United States Intervention in IRAQ
Table of Contents
Type chapter title (level 1) 1
Type chapter title (level 2) 2
Type chapter title (level 3) 3
Type chapter title (level 1) 4
Type chapter title (level 2) 5
Type chapter title (level 3) 6
US Intervention in IRAQ:
Introduction:
The war on terrorism led the United States to intervene and play a vital part in world history. The United States administration decided to send our troops to help destroy weapons of mass destruction under Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq. This project discusses the impact, perception and results of United States involvement in the Iraq war. Initially, there was a lot of controversy and questions on why we were involved, why we attacked Iraq and what were our true intentions in taking these actions? Did we go there for the right reasons or did the United States have some hidden agenda in instigating chaos in the Middle East?
People in the Middle East often have mixed emotions on how they feel about our country. They think that we are a nation that likes to pry and be involved in everything. They assume that because we are rich and have more power and resources than most countries that we are unstoppable. Within many countries in the Middle East there exist terrorist organizations that resent the Unite States so much that they constantly plot ways to get back at us. 9/11 is of course an outcome of this mentality.
Events:
1.Iraq invades Kuwait
1990 - Iraq invades Kuwait, prompting what becomes known as the first Gulf War. A massive United States-led military campaign forces Iraq to withdraw in February 1991. However, the invasion stopped short of removing Saddam Hussein from power.
1993 June – United States forces launch a cruise miss...
... middle of paper ...
... the new strategy, not its leader. If we do not see that the system structure is changing from military might and global bullying, then we will be doomed to fail in the eyes of the world.
We need to re-examine and challenge how we see ourselves globally or we will keep making decisions based on inappropriate mental models. The rules are changing and we must change with them.
References:
http://www-personal.umd.umich.edu/~atthrall/whyiraq.pdf
http://nexa.polito.it/nexacenterfiles/gallo2013terrorism.pdf
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-14546763
http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/index.php/pot/article/view/323/html
http://www.popularsocialscience.com/2012/10/25/why-did-the-united-states-invade-iraq-in-2003-2/
http://www.e-ir.info/2012/04/14/deconstructing-the-causes-of-the-iraq-war/
http://nexa.polito.it/nexacenterfiles/gallo2013terrorism.pdf
Kuwait has the 3rd most oil in the Middle East. Iraq was very poor and needed money. They had just suffered a war with Iran. (Stroilov)They invaded Kuwait in hopes of getting oil to sell and get some money. America was the number 1 country buying oil from Kuwait so we put troops on Kuwait's grounds to defend them.(Stroilov) The deadline for Iraq to leave was Jan. 15, 1991, so Iraq needed to leave and America took action and forced them out of Kuwait. Although before they left they set over 600 oil wells on fire. It took over 1 year to extinguish the fires. In the Gulf War USA played a big part to defend Kuwait. (Stroilov)In 1990 USA defended Kuwait from Iraq invading them for oil to sell it. Later Iraq did get into Kuwait and Desert Storm
The Persian Gulf War started on 17 January 1991 in response to Iraq’s invasion and annexation
During World War I, American ideals and interests were first tested by other nations of the world. Interventionists ensured the safety of our civilians and economy by becoming ourselves a belligerent party in the war whose loans would boost the economy. Interventionists also secured our lands by engaging in a war to defend them. In regards to WWI, interventionist ideals best protected American interests due to their emphasis of protecting our citizens, our lands, and enhancing our economy.
The United States Involvement in Bosnia; is it positive or negative. After a lifetime of war in Bosnia, can the United States really offer positive change? To truly get a feel for the conflict in this region we must first look at the long-standing hatred between the occupying ethnic groups: Serbs, Muslims, and Croats. From 1481 to 1903 the Ottoman Empire was the ruling body over the entire Balkan region. By the early nineteen hundreds the Ottoman Empire had collapsed. In 1918, at the end of World War One, Russia annexed the Balkan region renaming it Yugoslavia. In 1919 Joseph Stalin, Communist ruler of Russia and its satellite states (i.e. Yugoslavia), appointed Tito to be the head of Yugoslavia. Tito quickly became an iron fisted and ruthless dictator. The Machiavellian characteristics exhibited by Tito have given all Serbs a reputation as being strong armed and merciless. With Tito’s death in 1991, Yugoslavia collapsed and split into 3 independent states: Bosnia, Herzegovina, and Croatia. In 1994 Slovadon Malosovitch was elected ruler of the Serbian state. Incidents of mass genocide and several other war crimes became regular occurrences under his rule. The Bosnian crisis has shown the world the worst of human nature. On behalf of the United Nations, in an effort to settle the unrest in the Balkan region, The United States became involved in 1995. The United States involvement includes: the commitment of twenty thousand troops, the troop support of legions of tanks and other vehicles, and the “full support” of the United States Government.
The First Persian Gulf War between 1990 and 1991 was the most militarily efficient campaign in US history where comparatively few lives were lost. This war accomplished many goals, including that it secured the economic advantages for the “Western World”.
The Iraq war, also known as the second Gulf War, is a five-year, ongoing military campaign which started on March 20, 2003 with the invasion of Iraq by U.S. troops. One of the most controversial events in the history of the western world, the war has caused an unimaginable number of deaths, and spending of ridiculous amounts of money. The reason for invasion war Iraq’s alleged possession of weapons of mass destruction, which eventually was disproved by weapons inspectors. Many people question George W. Bush’s decision to engage a war in Iraq, but there might be greater reason why the decision was made. The ideas of George W. Bush might have been sculpted by one of the greatest works of all time, "The Prince."
Ted Galen Carpenter, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, challenges conventional wisdom and argues that the United States should not seek to remain the indispensable nation in the international system in “Delusions of Indispensability”. Carpenter depicts the concept of the U.S seeking to remain the indispensable nation as “dubious” and a “blueprint for strategic overextension” of resources leading to a “failed paradigm” (Pg.19). Carpenter frames his argument against the indispensable nation thesis around the following topics: unilateralism versus multilateralism, U.S. engagement as binary light switch, the failure to acknowledge that U.S. engagement can take different
Understanding the World ‘We’ Live in’, International Affairs, Vol. 80, No. I, (2004) pp. 75-87.
What does the United States have to gain from a war with Iraq? Supporters of a war with Iraq say it will help prevent the risk of an attack by a weapons of mass destruction developed by Iraq. Critics of a military action that say nothing will be gained, and the U.S. just wants to obtain the oil that Iraq controls. They claim that casualties will be too costly for America to afford. Nonetheless, America should act while others will not for fear of disturbing global peace. Iraq poses a “clear and present danger” to the security of the United States and the security of countries around the world.
In recent decades, the US has made it its mission to position itself as a world police and superpower. With an extensive portfolio of military operations and bases around the world, we seem to be driven by an irrational obligation to be omnipresent in world affairs. Our government has become greatly complacent in recent decades, ignoring the many issues arising from our primitive approach in dealing with foreign policy issues, instead just pushing repeat and recycling old, failed agendas and outlines. A consequence to this approach is a backfire effect, every miscalculation we make gets amplified tenfold, proving detrimental to human dignity, through the killing and displacement of innocent civilians, as we have seen in the middle east. In his article about potential new foreign policy options, Ian Bremmer writes:
The Soviet Union’s collapse at the end of the Cold War left the United States without its major global rival. Now alone at the top, the United States’ strategic imperatives have shifted remarkably. The shift has been significant enough to prompt fundamental questions about the international order and whether this new “unipolar moment” will last. Indeed, since 1989, political scientists have clamored to define the United States’ status relative to the rest of the world. Indispensable nation? Sole super...
The System-level of analysis shows that the Iraq Crisis (2003–present) is not a domestic conflict as it involved international actors like UN, IAEA and countries like USA. In 1991, after the second Gulf War, UN enforced the destruction of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) on Iraq. The UN condemnation of Iraq was crucial to preserve its authenticity. The UNMOVIC and IAEA had been responsible to check Iraq's acquiescence with its responsibility to eradicate WMDs (UN Chronicle, 1991). Iraq’s non-cooperation with inspection agencies by obstructing the inspection from 1997 to 2002 resulted in massive international pressure and strengthening USA’s doubts on Iraq. The apprehe...
The Iran – Iraq War started on September 22, 1980, when Iraq invaded Iran (Steele 14). Iraq had many reasons to invade Iran. A couple reasons were border territory issues between the nations, political issues, and the fear of the Islamic Revolution in Iran spreads into Iraq. The war continued on for eight years. In 1988, the United Nations stepped in and created a peace agreement for the two nations.
Whenever world politics is mentioned, the state that appears to be at the apex of affairs is the United States of America, although some will argue that it isn’t. It is paramount we know that the international system is shaped by certain defining events that has lead to some significant changes, particularly those connected with different chapters of violence. Certainly, the world wars of the twentieth century and the more recent war on terror must be included as defining moments. The warning of brute force on a potentially large scale also highlights the vigorousness of the cold war period, which dominated world politics within an interval of four decades. The practice of international relations (IR) was introduced out of a need to discuss the causes of war and the different conditions for calm in the wake of the first world war, and it is relevant we know that this has remained a crucial focus ever since. However, violence is not the only factor capable of causing interruption in the international system. Economic elements also have a remarkable impact. The great depression that happened in the 1920s, and the global financial crises of the contemporary period can be used as examples. Another concurrent problem concerns the environment, with the human climate being one among different number of important concerns for the continuing future of humankind and the planet in general.
Baylis, Smith and Patricia Owens. 2014. The 'Standard' of the 'Standard'. The globalization of world politics: An introduction to international relations. London.