Essay PreviewMore ↓
The first few chapters of Galbraith’s work open with a stark statement that would leave many republicans baffled. With seven words he obliterates the prima facia rationale for the 2003 invasion; granted, it’s easier to be critical in hindsight, but this one sentence brings to light just how easily some of us were duped into supporting the war. This shocking realization should remain for any reader a reminder as to how easily we can be tricked into something terrible if we refuse to examine the facts and give into fear. From this starting point, Galbraith leaps through a whirlwind of tempestuous conflict in between the Tigris and the Euphrates. These historical conflicts are important in beginning to grasp the division between Shiites, Sunnis, and the Kurds. An important factor in this division is that Iraq itself has no singular ethnic identity; it is a country patched together out of the remnants of the Ottoman Empire, but with three distinct provincial fabrics. This forced association creates a bitter schism that was hopefully not the intent of Lloyd George when he drew the country into existence. However, the most terrible miscalculations were yet to come. Throughout the Iran-Iraq war and the Reagan and Bush Senior presidencies, America kept on focusing on the potential of what Iraq could be; a geostrategically placed ally in the middle of unfriendly territory with a wealth of oil reserves. Thus the policies of America were specifically designed to facilitate the slow transformation of Iraq from a militant Islamic dictatorship into a pro-Western bastion of capitalism, a trusted ally in the hostile Middle East. Such actions on behalf of the United States included Reagan excusing Iraq for “accidentally” killing 37 American sailors with a missile launch, the indifference on our part of the Anfal of Kurdistan, the promise of support for resistance by George Bush Sr.
How to Cite this Page
"The End of Iraq: How American Incompetence Created a War without End by Peter Galbraith." 123HelpMe.com. 22 Sep 2019
Need Writing Help?
Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.Check your paper »
- The Iraq War was a protracted armed conflict that began with the 2003 invasion of Iraq by a US-led coalition. The US wanted to destroy Saddam Hussein’s regime and bring democracy. To addition to that, US and its allies believed that Iraq had secret stocks of chemical and nuclear weapons, hence Iraq was a threat to the world (Axford 2010). In March 2003, US air bombed Baghdad and Saddam escaped Iraq. The invasion disarmed the government of Saddam Hussein. President Bush in March 2003 gave a premature speech, that tyrant of Iraq has fallen and US has freed its people.... [tags: Iraq War, Iraq, 2003 invasion of Iraq]
1565 words (4.5 pages)
- In the wake of the shooting at a recruiting station in Chattanooga, Tennessee, it is apparent that the Islamic State of Iraq, ISIS, has become an increasing issue in American foreign policy. Following the removal of troops from the Iraq War between 2011 and 2013, Iraq was left as a fragile and divided nation. Despite our forces and training provided, a strong Iraqi government was never created. Many felt isolation and resentment in the wake of the war. Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi has created extreme violence in the Middle East that is now extending into the Western world.... [tags: Iraq War, Iraq, 2003 invasion of Iraq, Syria]
1129 words (3.2 pages)
- The Iraq War Weapons of Mass Destruction (recent?) The United States and United Kingdom intelligence services claimed that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. However, weapons inspectors never located any weapons of mass destruction. Iraq was invaded based on lies and deceit on behalf of the United States. The United States Military should immediately withdraw from Iraq. George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were informed repeatedly that the search for weapons were futile. Therefore, they created a secret group called the Office of Special Plans to supply the Bush administration with raw intelligence on Iraq.... [tags: Politics]
688 words (2 pages)
- Muhajir” and “they believed the Iraqi army was now strong enough to defeat the weakened Mujahedeen” (Warrick 76). Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was announced as the new leader of the Islamic State of Iraq on 18th May 2010 and following president Obama’s removal of U.S. troops from Iraq, al-Baghdadi took advantage of the resulting power struggle and “added many ex-Iraqi officers into his higher ranks to help him in his military strategies” (Warrick). In 2013, Jabhat al-Nusrah (Front for the Conquest of the Levant) based in Syria, was gaining notoriety fighting against the forces of the Syrian government in the Syrian Civil War, with the aim of establishing an Islamic state in the country and al-Baghda... [tags: Iraq, Iraq War, Al-Qaeda, Islam]
1986 words (5.7 pages)
- Economics is an important factor that led to the war between Iraq and the United States. The invasion of Iraq was the most costly, longest and largest use of armed forces by the United States in 2003. The war devastated the economy, exhausted Iraq’s foreign exchange reserves, and left the country in debt. The economic factors during and after the Iraq War ended should affect how the United States approaches future wars by looking at the enormous amount of money spent and examining its effects on individual parts of the economy.... [tags: Iraq War, 2003 invasion of Iraq, United States]
1078 words (3.1 pages)
- Throughout the past few months many things have been threatening the United States from what seems like a far away cloud. Though day by day that cloud is coming closer and with all these problems Obama has been sidestepping them until they come back again. From the poor response actions with ISIS, to most recently with using his executive power to change immigration laws. With each passing by day more and more questions are left unanswered, and they are its too late. Back in 2012 we the people of the United States of America reelected President Obama into office, in the belief that his promises he made to change the country would actually happen.... [tags: United States, Iraq War, World War II]
1323 words (3.8 pages)
- International Relations Theories 1: What, if anything, does the case of Neo-conservative thought and the invasion of Iraq tell us about the relationship between ‘theory’ and ‘reality’. There is no doubt that Neo-conservative thought played a major role in instigating the Iraq War. The focus of this essay will be concerned with the proposal of Neo-conservative theory creating the circumstances surrounding the Iraq war in order to acquire some control and recognition as an important theory through policy formation; an argument that supported by a considerable amount of evidence.... [tags: United States, Iraq War, George W. Bush]
1579 words (4.5 pages)
- The Conflict and Struggles in Iraq Throughout history, the United States has attempted to overthrow corrupt government in other areas of the world and instating democracies such as ours. What the United States fails to realize is that reforms in a country’s political structure do not occur overnight, but rather to enforce these new changes, money and time is required. Sometimes the money and time seem to be more than we as a country bargain for, but I am a firm believer that you finish what you start.... [tags: Iraq Iraqi Politics Political Papers]
1585 words (4.5 pages)
- We Must Support Our Troops in Iraq Most Americans haven't really changed all that much over the past three years. Going to class, work or keeping up with our own personal lives is what mostly preoccupies our daily existence. The majority of us simply don't have time to contemplate the actions currently being taken on the other side of the world. That's not to say that we haven't been inundated with news, pictures and videos of the bloodshed in Iraq. We know what goes on, but as most of us aren't directly involved in the war, our reactions to the news of the violence have, over time, become indifferent.... [tags: Argumentative Persuasive War Iraq]
701 words (2 pages)
- The war with Iraq began about fifteen years ago. Still to this day people are torn between going to war and trying to keep peace with Iraq. Back when the United States first had a problem with Iraq was when they invaded Kuwait in 1990, and refused to leave. Their were three main causes that made Iraq invade Kuwait. The Iraqi leaders have always considered Kuwait to be part of Iraq because of the way it used to be a long time ago. Second, the country of Kuwait is full of oil. I am sure that was the main reason why Saddam invaded Kuwait.... [tags: essays research papers]
1941 words (5.5 pages)
The trend of miscalculations towards Iraq continued during the presidency of George the Second. He molded himself as an everyman (an alumni of both Harvard and Yale) who sought to bring faith back to politics as a compassionate conservative, championing causes he believed in, and was often so frustrated by those who he felt did not understand him; there’s still a quiet desperation whenever he’s delivering a really hard speech, or taking the tough questions from reporters. He looks ready to explode, hissing and sputtering like a broken power line in a windstorm, as though there was some monumental obstacle keeping him from adequately explaining himself. If only he could get past it, he seemed to believe, everybody would understand and those thick, thick democrats would get behind all of his marvelous ideas. He didn't seem to get that those thick, thick democrats did understand his ideas. That's why they were so upset. Galbraith argues that one of the central miscalculations of the Bush administration has been that they have tried to predict each response in the best possible outcome; that we would be greeted as liberators, that everyone would sit around a campfire singing kumbaya, etc. No one had prepared for the resistance and resentment that would follow our “liberation.” There was no timetable prepared for a withdraw, no exit strategy, not even a coherent plan as to how to occupy Iraq; in trying to pursue both the strategy of handing over power to an interim government and attempting to sustain occupation as we did in German and Japan, the administration has show its incredible lack of strategy in such a precarious situation. The regional divisions of the past came rearing to life in the form of a civil war (or its compassionate codename, “sectarian violence”) that surprised American forces and planners. It seemed as the entire purpose for invading Iraq seemed to vanish once things didn’t go as swimmingly as Ann Coulter would have us believe. Bush and the rest of the White House had argued that Iraq was attempting to purchase yellowcake uranium from Africa and our invasion was justified to keep America safe. However, once this myth had been debunked, the American forces failed to keep the yellowcake that was actually sanctioned by the International Atomic Energy Agency safe from the hands of vandals and looters in a compound in Tuwaitha . Looting also occurred in the National Museum and the National Library, resulting in the tremendous loss of art and history of the region. However, much to the complete shock of the war’s growing cynics, the Oil Ministry was well fortified; Rumsfeld saw that the protection of oil was far more important than the blueprints for the dams, barrages, pumping stations, and canals that millions of Iraqis depended on for water. Much like the president struggling to have his vastly superior views accepted by his audience, the American forces were met with resistance as they attempted to promote democracy and independence from the turrets of tanks. The bold assertion that we could shape Iraq in our own image was underscored by the incompetence of L. Paul Bremer III, who, when appointed, had only 2 weeks to study the situation in Iraq and plan its reconstruction; combined with his lack of experience with the region, language, and post-conflict situation , disaster seemed to be inevitable. Bremer surrounded himself with appointees who failed to facilitate any of his goals and lacked complimentary skills and qualifications for the situation in Iraq.
Unfortunately, one of the biggest impacts of entrusting the world’s most powerful military as the personal plaything of a man with bigger daddy issues than Meredith Grey is that Iran is now actually poised to become an “Axis of Evil” with Iraq; while the original quote describing Iraq, Iran, and North Korea was irrelevant due to the fact that a) it’s not an axis, and b) Shiite Iran and Sunni Iraq were bitter enemies with little ties to North Korea. As the Shiite majority in Iraq consolidates power, the ties to Iran grow stronger. With a divisive leader such as Ahmadinejad who promotes a dangerous ideology of inequality and hatred, Iran poses a serious threat not only to values that Americans hold dear, but to the precarious situation in which Iraq teeters; this problem is only magnified due to the inherent instability of the Middle East.
However, the American invasion of Iraq has had some benefits outside of allowing Curious George to play dress up on an aircraft carrier. The Kurdish people, who have long been an Otherized minority targeted for genocide have now been able to secure their own piece of the map. Although an autonomous region, it seems more now than ever poised to become its own state. This is only a third of the equation for Galbraith’s alternative to the status quo. He suggests that because of the blunders and hubris on America’s part, the partitioning of Iraq into three separate states is the only viable solution. As it stands, Iraq has only been held together at its colonial seams by brutal dictatorship and American occupation and has been a source of oppression to roughly 80% of its population . Galbraith argues that we should learn from the lessons of history regarding failed states and their break up; if we continue to force these three groups together, we could wind up with another Yugoslavia rather than the peaceful dissolution of Czechoslovakia. Only then can we begin to withdraw our forces present there and end this tragic chapter in American history.
While it is scathingly critical of the Bush administration (and rightfully so), Galbraith’s book is actually quite balanced in terms of its coverage of the issues; instead of just focusing on the military destruction we often see emblazoned on our televisions, he examines the cultural and political implications of the administration’s decisions regarding Iraq. A staunch advocate on behalf of the Kurdish people, Galbraith brings to light the oft-overlooked issue that this war has actually helped advance the ever-oppressed Kurds in their quest for independence, which is far more important than the “positive stories” Fox News airs that show American troops painting kindergartens. He also calls out Bush’s attempt to slough off his responsibility on his part of Iraq; while he'll never be sufficiently self aware to grok the breadth and depth of his failure, he definitely knows that something has gone terribly wrong, and that all of his good intentions have amounted to a world full of hate and killing and a father whose long shadow has still never been escaped. If history ever gets around to believing Bush meant the things he's said, the nicest thing our descendants will be able to say about him is that he meant well; which, on face, doesn't make him any different from Fred Phelps or The Unabomber — except that the world's most powerful military was Bush's personal plaything, and he mainly used it to score points against dad. We all mean well, but most of us have never been given aircraft carriers because of it.
Galbraith pg. 103
Ibid, pg. 118
Ibid, pg. 206