Should We Stay Or Will We Go?

Invading Iraq was—and remains—a highly debated and controversial decision within both world politics and the academic disciplines of politics and international relations. With a growing number of deaths, rising tensions in the Middle East, and a failure to find any weapons of mass destruction (WMD), the voices condemning the Bush administration have been increasing ever since the decision to go to war was announced. While many scholars have traditionally argued against the war, this paper will argue that the Iraq War can be justified.

This is a typical propaganda article which relies heavily on the emotions of the viewer to convey its message. It first projects scenes of typical

Since the war on Iraq began on March 20, 2003, at least 1,402 coalition troops have died and 9,326 U.S. troops have been wounded in action. This is no small number and the count grows daily. One would hope, then, that these men and women were sent to war with just cause and as a last resort. However, as the cloud of apprehension and rhetoric surrounding the war has begun to settle, it has become clear that the Bush administration relied on deeply flawed analyses to make its case for war to the United Nations and to the American people, rushing this country, and its soldiers, into war. This is not to say that this war was waged against a blameless regime or that our soldiers have died

There is much controversy surrounding the war in Iraq, both in terms of its legality, its practicality and its current course. Within all of these elements there are arguments to be found that suggest that the troops currently in Iraq should indeed come home. The main argument for bringing home the troops is that they shouldn't have been there in the first place, as no weapons of mass destruction were found, and they are now doing virtually nothing to help the situation, and may indeed be worsening it.

Following the attacks in America on September 11, 1999, there was a public outcry for justice throughout the country. Even with significant public support to wage war against Iraq, there was not enough reason to persuade congress. Over the course of two years, President George W. Bush proved that there was a purpose in the war, not only seek vengeance against terrorism; but, gift a people freedom from dictatorship. Yet, there were still downsides to war including inevitable loss of American life and damaged reputation for our country. For that reason, the United States of America should not have gone to war with Iraq in 2003 due to the extensive federal funding for undesirable warfare which took away from domestic prosperity, the preventable injury to veterans as well as violence against civilians, and the country’s damaged reputation achieved due to the illegitimacy of the war.

Jim Lewandowski said, “None of us could see a reason of why we were still there, and it just kept going on and on.”In 2003, with president George W. Bush accusing Iraq dictator Saddam Hussein of harboring weapons of mass destruction , within one month Hussein has been ousted. After the election in 2008, President Obama vowed to bring American troops home, and in 2011 he withdrew the last U.S. forces. The United States was now using airstrikes to fight ISIS and the debate is growing about whether the United States withdrew its forces from Iraq. Our troops should be removed from Iraq because of the Iraq war may turn out to be the worst war in American history. Also, the war causes the Americans National security to be endangered.

The mood in the articles, “The Falling Man” by Tom Junod and “What is an American” by Michel-Guillaume Jean de Crèvecoeur have a contrast in mood with articles, “Violence is Who we Are” by Steven Crichley and “We’re No. 1(1)!” by Thomas Friedman. The first two articles have the appearance of hopefulness and patriotism, contrasting the last two articles display a sense of disaster and hopelessness.

A response to this critique may be that the variable of enemy labelling is a direct test for framing or counterframing. It is important to see whether news coverage is complying with the administration’s frame or deviating from this. Language used in news media is important as it affects public opinion about the war. It is a subtle element of bias from the news programme that gives away a political stance that may have not been explicit. This is because it establishes a sense of evaluating the situation morally. Counterframing, as Aday notes, can occur by the media rejecting obvious administration framing devices, such as enemy

In the last decade nearly, half a million people have died from conflict-related causes in Iraq since the US-led invasion in 2003 (ABC), and has become the site of intense struggles both domestically and internationally. There have been different types of debates on whether Iraq has improved since the toppling of Saddam Hussain’s government. Opponents on the current conflict believe the worst is over for Iraq and the country has regain stability. However, how can anyone make a good or bad distinction on Iraq with no new available information? Media coverage, government data, and public awareness on current events in Iraq have been kept

     The war in Iraq is a controversy clouded with misinformation and confusion. To get a proper view of the war we need to step back and examine both sides, pro-war and anti-war, of the facts leading to the war, execution of the war, and the effects of the war.

Previous to the beginning of the war in Iraq the American political parties, though not working together in perfect harmony or unison, had achieved some measure of cooperation and unity under the idea of patriotism. However, the execution of the war in Iraq has ripped apart any ties between the parties, as now Democrats and Republicans consistently bicker over the context and continued growth of the war efforts. As many Democrats call for complete withdrawal from the war-torn state and label the operation a disaster, a strong amount of Republicans still maintain the validity of the war and the need for the United States to remain in Iraq and complete the task that was started. This diversity amongst the politicians of America is not conducive to achieving successful results. A more united, unified opinion amongst politicians in America would provide a much better setting for either continued efforts in Iraq or the stopping of the war altogether. In this case, a better balance between diversity and unity must be achieved if any form of tangible progress is to be made.

On September 11, 2001, 2,752 people were killed at the World Trade Center resulting in the largest loss of life on American soil by a foreign nation. The culprit of the most devastating loss in America was the radical terrorist group Al Qaeda led by Osama Bin Laden, putting George W. Bush at the forefront of the Middle East Crisis. His actions should result in the continuation of the containment policy. This policy has been in place for years, and it allows the U.S. to get involved in other countries without the expense of losing lives and escalating hotspot regions in the middle east. Additionally, it will hinder the Iraqis from gaining weapons of mass destruction. This essay will begin by examining the effect of no-fly zones on the Iraqi military and economy, then discuss the economic block the sanctions are able to create, and finally explaining the importance of oil in Iraq 's economy.

Actually, the public will support even a costly war provided the stakes warrant it and the president can persuasively promise victory. In this instance, the stakes could not be higher. What is lacking is a compelling account of victory, a frame for war aims that shapes how the public will interpret unfolding events.

The Syria’s war has become an issue that is frequently reported by news organisations around the world, and the news stories produced by different news organisations reflect a diversity of approaches of communicating, constructing and negotiating collective ideas (Al-Ghazzi, 2014). In order to understand the process of producing meaning by the different news media, it is necessary to analyse media representations as texts and images by discovering textual, visual and discursive properties (Orgad, 2012: 17). The case-study, therefore, will research the media discourse of news reports produced by the Guardian and Al-Jazeera, choosing 5 pairs of news stories with similar topics among Syria war.

This article addresses the role and the relationship of spin doctoring with other players take part in mass media, with two case studies demonstrated: one being successful and one being unsuccessful spin. The successful spin will be shown using the example of the Islamic State Group in Syria and Iraq (ISIS). On the other hand, the unsuccessful one will be using the handling case of the missing plane, Malaysia Airlines flight MH370. A summary of the key concepts relevant to this article will also be provided, followed by what led to the success and the failure of the two campaigns’’ mentioned will be analyzed.