Although severe consequences come with the decision of war with Iraq, most blinded United States of America citizens are still yet persuaded to support such a war. The Bush Administration has covered their schemes of war with lies to gain support. While weapons of mass destruction is supposedly the reason why the United States launched military action to begin with, all the clearly ignored consequences will haunt their final decision of war, and will remind them how the war is not and never was justified. Whither the war is for the protection of the United States and their alliances, or for oil production and the spread of democracy, the United States is only intensifying the aggression of the situation. The Bush Administration’s plan for war in Iraq, violates International laws, furthermore being ethically wrong (Walton).
The United States, could not win the war without the soldiers who fought in it, and they cannot give Iraq the freedom promised if they do not have enough men and women in combat. The stop-loss program that President Bush set up and put into play is something that was very needed in the country during this time of conflict. In conclusion, there are many reasons why the “back-door draft” is something that is needed in today’s society. American is trying it’s hardest to spread freedom and democracy around the world, to countries that have not been able to obtain it on their own. The military plays a massive role in the gift that America is giving to Iraq, without the military the old Iraqi government would still be in charge, and they would be a lot further away from freedom.
Although George W. Bush and his administration developed a new national security strategy by using preemptive war tactics they believed that this would have been the best choice to prevent danger to the American soil. In the end, it would best to be reluctant of preemptive action because it is impossible to ignore the cost, not only economically, but in mortality. No matter what, the cost of action or inaction would be high. Allowing preparation for attacks not yet seen convinces every nation to once again flex their military muscle, creating tension the world has tried very hard to detain. Thus, in accordance to past historical events mentioned above, the doctrine deems a considerable departure from America’s approach to foreign policies.
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).
Spingola didn’t understand why there was an new order inserted were the Secretary of Defense would put into the decision making and action protocol. There were war game exercises, scheduled to take place the morning of September 11 at which this made the government reaction time slower then usual. Bush was fighting the conspiracy war at the same time the Iraq war. Spingola states, “Bush and his minions claim to be genuine patriots. 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.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt wanted to persuade the US to go to war after the attack on Pearl Harbor while President George W. Bush wanted to comfort the Americans after the 9/11 tragedy. Both presidents got their points across when delivering their speeches through the use of diction, anaphoras, and rhetorical appeals. While Franklin D. Roosevelt established a formal and assertive tone to motivate the Americans, George W. Bush went for an informal and sentimental tone to reassure the Americans. Because the opening and ending of a speech are the first as well as the last words that reach the audience, the word choice plays a huge role in leaving a targeted impression on the audience. Right off the bat, Roosevelt addresses members of Congress as "Mr. Vice President, Mr. Speaker, members of the Senate and the House of Representatives" (Roosevelt 1).
In Bush's speech, he says that "we'll accept no outcome but victory." (Bush) He is referring to the war with Iraq, and according to him, the war will "free its people and defend the world from grave danger." (Bush) He makes the decision to go into war and he seems very confiden... ... middle of paper ... ... Americans that by going to war is the right thing, no matter what. In the end, President George W. Bush speech has shown his arrogance and naivety in going to war. Bush has also demonstrated that his true desire in war is to show off weapons.
Heated resistance against war became even stronger. Nixon wanted to negotiate an honorary departure, which he considered to be almost anything - apart from leaving millions of people, to whom America promised help, to North Vietnamese communists. He took reliability and honor seriously, because he knew that American ability to create peaceful international order depended on them. Nixon and his special advisor claimed that they had a secret plan how to reach “honorable peace”. But peace came slowly, and when it finally arrived, no one could talk about honor.
The draft is not in practice today and it would take very extreme measures for it ever to be put back into practice, but this allowed the United States to go and fight communism. One of the biggest positive things that came out of the war which is the fight for what was right, and that is the fight against communism. Even showing the world that we were not going to allow the communist party to grow and increase its range and toxicity. Finally the program was efficient and this allowed us to move forward and allowed us to fight. This program the draft was effective and allowed the United States to fight for what we believed although we had to sacrifice much and ask a lot of them it allowed us to do what was necessary for what was right.
Wilson spoke of a new kind of Manifest Destiny for the United States. They would fight not just for the country’s own sake, but for the ultimate peace of the world: democracy. Wilson flew to ... ... middle of paper ... ...m went unsolved. The additional battle against Hussein to protect oil interests showed how aggressive Bush’s policy regarding foreign affairs was and is considered the largest expression of political and military Manifest Destiny in U.S. history. Under the current administration, foreign policy dictates that while some situations abroad necessitate military intervention, the U.S. shouldn't seek out proverbial monsters.