CJ 380

President George W. Bush "Addresses the Nation on the 19th March 2003" clearly stating his reasons for war is to help Iraq and nothing more. However, President Bush's speech shows his personality, desire for power, and war beliefs and which Hertsgaard and Andreas have accurately criticized Bush for these qualities and therefore blame Bush for foreigners' anger and hatred towards America. Hertsgaard explained how Americans are seen as arrogant to foreigners. It seems right to criticize Bush for showing arrogance in his reason to go to war. In Bush's speech, he says that "we'll accept no outcome but victory."

That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger," This quote explicitly signifies that George W. Bush along with the neoconservatives lied to make the American public react in a certain way they have planned for their own concealed motives. In my opinion ma... ... middle of paper ... ...a man determined to achieve absolute power over the cost of war tragedies. The film productively works through featuring interviews, displaying news footage and heartbreaking pictures of the after math of the war on Iraq. It specifically proves how the Bush administration provoked the media to convince the people of America to support "war on terror" by creating a non-existent fear.

So either we support their words and actions or we are vilified as unpatriotic.” Bush had a dictator attitude when it came to his reasoning for war. He felt he did not have to justify or answer to anyone’s questions for his reasons. Bush let Americans believe some of the conspiracy theories in order to shift the blame away from his administration. Instead of finding the most qualified skilled individual to lead the investigation on the 9/11 attacks, Bush appointed an individual who has been under fire with the government before. Henry Kissinger, a man whose been investigated for his secretive activities and tried for war crimes, was now called to investigate the biggest crime against America.

When President Bush called Americans to enlist in his "war on terror," very few citizens could have grasped the all-encompassing consequences of the proposition. The terrifying events of 9/11 were like a blinding flash, benumbing the country with a sudden knowledge of unimagined dangers. Strong action was recommended, skeptics were silenced and a shallow sense of unity emerged from the shared vulnerabilities. Nearly three years later, the enormity of Bush's summons to open-ended "war" is more obvious. It overwhelmed the country, in fact deranged society's normal processes and purposes with a brilliantly seductive political message: Terror pre-empts everything else.

Now, because of the destruction of the old Iraqi society, for the first time in centuries, power is in the hands of the Iraqi Shiites. When regarding foreign affairs, I’m considered myself to follow the constructivism theory. Hook and Spanier spells it out well on how Americans “lack historical and cultural understanding” of other sates, which allowed the setbacks in Vietnam and now in Afghanistan. How can the US coexist with other nations within the international community? Polls have shown the majority of Americans feel the War on Terror is misplaced, invoking the debate on how similar it is to the Vietnam War.

The war in Iraq is over now. Looking back on a huge controversy makes one side seem clearly more “correct” than the other. Yet in the beginning there were two sides to the controversy about the war in Iraq. There was the terror brought upon by the 9/11 attacks, people that the government wished to punish or kill like Saddam Hussain and Osama Bin Laden, and a country which was in “need” of US help both politically and financially. At the time of the Terrorist attacks, people were afraid of what else the terrorists were planning or could do and so George Bush sent troops in to look for Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD).

American civil liberties are defined as civil rights designed with the purpose of limiting government intervention in citizen’s affairs (Civil Liberties 1). After the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, the United States government enacted new policies that did not universally coincide with the civil liberties Americans are guaranteed. Several of the new procedures enacted were unnecessary and caused average American citizens to have to live without the civil liberties they are assured that they will receive. Also in an attempt to infiltrate terrorist organizations, interrogation tactics have become brutal and grotesque. Despite the victim’s criminal status, basic rights the law guarantees such people are being defiled.

The terrorist attacks of September 11 led to a lot of pressure from the public to find those responsible and bring them to “justice”. In order to do so, President Bush declared a war on terrorism just a few days after the attacks, but little did he know that this very decision would also bring devastating consequences to many countries. Over time, people have been losing faith in the war and in its purpose. Consequently, countries whose economies have fallen under the Military Industrial Complex have manufactured a societal fear against Muslims and jihadists. As a result, they are now being stigmatized and portrayed as the enemies of democracy, and of the United States in particular.

The most significant one being the Osama bin Laden plan on destroying the twin towers in September 11 of the year 2001. The changes in terrorism has evolved to a dramatic negative spin with inspired terrorists of our own country. The 9/11 attack heated the whole terrorist idea making it dangerous for those innocent people who pay the consequence of those who seek change with violence.

One intention of a terrorist organization may be to provoke a counter reaction from the government, to increase publicity for the terrorists’ cause, and to demonstrate that criticism of the regime is well founded. The terrorists mean to force the state to show its true repressive face, thereby driving the people into the arms of the challengers. September 11, 2001 was an excellent example of this. After the attacks, Americans were outraged and emotional. Action had to be taken to revenge the lives lost and to ensure our national security.