Method 1: Commenting on 2 documents

Stage 1: introduction - Presenting the documents
Similarities: Both documents deal with how US foreign policy adapted to a changing world after 1991 that is to say after the Cold War which ended in 1989 (fall of the Berlin Wall)-1991 (collapse of the USSR) & and after the shock of the 9/11/2001 terrorist attacks.
Differences: The first doc is a TV speech by US President George H. Bush delivered/broadcast from Washington DC on 16 january 1991 about the Gulf War while the cartoon by Kal published in The Baltimore Sun on 23 September 2002 shows the USA going to war in Iraq.
Announce structure: In a 1st part I'll use the speech to explain how USA foeign policy adapted after the Cold War and in a 2nd part I will analyse how the USA responded to the 9/11/2001 terrorist attacks thanks to the cartoon.

Stage 2: Analysing the documents

DESCRIBING - What you see (docs)
INTERPRETING - What you know (notions)
1. The US after the CW, US foreign policy in the 1990s: the Gulf War (speech)

Paragraph 1. Iraq’s attack
- a regional threat /Kuwait destroyed
- a world threat /chemical WMDs
Paragraph 2. US reaction, response
US + UN to save Kuweit => diplomacy first
which failed => military intervention necessary
BUT different from Vietnam: short war, low/no casualties
Paragraph 3. US justificationIraq’s attack
US mission: to protect freedom & democracy

Iraq's invasion of Kuwait: Iraq’s war of aggression (def) on Kuweit + WMD (def)
=> US reaction:
- US multilateral (def) interventionism (def) = the policeman of the world
- soft (def) then hard pw (def): war of liberation (def)
But the opposite of Vietnam: clean/dirty war (def), fast operation/quagmire (def) (showing Vietnam syndrome (def) is not over)
Because new world order after Cold War based on rule of law (def)

2. The US after 9/11, US foreign policy in the 2000s: fighting terrorism (cartoon)

In the center, main character : Uncle Sam...
- appearance: with stars & stripes on top hat + striped trousers
- express°: determined, furious
- act°: going to hit, to smash to pieces with a huge hammer ...
... from the Afghan to the Iraqi trap
on the left, Iraq’s leader sitting in a huge open trap taunting Uncle Sam, thumbing his nose at Sam
on the right, however, Uncle Sam's still got one foot in a big Afghan trap

- 9/11 2001: the facts, war of aggression (def), asymmetric warfare (def)
=> US response:
- War in Afghanistan in 2001 against the Taliban government harbouring Ossama bin Laden and Al Qaeda terrorist network
+ war in Iraq in 2003 against Saddam Hussein's WMDs and dictatorship
= Both dissymmetric invasion (def) & asymmetric guerrilla (def) // Vietnam quagmire

Stage 3: Concluding
Assess docs (reliable/biased justified): To conclude, both reliable (official speech + all cartoon references) & biased (speech with US point of view, caartoon criticizing US interventionism) => overall balanced docs.
Sum-up ideas Both documents show how the US successfully adapted to the new post-Cold War world with its victory in the Gulf War but that it dealt less successfully with Al Qaeda a new terrorist ennemy as it maybe overreacted and overreached. + Nuance/opening The USA, however, learnt -again- from its mistakes and President Obama resorted to limited war to defeat the current terrorist threat that is to say ISIL/ISIS in Iraq and Syria.
Note. ISIL = Islamic State in the Levant (= Syria + Iraq + and maybe next territorial annexion: wider view) ISIS = Islamic State in Syria: narrower view)