Since the Persian Gulf War (though the seeds can be traced as far back as Vietnam), a myth has taken root among policymakers that only the costs matter -- that the publi... ... middle of paper ... ...mas, Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations. President Bush has repeatedly said this war will be long and we should get on with our lives. In other words, the terrorists started Cold War II, not World War III. The president must stir national vigilance well beyond the levels of post-Cold War complacency, but he can't have the entire country on a permanent high war footing. Yet precisely because the war will be long, it is that much harder to get on with our lives without seeing something that indicates we have started to win.
Are the lives of these young brave soldiers worth the sacrifice that is needed to bring change into the corrupt government of Iraq? Sacrifice becomes necessary to achieve social change when there is loss of personal freedoms, abuse of power, and physical abuse. This is demonstrated by the revolutions in Nicaragua and Haiti as well as the novel, In the Time of the Butterflies, by Julia Alvarez. When people are being severely oppressed and they no longer have any freedom, they are likely to sacrifice themselves in the hope of achieving justice. In most nations, people have the freedom to act in their own will.
There are few arguments that are pro the “back-door draft” yet there are many more arguments that are against the policy. This paper will explain why the reasons why the policy is something that will just destroy America, such as people being forced to say in war, their families being affected, the volunteer military becoming a non volunteer, and even what it has done to some of the soldiers. President Bush put the “stop-loss policy” into effect giving the military the power to keep military personnel for up to twenty-four months longer, in a combat zone or in a high-risk area. If a soldier’s military group is being shipped over to fight the War in Iraq, then the soldier would have to go with them as well. It does not matter if the soldier only has a month left, it would not matter and he would still have to go with him.
United States Foreign Policy and the War on Terrorism In very general terms, it could be said that the United States makes foreign policy decisions based on what we hope are the best interests of its citizens. On the surface, it would appear as if this has been the case over the past several months, as the U.S. has waged its war against terrorism. If one were to penetrate this surface, however, they would see that there is much more to this conflict than meets the eye. Is Operation Enduring Freedom indeed justifiable? Most people would say yes, it is in our best interests, because our forces are fighting against an injustice, for the purposes of establishing a peaceful environment and bringing about humanitarian relief, which will ultimately deter future terrorist acts against our nation.
What does he mean by the “legitimacy/efficacy trade-off”? Kurth has a theory that the powers with the most legitimacy also have the least efficacy, or ability to implement an intervention, in the political sector. The UN has the greatest legitimacy in the world, however, it is greatly hindered by the Permanent-5’s veto power (197). A hu... ... middle of paper ... ...ople who were not helped, like those in Darfur, because the U.S. ground forces were held up keeping the peace in Iraq (204). He says that the impact of Iraq will be felt and deter interventions for years, creating an “Iraq Syndrome” (205).
Although war comes with risk, leaders often find it inevitable when it comes to assuring the safety of their citizens. The Vietnam War was a significant movement in history that extended from 1965 – 1973 through the political years of Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon. The antiwar movement caused division within the administration as to the deciding factors of the United States involvement in Vietnam. Their decisions caused the most traumatizing event of the 20th Century. More than two decades ago the longest war ended, yet questions remain unanswered: what was the motivation of President Kennedy and his administration (Nolting, Lodge, Rusk and McNamara) to get involved in the Vietnam War, the role of Diem and the escalation of devastation on the US.
Having served in the military, I can say from personal experience, that our forces need a desperate infusion of new weapons and strategic programs that would do away with inefficient and obsolete ones. Our men and women, who wear their proud uniform, represent one of America’s most treasured assets, thus their needs must be held to a high standard. During the Clinton era, for that matter, since the end of the Reagan era, defense spending has been systematically reduced across the board (omitting the Gulf War). This type of reduction leaves our armed forces inadequately supplied with resources to combat issues that affect the U.S. domestically and abroad. The current status must be overhauled and restructured.
Through an extensive study of the events leading up to the war in Iraq, it will be evident that the war could have stemmed for many of reasons. The overall reason, though, is that Iraq has been a continuous threat to the United States, the nation as a whole, and their very country. Looking through the lenses of the Iraqis, Postcolonial theory, will display what this war has done for them, and how many of them depend on the U.S. now until their government is stable enough to make their own civilians feel safe again. Studying the war of Iraq through Liberalism will help touch upon one of the many theories that can be used to understand the war. Liberalism is the theory that was used by President George W. Bush in his decision-making process.
This, to the American government, as well as the modern state’s view, is how to define peace: through militarism. The threat of weapons of mass destruction leading to the war in Iraq caused a different use of the word peace in the political justification for war. President George Bush expressed his concern fo... ... middle of paper ... ...one another if they say it is for the goal of reaching global peace. Wars will continue to be fought in order to obtain this arbitrary goal and the modern state will continue to support them, as they can justify their violence. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have been fought for years and made little progress.
It was thus important to replace murdered or abducted military personnel so as to fight the opposition. Finally, in any war, manpower is essential and therefore, it was significant for the U.S Army to get additional manpower to help them fight during the Second World War. Works Cited James, R. (2013). The double V: How wars, protest, and Harry Truman desegregated America's military. New York: Bloomsbury Press.