Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Iranian weapons of mass destruction
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Iranian weapons of mass destruction
Chariane Nkengfack
Ms. Burke
English
17 March 2014
The Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD's) in Syria
Far out into the East of the Atlantic Ocean lies Syria, a country equipped with a ridiculous amount of Weapons of Mass Destruction, or WMD's. The risk of WMD proliferation has now significantly increased. During March of 2013 and February of 2014, the Syrian government and rebel forces has been accusing each other of discharging a deadly chemical near the city of Aleppo, although, what exactly happened remains foggy. The misuse of WMD's is a clear violation of the agreement established between both countries by the United Nations, serves as a huge threat to countries, and these weapons have more resourceful uses such as being disassembled and reused as fuel.
The United Nations (UN)
The United Nations (UN) is an intergovernmental organization established on October 24, 1945 to promote international co-operation. As a replacement for the ineffective League of Nations, the organization was created following the Second World War to prevent another such conflict. At its founding, the UN had 51 member states; there are now 193. The sole purpose was to protect and unite each and every committing and co-operating member country. Syria, on the other hand, has apparently chosen not to obey their restrictions and defied the oath they have taken when joining the UN. Instead, they decided to abuse their privileges of keeping their chemical weapons and not using them at any point what so ever. The US faces a serious threat to Syria’s WMD’s. In fact, Syria’s weaponry arsenal and keep-safe warehouses are so profoundly massive that military planners estimate that it would take 750,000 ground troops to secure them.
The Bombing of ...
... middle of paper ...
...is playing a huge role in what is soon to become “World War 3”. The UN has tried and hoped to fully succeed in building up a strong foundation and agreement between the numerous nations, countries, and lands involved in the organization, but then countries like Syria come in and throw acid rain on the UN’s parade. Instead of ALL countries worldwide forming one alliance in which the words enemies or threats do not exist, there are the countries that choose to want to corrupt the world’s potential peace formation. Rather than firing these “country-killers” from nation to nation, suppliers should rather invest their weapons in disassembly lines and car fuel. All in all, Syria is and has been frowned upon for several years because of their intolerable behavior and uncontrollable usage of WMD’s and this is an issue only an extremely powerful force can solve.
The war in Syria has been going on for six years now, killing more than a quarter million people and forcing over 10 million people to leave their homes. It has started with a peaceful protest and is now a full on genocide of people dying. The protest was for the arrest and torturing of Syrian teens for the graffiti of their anti government on a wall. When people form other people that were tired of the government saw this, they wanted their president to make major reforms of their democracy. He didn't like that, so he responded with a violent reaction. He killed thousands of Syrians and more from starvation. As the war went on, more people came in to play a role in the war. These people were from many different places. It has gotten so bad that politicians don't know what to do to stop it.
Eleora Salvador Ms.Levine English 9H 1 November 2017 Motivation in WMD’s The author of “WMD’s”, Brian O’Conner, uses his motivational voice that attracts his target audience. Brian O’ Conner uses a motivational voice to write about the life of Chuck Liddell. Who exactly is the target audience?
In part one this essay proposes that an arms embargo is simple to initiate, primarily because it meets the demands for action in circumstances of conflict and violent repressions, and requires minimum political consensus among the UN member states. Nonetheless, the failures of many arms sanctions during the past two decades could either maintain or alter this situation. Furthermore, the second part of this essay will argue, with specific references to the EU’s sanctions against China and Syria that embargoes are not difficult to lift per se, but their removal ofte...
The system the UN currently has offers some perspective on the idea of conducting and participating in war. But...
On 18 April 2013 American allies Britain and France provided letters to the United Nations claiming possession of evidence that chemical weapons have been utilized multiple times in the time ncluding in and around the cities of Aleppo, Homs and possibly Damascus.
The war between Iraq and Iran initiated in 1980 and it lasted eight years (3). The invasion of Kuwait started on the second of August 1990. There are reasons and consequences for this invasion that I am going to talk about in this essay
Jouejati, Murhaf. “Syrian Motives for Its WMD Programs and What to Do about Them.” Middle
The history of the US’s relationship with the UN is complex, seeming to vacillate between warm cooperation and abject disdain as the national interests of the US and the rest of the world, and the short- and long-term interests of the US itself, align or oppose each other. The UN was originally the vision of US president Franklin Roosevelt and the product of US State Department planning and diplomacy. It was designed to forward the national interests of its strongest members, the P-5, to reflect and channel the geopolitical power structure rather than twist it into an unnatural and unsustainable hierarchy of weak nations trying to dominate strong. Because the Charter is based in a realist view of the world, during the Cold War, when the national interests of the two world powers diverged, the UN was paralyzed to deal with any of the world’s conflicts. When the Cold War ended it gave rise to the first war that should have been authorized by the Security Council—the Persian Gulf War from later 1990 to early 1991. Many hoped for a “new world order” after the success of the Gulf War, but the interests of the US and the rest of the world, primarily the rest of the members of the Security Council, soon divided again. Today, the world is still struggling to cope with the blow dealt to the UN by the US’s use of force in Iraq, including the US, which has not even begun to feel the long-term negative effects of its unilateralism. However, the war in Iraq could have been less detrimental to the UN and the US in particular, and by extension to the rest of the world, if the US had argued that it was acting to uphold resolution 1441 under the authorization of the Security Cou...
For the past several months the United Nations’ Security Council has debated on whether or not to accept the U.S. proposal to force Iraq to comply the new and former resolutions. The new resolution calls for complete disarmament of Iraq and the re-entrance of weapons inspectors into Iraq. If Iraq fails to comply, then military force would be taken in order to disarm Iraq. This proposal met opposition from council members Russia, China, and France. They thought that the U.S. proposal was too aggressive and that the U.S. should not act alone without U.N. approval. For weeks they refused to believe that the only way to make Iraq disarm is through the threat of force and the fear of being wiped out.
The night before the anniversary of 9/11 in 2013, Barack Obama delivered a speech to the United States of America on the subject of Syria’s inhumane use of chemical weapons on its own citizens. The United States’ intelligence analysts estimated that more than 1,400 civilians were killed due to the chemical warheads that were launched on the area right outside of Damascus. In President Barack Obama’s address to the nation on Syria, he attempts to persuade the American people to support his plan of a targeted air strike on Syria. By describing the victims of Syria, giving reasons for the inhumanity of the Syrian government, and reinforcing his credibility,
Quarterly, inc. "Syria." The Middle East. 11th ed. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 2007. 437 - 456. Print.
Unfortunately for the citizens of countries like Syria, the rules enforced in the international sector are set by western nations to the benefit of western nations. This is evidenced, for example, following the Washington consensus policies instituted by western nations for the developing world, “The Washington Consensus era is often considered the “lost decade” of development, with increases in acute poverty, urban migrations, environmental degradation, increased militarization” (Lecture, 10/11/16). The west may claim that it has the best interest in aiding the developing countries growth, but empirical evidence shows that western nations will support a leader that is hostile towards improvements within their borders. Humanitarian Imperialism details the shift of humanitarian assistance in favor of western interests, “The new humanitarianism involve[d] a shift in the centre of gravity of policy away from saving lives to supporting social processes and political outcomes” (Bush 313). Although the Syrian president had been abusing human rights, the democratic process, and economic opportunity, his business friendly policies kept him in good graces with the west (Leber). The push on behalf of western nations for an integrated global economy creates a vacuum of human rights, leaving developing nations wrought with domestic
1. As far as peace keeping methods go, the reputation of the United Nations is very pitiable. This is not only because they have not been doing their job to it’s fullest extent, but also because the member states on the security council haven’t given the UN the power it needs if it is to be a successful force in peace keeping methods.
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.
Topic One - Weapons of Mass Destruction: Weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) include a wide range of arms that fall under the category of being nuclear, biological, or radioactive/chemical in nature . Due to their destructive nature, WMDs can prove to be detrimental and devastating to the international community should they fall into the wrong hands and used for harmful and damaging purposes. In order to maintain balance and peace between all states, it is imperative that DISEC finds a way to restrict and prevent any potential of WMDs becoming a threat.