the general governance and management of the state of affairs in many nations in the world. Decision-making processes are rudimentary to progression in growth and development of the internal and external affairs in many nations. The progresses in growth and development protocols in the U.S.A.'s government are based on how it manages its internal affairs

The country has been criticized on how it has handled many external matters like addressing the uses in Iran and Afghanistan. Nonetheless, the decisions that are made by the president affect on the general performances of this state of affairs in the country

. The U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process towards Iran has attracted numerous statements. These statements seek to establish a common ground and root of the problems that have been experienced between these states

. Nonetheless, it is relevant to know that these factors influencing on the U.S. President Foreign Policy Decision Making Process are categorical of interests and desire for growth and development in order to have dominion and leadership in the global realm of dominance in the world

Reference list

Alterman, Eric. 1998. Who speaks for America?: why democracy matters in foreign policy.

Ithaca [u.a.]: Cornell Univ. Press.

Beisner, Robert L. 2003. American foreign relations since 1600 a guide to the literature.

Santa Barbara, Calif: ABC-CLIO. http://ebooks.abc-clio.com/?isbn=9781576075302.

Bill, James A. 1988. The eagle and the lion: the tragedy of American-Iranian relations. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Blake, Kristen. 2009. The U.S.-Soviet confrontation in Iran, 1945-1962 a case in the annals of the Cold War. Lanham: University Press of America.

http://public.eblib.com/EBLPublic/PublicView.do?ptiID=500779.

Blight, James G. 2012. Becoming enemies: U.S.-Iran relations and the Iran-Iraq War, 1979-