The Iraq War was an armed conflict that began in 2003 with the invasion of Iraq by the United States Military. The invasion collapsed the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. However, the war continued for a decade as an urgent situation emerged to oppose the occupying forces and the Iraqi government. It is estimated that between 150,000 to 600,000 Iraqis were killed in the first 4 years of conflict. The United States officially withdrew all US forces from Iraq in 2011 but in 2014 became involved again to try and aid the country with its civil war and economic issues. The invasion began on 20 March 2003, with the U.S. joined by the European forces and several other allies, launching a "shock and awe" bombing campaign. Iraqi forces were quickly …show more content…
Any Western governments seemed surprisingly uninterested, about these remarks. The U.S government followed a policy which allowed and perhaps encouraged the questionable growth of Saddam Hussein's arsenal and his power. Prior to September 2002, the CIA was President Bush’s main provider of intelligence on Iraq. In September, a Pentagon unit called the Office of Special Plans was created by Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith, to supply President George W. Bush administration officials with all intelligence on Iraq. Seymour Hersh claims that, according to a Pentagon adviser, " was created in order to find evidence of what Wolfowitz and his boss, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, wanted to be true—that Saddam Hussein had close ties to Al Qaeda, and that Iraq had an enormous arsenal of chemical, biological, and possibly even nuclear weapons that threatened the region and, potentially, the United States”.The issue of Iraq's nuclear weapons took a hit a turning point in 2002–2003, when President Bush demanded a complete end to the believed Iraqi production of nuclear weapons and full cooperation with the U.N. Security Council Resolutions requiring U.N. weapons
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.
Over the next several weeks America launched over 2500 missiles on Iraq military. After this Iraq got tired of just sitting there so they finally started to fight back. They launched missiles at the barracks that were blocking Iraq from entering Saudi Arabia. Before February 24 the real ground war hadn’t even started.
Published in 1961, Joseph Heller’s Catch-22 is a satire of war with a twist. Heller wrote his narrative nonlinearly. Although certain critics described the novel as “disorganized, unreadable and crass”, the mismatched chronology complements Heller’s style of writing and draws the reader’s interest. One key point of Catch-22, the catch-22 paradox, makes use of the nonlinear structure to encircle the reader in the contradictions. In addition, Heller’s style of writing provides a point of viewing different from most novels. While the narrative may seem complex and overwhelming at first, the reader learns to appreciate the subtleties of Heller’s labyrinthine plot.
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This George Santayana quote speaks volumes about what should be taken into consideration when making a decision with a lot riding on it. If nothing else, this quote serves as the proper bridge, or connection, between Robert McNamara’s Eleven Lessons in “The Fog of War” and the ongoing conflict in Libya. In “The Fog of War”, Robert McNamara breaks down 11 vital lessons he learned about war from the Vietnam War. When looking at the current Libyan situation, these lessons can be similarly applied, and thus avoid any potentially costly mistakes like the ones made in Vietnam. McNamara himself has stated that those particular 11 lessons were intended to be applied to war in its most general meaning. However, some lessons are certainly more applicable than others. The four lessons in particular that stand out are, “empathize with your enemy”, “proportionality should be a guideline to war”, “belief and seeing are both often wrong” and “be prepared to re-examine your reasoning.” These four lessons need to be applied in Libya to ensure that history’s mistakes are not needlessly repeated.
On September 11, 2001 terrorists crashed two American airline airplanes into Twin Towers, killing thousands of people. It was the worst terrorist attack in American history and it showed us that we are not protected by Atlantic and Pacific. It showed us that we could be attacked by anyone at anytime. It showed us that if we will be attacked again that we can only depend on each other and not on other nations to help us. The 9/11 changed people forever, some lost family members or friends, others lost their jobs even so called “American Dream.”
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.
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."
... Sept. 11th, 2001, terrorist attack on theWorld Trade Center and the unreliability of U.S. intelligence onWeapons of mass Destruction in Iraq have been a focus of intense scrutiny in the U.S. in 2004 particularly in the context of the 9/11 Commision , the continuing armed resistance against U.S. occupation of Iraq, and the widely perceived need for systematic review of the respective roles of the CIA, FBI and the Defense Intelligence Agency. On July 9th, 2004 the Senate report of Pre-war Intelligenceon Iraq of the Senate Intelligence Committe stated that the CIA described the danger presented by Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq in an unreasonable way, largely unsupported by the available intelligence. In a briefing held Sept 15th, 2001 George Tenet presented the Worldwide Attack Matrix, a "top-secret" document describing covert CIA anti-terror operations in 80 countries in Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. The actions, underway or being recommended, would range from "routine propaganda to lethal covert action in preparation for military attacks". The plans, if carried out, "would give the CIA the broadest and most lethal authority in its history".
To understand the power struggle relating to foreign policymaking, it is crucial to understand what foreign policy entails. The Foreign Policy Agenda of the U.S. Department of State declares the goals of foreign policy as "to build and sustain a more democratic, secure, and prosperous world for the benefit of the American people and the international community." While this definition is quite vague, the actual tools of foreign policy include Diplomacy, foreign aid, and military force.
Immediately following the two thousand and three invasion of Iraq, Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) was in full effect. After the decline of the Iraqi government headed by Saddam Husain, The United States concluded that Iraq as a free nation was now more vulnerable than ever. American policy would not completely withdraw military forces and abandon the newly liberated Iraqi people. A reduced American Military force was left behind to aid in a smooth transition to a new government. Quickly, the coalition forces occupying the nation began to meet heavy ambushes composed of devastating Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) combined with multiple directional small arms fire. Intelligence concluded that a well trained and organized insurgent force was
The US government claimed that it had raided Iraq to prevent Saddam Hussein from using weapons of mass destruction. However, in the1990s, United Nations weapons inspectors went to Iraq and almost completely dismantled the major weapons factories and destroyed nearly all the country’s biological and chemical weapons and long range missiles. Yet, also at the same time, the US had supported the nuclear-armed dictator of Pakistan. This leads people to think that the US intervention was more than just preventing Saddam Hussein. According to Gareth Evans, President of the International Crisis Group, Iraq did not pose an apparent threat. He claimed that the Iraqi threat required intent and obvious danger. In addition to that, the US claims that there had been possible ties between al Qaeda and Iraq. There actually had been reports that contacts really occurred with Bin Laden, however they do not appear to have resulted in collaborative relationship due to two senior Bin Laden associates denying any link had exi...
Federal forces retook the Eastern area of Mosul last month from ISIS after more than two years of tyrannical rule by the jihadist group and weeks of bitter combat.
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. President Bush flew into Iraq to show the world that the war is over, even though nothing was accomplished (Kirk et al. 2014). Iraq was facing 13 years of scantions, therefore regime diverted its resources to flexible networks of patronage that kept it in power (Dodge 2007, 88). Iraq faced widespread of lawlessness and after the violent regime changed US could not control the situation. Iraqi civilians were looting, attacking ministries building and this resulted into a series of event (Kirk et al. 2014) . From a military perspective the regime was taken down, but they made no commitment to rebuild or secure the country.
The study of international relations takes a wide range of theoretical approaches. Some emerge from within the discipline itself others have been imported, in whole or in part, from disciplines such as economics or sociology. Indeed, few social scientific theories have not been applied to the study of relations amongst nations. Many theories of international relations are internally and externally contested, and few scholars believe only in one or another. In spite of this diversity, several major schools of thought are discernable, differentiated principally by the variables they emphasize on military power, material interests, or ideological beliefs. International Relations thinking have evolved in stages that are marked by specific debates between groups of scholars. The first major debate is between utopian liberalism and realism, the second debate is on method, between traditional approaches and behavioralism. The third debate is between neorealism/neoliberalism and neo-Marxism, and an emerging fourth debate is between established traditions and post-positivist alternatives (Jackson, 2007).
A war crime is an unjust act of violence in which a military personnel violates the laws and acceptable behaviors of a war. Despite all the violence in a war, a soldier shooting another is not considered a war crime because it is not a violation to the laws and practices of a war, and it is considered just. A war crime is defined as a “violations [violation] of the laws and customs of war” (“War Crimes”), and are attacks “against civilian populations, prisoners of war, or in some cases enemy soldiers in the field” (Friedman). War crimes are typically committed with weapons or by uncommon, cruel, devastating military methods and are “…Committed primarily by military personnel” (Friedman). There are many different types of war crimes one can commit, including “murder, ill treatment…murder or ill treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages or devastation not justified by military necessity” (Friedman). Originally constructed as international law by the London Charter on August 8th, 1945 and further developed by the Hague Conventions of 1899, 1907 and the Nuremberg trials, war crimes are aggressive, unacceptable and unjust actions performed by military workforce that occur during a war.