...lies. My friends we were all lied too back in 2002 when George Brush and Tony Blair declared, falsely, that Iraq possessed “weapons of mass destruction” (WMDs) and that we had to prevent Saddam from unleashing his furry on the World or else we would all be doomed. So with no evidence to support these claims and against the United Nations orders, the United States and the Allied forces brought “freedom” and “democracy” to the people of Iraq. Now, you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to know just how this new found, wonderful freedom and democracy has benefited the people of Iraq. Just take a look at this fact; over four million Iraqis have emigrated from Iraq since 2003. What does this mean? This means that the invasion of Iraq was wrong. Bush and his so called “friends” invaded under false pretences; they were selective about where and when to promote this so-called democracy; and they did not make the world a safer place by eliminating Saddam Hussein. In the lead up to the war, Tony Blair and George Bush claimed that Saddam’s Iraq had developed weapons capable of creating mass destruction and that the only solution was too enter Iraq and exterminate these weapons. However, after seven years of endless searching not a single piece of evidence was found to support Bush and Blair’s claims. The collation forces ended up leaving Iraq WMDless. In any case, even if Iraq did have WMDs, so does other countries such as Israel, Russia and North Korea (which by the way has openly threatened...
Words: 1007 - Pages: 5
...The Iraq war wasn’t justified The 2003 invasion of Iraq (March 20 – May 1, 2003), was the start of the conflict known as the Iraq War or Operation Iraqi Freedom in which a combined force of troops from the United States, alongside the United Kingdom, and smaller contingents from Australia and Poland invaded Iraq and toppled the regime of Saddam Hussein in 21 days of major combat operations. This phase (March–April 2003) consisted of a conventionally fought war which concluded with the fall of Baghdad that marked the beginning of the second phase, the current Iraq War, and was a continuation of the Gulf War of 1991, prior to which Saddam Hussein had invaded Kuwait, and after defeat by Coalition Forces had agreed to surrender and/or destroy several types of weapons, including SCUD missiles and weapons of mass destruction (WMD). According to then President of the United States George W. Bush and then Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Tony Blair, the reasons for the invasion were "to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, to end Saddam Hussein's alleged support for terrorism, and to free the Iraqi people. According to Blair, the trigger was Iraq's failure to take a "final opportunity" to disarm itself of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons that U.S. and British officials called an immediate and intolerable threat to world peace. Although some remnants of pre-1991 production were found after the end of the war. US government spokespeople confirmed that these were...
Words: 1431 - Pages: 6
...Iraq War Iraq War was an armed conflict that began with the invasion of Iraq in March of 2003 and lasted until 2011. The US counted with some allies in this war such as United Kingdom or Australia. There were different reasons to explain the interest of the invasion and posterior war. Iraq invasion had a lot to do with 9/11 and the 1991 Gulf war. The Bush administration made the argument that in the post 9/11 climate there should be a belated reckoning with Saddam Hussein. He had continued to sponsor terrorism, had over the years invaded or attacked four of his neighbours, and had killed tens of thousands of his own people. Another important reason was the strong belief that Iraq had weapon of mass destruction, according to CIA, and most Middle Eastern governments and European intelligence agencies agreed. This started with the belief that there were missing stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. The possible possession of these weapons was never clear, but was useful to get some more support as the other reasons would not generate enough public urgency for pre-emption. Another motivation to invade Iraq was the issue of oil. The intention was not to take Iraq oil, but to avoid Saddam of having the control of oil. Iraq’s oil revenues meant that Saddam would always have the resources to foment trouble in the region, would always be difficult to remove through internal opposition, and would always use petrodollar influence. Finally, we could also say that another reason...
Words: 760 - Pages: 4
...University Contemporary US History Professor Tonya Simmons March 13, 2015 Policemen of the World Thesis and Outline Most people would agree that if the U.S. were to launch missiles to attack Syria in vengeance for their alleged use of the nerve agent sarin against anti- government rebels, it would be another addition to the long list of U.S. foreign military operations. Prior presidents have resulted to war after the country was directly attacked, such as by Japan at the start of WII. But more frequently, American presidents have moved forward without consulting congress, using their authority as the country’s leader or commander in chief. With that leverage, they have preceded without congressional approval to send troops abroad, engage in bombing attacks, or dispatch US military personnel to work with international allies. The Unites States has been in more than 50 military actions in the last half century this can average out more than one a year. And to mention there is still no recollection to cast a verdict on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Since September 11, 2001, there have been many explanations of the ways in which the arrangement of global power is changing or will be changed by the U.S. “war on terrorism.” Most of them take as their initial point the options facing the wealthy and powerful nations of the world seeking to control an ever larger share of the world’s resources. “Public support in the US for the war against Iraq was founded on a multi-tiered...
Words: 936 - Pages: 4
...speculations in the media about the US and allied forces bring a somewhat sense of freedom and democracy to the people of Iraq. Let’s not get ahead of ourselves and believe in everything that our president tells us. We are all human and we all want people to believe in us. So Bush used persuasive words to make us believe that the war in Iraq had to be dealt on immediately to make the world a safer place for its friends and itself. Whilst arranging for battle in this war, George Bush and Tony Blair declared repeatedly that Iraq had “Weapons of mass destruction” (WMDs). They said that to prevent Saddam from using these against his own people or neighbours that we had to take action before Saddam brings it to the United States. In all of this, there was no actual evidence to support this claim and in the end no WMDs were actually found. Whilst Iraq didn’t have any WMDs the US and Pakistan had, but you didn’t see them invading their enemies with them. To strengthen their choice, they reminded us that Saddam had used chemical weapons against the Iraqi Kurds in 1988. What they did not remind us of, was that the US supported Saddam at the time and continued supporting him for another year and a half. Many people who supported the invasion into Iraq claimed that the “Coalition forces” removed a malicious dictator and bring democracy to Iraq. As malicious and undemocratic as Saddam was, the invasion was undemocratic. As a member of the UN, the US pledged to follow procedures alongside...
Words: 520 - Pages: 3
...Bush declared war on Iraq, and issued the order for both its invasion and occupation. According to the US government, this act of war was executed in response to substantial evidence proving that Saddam Hussein, Iraq’s current president, was in possession of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) which posed a significant threat to the security of the United States, its allies, and the people of Iraq themselves. This decision by the Bush administration proved to be a polarising one within international relations theory, with those within the profession striving to create an all-encompassing explanation for the conflict’s origins through their respective theoretical lenses. Of all of the...
Words: 699 - Pages: 3
...1. SS Notes 7: Iraq-Kuwait conflict Causes of conflict Factors: Economic problems, oil production and dispute over territoryEconomic problems: Iraq had previously fought a war with Iran, which drained its reserves. As aresult, Iraq’s economy was severely weakened. Iraq also had debts to other countries such as the USand France. For example, Iraq owed about US$80 million in debts. Iraq thus had to find ways to payoff its debts and saw Kuwait as a potential solution. Thus the economic problems of Iraq are animportant cause of conflict between Iraq and Kuwait.Oil production: Iraq’s main source of income is through the sale of oil. Oil production wasmaintained by OPEC, to prevent a decline in oil prices. However, Kuwait ignored its quota, thus theprice of oil dropped from US$18 to US$7 per barrel. This loss of revenue for Iraq meant that it wasunable to pay off its debts through the sale of oil. This prompted Iraq to look for alternative ways tosettle their debts and looked to Kuwait as a potential solution. Thus oil production is an importantcause of the Iraq-Kuwait conflict.Territorial dispute: Some borders in the region were not well defined as both Iraq and Kuwaitinherited their borders from the British. There were thus clashes between the two countries as theyboth wanted certain territories for themselves. An example is the Rumaila oilfield. The Rumailaoilfield was shared between both countries as its borders were not clearly defined. However in 1990,Iraq claimed that Kuwait...
Words: 2249 - Pages: 9
...world in relation to its historical background. Tonight’s episode will be focussed on Iraq and the despair seen in the country, both by the hands of Saddam Hussein and American forces. Saddam Hussein has been regarded for decades as a lethal dictator that led Iraq into the despair and poverty we see today. However, despite his dictatorial methods of leading his country, Hussein accomplished some astonishing triumphs for his beloved country; achievements that were destroyed by the American invasion in 2003. Now, it seems that the question on everyone’s lips is; “Was Iraq better off before or after the American invasion?” and it seems that many...
Words: 1852 - Pages: 8
...Justification of the War in Iraq In 2003 the United States of America invaded the country of Iraq in an effort to stop the production and take custody of the weapons of mass destruction that were believed to belong to the Iraqi government. Today we take a look at the actions taken by the United States government and analyze if there was truly weapons of mass destruction and if the invasion was justified in taking place. There are many opinions on this matter. Some throughout the world believe that there was just cause to invade. We ask ourselves if Iraq’s past actions which included genocide may have gave weight to the supporting opinions. If you look at the opposing side there are just as many, if not more, that disagreed with this military conflict and the actions taken by the United States government. Non supporters thought that the risk may outweigh the benefits of the invasion and also voiced doubt on the existence of weapons of mass destructions. In researching the issue and being a witness to the actions taken by the United States I am eager to believe that the war was justified. There are many reasons that I believe and other believe that it was just or not just. In support of the invasion of Iraq by the United States there are many reasons that are well apparent in supporting this notion. Prior to the invasion Iraq has proven that it supported terrorist and also supplied a haven for the terrorist that attacked and were planning to attack America and its...
Words: 994 - Pages: 4
...after 9/11. The first phase was during the invasion of Afghanistan where the strategy and view was to defeated terrorism. The second phase was during the invasion of Iraq, where the strategy changed to a more global prospective to eliminate not only terrorism but weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Furthermore, this second phase had the most criticism and created the overall failure of the Middle East policy for the Bush administration. The first phase of Bush’ view on terrorism was attributed to the attacks on 9/11, where there was full support for the war. Al Qaeda was the specific goal to eliminate, thus an invasion in Afghanistan was needed according to Bush. The leader of Al Qaeda proposed the killings in the US were justified because there have been killing in the Middle East by the Israelis, which were supported by the US. Since the...
Words: 750 - Pages: 3
...end all wars... on terrorism. The Iraq war was terrible, no one could have seen what was going to happen.So many countries went along with the US, but Canada said no. My thesis is that saying no to the Iraq war was a defining moment for canada because the war was unpopular in Canada and no UN approval, it forced the US to realize that Canada was not the 51 state, and the war did nothing but destabilize Iraq. This is how Canada listen to its people and decide not to go to Iraq. Canada has always been an ally of the US since we became independent from the UK. From WW2 to the persian gulf war and even the invasion of afghanistan after the 9/11 attacks. But, Canada did not join the Iraq war because it did not have the UN approval it...
Words: 897 - Pages: 4
...Realism and Liberalism Political realism believes that politics, like society in general, is governed by objective laws that have their roots in human nature. In order to improve society it is first necessary to understand the laws by which society lives, the operation of these laws being impervious to our preferences. Realism, believing as it does in the objectivity of the laws of politics, must also believe in the possibility of developing a rational theory that reflects, however imperfectly and one-sidedly, these objective laws. It believes also in the possibility of distinguishing in politics between truth and opinion – between what is true objectively and rationally, supported by evidence and illuminated by reason, and what is only a subjective judgment. Realism is a theory within international relations which predicts states will act in their own national interest in defiance of moral consideration. In general, this belief results from an observation of human nature and the perception of people as selfish and fiercely competitive. Realism regards the international arena as anarchic, governed by no authority overriding sovereign states. International institutions such as the United Nations are not afforded significant credibility from a realist perspective. Rather, influence is perceived to be held predominately by major powers such as the United States, whose dominance is a product of military and economic strength. Realists hold the primary interest...
Words: 2876 - Pages: 12
...Was the invasion of Iraq, justified? That is a question that American society struggles with today. It is a highly debatable issue, with some for and some against. But what led up to it and why did we invade Iraq? In this paper, I will look at the facts, rumors, and mere coincidences that overshadow this highly controversial debate. I will also speak on personal experience, when I was deployed to that region. As we all know, in September of 2001 a great tragedy struck this great nation. On the morning of September 11th, terrorists hijacked four passenger planes. Two of the planes, struck one of the World Trade Center Tower’s. One plane hit the pentagon, while the fourth plane was enroute to Washington D.C., crashed in Pennsylvania. Nearly three thousand people lost their lives in these horrible events. It has been since Pearl Harbor since that large of an attack happened on American soil. President George W. Bush was our Commander-in- Chief, his approval ratings before these attacks were not bad, but not great. His rating, which was done by the Gallup poll was around 55%, give or take. The economy was heading into a recession. How this all comes into play, is the theory that war boosts the economy. Companies are given contracts to build equipment and clothing for the military in return they hire more employees to keep up with the demand. Not only do unemployment numbers decrease, spending increases which help boost an ailing economy. There are a lot of conspiracy theories...
Words: 1995 - Pages: 8
...War Theory is a military ethics doctrine derived from Episcopal philosophy of the Roman Catholic Church. As studied today, the Just War Theory is considered hugely informed by the Christian understanding of the justifications of wars of invasion. In ethicist literature as in moral theology and policy making, the Just War Theory is associated with the belief that conflicts can be justified under certain philosophical, political and religious criteria. This paradigm dates back to the times of Marcus Tullius Cicero, a Roman statesman, philosopher, lawyer, theorist and constitutionalist. The connection of the theory to medieval Christian theory and particularly, contemporary Catholicism is in the works of Thomas Aquinas and Aurelius Augustinus Hipponensis (Gutman & Rieff, 2000). The former, also called Thomas of Aquin was an Italian Dominican priest, a theologian and a philosopher. The latter, also called St. Augustine, Blessed Augustine or Augustine of Hippo, was a onetime Bishop of Hippo Regius, a philosopher and theologian. This paper describes the tenets of the just war theory derived from the works of these philosophers and the utility of the theory within contemporary warfare. Specific focus is on the justification of the US invasion of Iraq and the consequences thereof. In the works of these three philosophers, the Just War Theory took a Christian connotation of the Roman Empire’s view of warfare. The Christian understanding of provocation to war and the ethics of warfare...
Words: 979 - Pages: 4
...Touro University International Ethics 501 Case Assignment #1 Professor: Dr. Bonnie L. Adams Introduction No matter how trained an Army, winning or losing comes down to logistics. Evidence of how great the US military has become at mastering the art, you need to look no further than the initial invasion of Iraq. For the Marine Corp in particular, the Iraq invasion was the deepest penetration a Marine land component had ever attempted. The capabilities to conduct such long operations were a direct result of overhauling their logistic process. Seeing the Future One of the most difficult challenges military planners face is not the enemy of today, but future adversaries and trouble spots that US military forces may find themselves being employed. The first Gulf War was fought with military hardware that had been purchased for the sole purpose of protecting Western Europe from a Russian invasion. The lessons learned were not based on recent military success such as the invasion of Panama, but from Vietnam. Modernizing logistic management for the military is a difficult process. While there is one Department of Defense (DoD), there are three separate branches, since the Marines fall under the Navy, although they do act separate at times. When one branch makes a change, that may work well for it, the problem lies when a separate service purchases software that they believe meets their requirements and neither system is compatible with the other. The Enterprise...
Words: 1340 - Pages: 6
