"An American Attack on Iraq Was Not Justified"
The 2003 Iraq War lasted less than three weeks. It began in the early morning hours of March 20, when American missiles struck Baghdad. By April 9, U.S. forces had advanced into Baghdad. By April 15 Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had vanished, and U.S. and allied officials pronounced the end of major combat operations. Although the war itself was short, arguments over whether it was justified had been made for months and years prior to the attack, and still continue today. Going to war in Iraq was not justified on many levels.
One of the main reasons for the attacks on Iraq was to disarm them of any weapons of mass destruction that they have. This makes sense to prevent future terrorist attacks, but no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq. Iraq did use weapons of mass destruction in the 1980s, but not since then (Corn 45). Virtually all of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction were destroyed or otherwise made unusable in the 1990's (Massing 2). Also, Saddam wanted to stay in power - using weapons of mass destruction would mean a sure end to his power. This calls into question whether or not invading Iraq was justified because the Bush administration should have known that weapons of mass destruction in Iraq were effectively contained.
Because Iraq is effectively contained, it is no longer an imminent threat to the United States or any other countries anymore. Saddam Hussein has never threatened to attack the United States or to use weapons of mass destruction offensively (Farley 29). Sure, Iraq's surrounding countries such as Kuwait and Iran hate Saddam Hussein, but they are not afraid of him. They know that Iraq is the weakest country in the region. Iraq has been wea...
... middle of paper ...
...ake us just as bad as the dictator we claim to be liberating Iraq's people from?
Boron, Atilio. "What's Happening? Boron Interviews Chomsky." 14 Feb 2000: 1-7. CQ Researcher. Landman Library, Glenside, Pa. 14 November 2005
Corn, David. "A Failure to Find Iraq's Weapons Calls into Question the Justification for War." Iraq Opposing Viewpoints. Ed. William Dudley. Greenhaven Press, 2004. 44-50.
Farley, John E. "An American Attack on Iraq is Not Justified." Iraq Opposing Viewpoints. Ed. William Dudley. Greenhaven Press, 2004. 27-31.
Gerassi, John. "The Time Has Come to Say It Out Loud." 17 June 2003: 1-5. CQ Researcher. Landman Library, Glenside, Pa. 14 November 2005
Massing, Michael. "Liberating Iraq's People Does Not Justify War." Iraq Opposing Viewpoints. Ed. William Dudley. Greenhaven Press, 2004. 36-44.
The war in Iraq was declared in March 2003 for many reasons. Some of the reasons are to free Iraq, the oil, and because Saddam Hussein did not allow weapons inspectors search for nuclear weapons. The US wanted to take over Iraq and free its people from the torture they had been enduring for so long. Saddam Hussein had developed weapons of mass destruction that posed a long-term threat to America. He denied weapons inspectors access to search for nuclear war weapons and this served as a threat to other countries. The aim had been the destruction of the Iraqi society enabling the US and Britain to gain control of Iraq's huge oil reserves.
Dodds, Joana and Ben Wilson. "THE IRAN-IRAQ WAR: UNATTAINABLE OBJECTIVES1." Middle East Review of International Affairs (Online) 13, no. 2 (06, 2009): 72-94. http://search.proquest.com/docview/220899524?accountid=8289.
Since the 9/11 attacks, the Bush administration has been calling every citizens and every nations to support his Middle East policy. Nonetheless, the U.S. has been involved in the middle-east struggle for more than half of the century, wars were waged and citizens were killed. Yet, political struggles and ideological conflicts are now worse than they were under Clinton’s presidency. As “President’s Address to the Nation” is a speech asking everybody to support the troops to keep fighting in Iraq, I, as an audience, am not persuaded at all because of his illogical fallacy in the arguments. In this essay, I will analyze how and what are the illogical fallacies he uses in the speech.
No matter how well intentioned the invasion of Iraq may have been, it was an act of violence and deception that has left many American men dead for no clear reason.
Saddam Hussein’s main purpose of sending troops to take over Kuwait was to take control of their oil fields, which Hussein believed would be an easy task; however, he failed to understand that the United States and United Nations were keeping a very close watch on the Iraqi’s actions. Hussein also had other motives, such as freeing himself from the debt he was drowning in from the Iran-Iraq War just two years earlier. He set the pretense for war with Kuwait by defining their refusal to give land to Iraq as an act of military belligerence. President Bush ordered the United States to respond just five days after Iraq had invaded Kuwait. If the United States had not taken action, Hussein would have possibly continued to invade other oil producing countries and take control of the United States main sources of oil as well as threaten a number of innocent people’s lives.
The 'Standard Five days in Fallujah. Retrieved November 7, 2013, from http://www.cds. http://www.theatlantic.com. Kessler, G. (2007). The 'Standard Weapons given to Iraq are missing.
Krieger, David. "The War on Iraq as Illegal and Illegitimate by David Krieger." The War on Iraq
In this paper, I intend to analyze Iraq war of 2003 from Realist and Marxist/ Critical perspectives. I intend to draw a conclusion as to which theoretical framework, in my opinion, is more suitable and provides for a rational understanding of the Iraq War. While drawing comparative analysis of two competing approaches, I do not intend to dismiss one theory in entirety in favour of another. However, I do intend to weigh on a golden balance, lacunas of both theories in order to conclude as to which theory in the end provides or intends to provide a watertight analysis of the Iraq war.
Schmidt, Michael. “Fatal Bombs in Iraq Seemed Aimed at Militia.” The New York Times. 09 Feb. 2011. Web. 26 Feb. 2011.
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."
Most Americans believe that the troop presence in Iraq and Afghanistan is due to the terrorist attacks on the United States. And while it is hard to deny that the 9-11 attacks were the impetus for putting boots on the ground, it is imperative that the chain of events following the horror of September 11 are seen to reflect the willingness and wants of actors in control before the towers fell. In no field other than politics does the justification for action often come from a noteworthy event and the true cause stays hidden behind the headlines.... ... middle of paper ... ...
... hand, the principle is still very useful and is referred to in global political and social debate. It is noted that Richard Falk, critic of western wars argues that the just war theory ‘is a vital source of modern international law governing the use of force and it focuses attention on the causes, means and ends of war’ (Shaw, 2005, p.133). It can be acknowledged, that the morality of war still remains urgently central to political argument around the world. In recent years, the Just war theory has seen to respond to the main challenges surrounding the establishment of war in Iraq in 2003. It can be assessed the war in Iraq has distorted into a stimulating theory positioning the existence of Weapons of mass destruction.Therefore, this dissertation will elaborate on the theories that are challenged by Iraq war in relation to the use of weapons of mass destruction.
Iraq for the past several years has violated numerous U.N. resolutions that call for destruction of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and allowance of weapons inspectors to monitor the disposal of such weapons. Ever since the end of the Gulf War, Iraq has disregarded these policies by removing weapons inspectors, which in turn has allowed Iraq to further research weapons of mass destruction. In 1998 the U.S. launched Operation Desert Fox with the objective of allowing weapons inspectors back into the country. After the operation succeeded and inspectors were allowed back in, all seemed well and little attention was paid to Iraq. Since political powers did not deem it worthy to check on Iraq and put their main focus on Wall Street, Iraq renewed their weapons program and everyone just did not pay attention.
Rivkin, David B., Jr., and Lee A. Casey. "The New Iraqi Constitution." The Heritage Foundation. The Heritage Foundation, 16 Sept. 2005. Web. 20 Mar. 2014.
The root of the Iraqi conflict stemmed from the United States and President W. Bush’s uncertainty in knowing if the country had weapons of mass destruction. The fact that Saddam Hussein’s lack of cooperation with past U.S. Advisors, Saddam evasiveness, September 11th, the United Nations, and U.S. interest in the oil in the Middle East (Goldschmidt & Davidson, 2013, pp. 397-399). After desert storm and desert shield ended, Iraq was stagnant with the United Nations not allowing the search for the alleged weapons of mass destruction between the years of 1997-2000 (Goldschmidt & Davidson, 2013, p. 370).