The Nature of the Conflict: The Iraq War (2003-2010)
by
Barry J. DeLisle
NIU Class 2017
Unclassified - submitted to the faculty of the National Intelligence University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for MCR 615.
May 22, 2016
Word Count: 2364
The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the
Department of Defense, the U.S. Navy Reserve, or the U.S. Government
The Nature of the Conflict: The Iraq War (2003-2010) Determining the nature of the conflict is a crucial first step in understanding what is required to develop an effective strategy. Iraq presented the United States with a highly complex, complicated, and challenging environment to fully understand and assess. The longstanding religious conflicts, unequal wealth distribution, limited economic development, disenfranchised young male population, presence of terrorism, and a multitude of other factors increased the difficulty of assessing the battlefield in Iraq. Any change to the status quo could lead to second and third order effects, which would only further convolute the situation in Iraq. Clausewitz once stated, “The nature of war is complex and changeable,” and the battlefield in Iraq was no exception. In order for the United States Administration to develop an effective strategy, a solid understanding of the nature of the conflict was required. The initial strategy failed to properly balance the ends,
The disbanding of the Iraqi army and “debathification” or dismantling of the government in place only served to increase the casualties of American troops and Iraqi civilians as the radical Sunni insurgency expanded. This point of cause and effect, clash of two distinct political and cultural worlds, defined this war for the generation serving, at home and the future generations. The threat of increasing terrorism after the attack of September 11, 2001 was one of the driving force of invasion of Iraq. However, in one analysis the increase of global terrorism today is told to be well contributed by the conflicts that were fueled by the western presence in Iraq and the surrounding
The Gulf War is often remembered as an easy victory by most Americans. Perceived as an intense military campaign intended to bring about a swift victory, and often referred to as a battle between good and evil. In reality, the U.S. military had a host of troubles in the conflicts of Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Sheild which became known as the Gulf War of 1990-91, many of troubles were caused by the unnecessary deaths of allied troops, and the Iraqi civilians alike. Other catastrophes were avoided purely by luck or incompetence of the Iraqi Military. What new military strategies, procedures and technologies are now in place as a result of lessons learned. Hopefully to ensure that some of the worst mistakes that were made evident by the Gulf War will not be repeated in a subsequent war in Iraq or elsewhere. The intense reality of the actual battle fought by the United States and its allies against Iraq, left many a U.S. military spokesmen were scoffing at the Iraqi forces as “the fourth-largest army in the world.” And “the second-largest army in Iraq” by the world at the end of the Gulf War,
…The U.S. began the Iraq war with the goal of ridding the region of a tyrannical government that didn’t protect its people. However, a decade later, at the conclusion of the U.S. military mission in Iraq, the people are perhaps worse off than they were before the
On September 11, 2001, two planes crashed into the World Trade Center in New York City, New York. This was the very first contact that the United States of America had with the terrorism that went on in Iraq. March 20, 2003 marked the day that President George W. Bush announced the start of the war against Iraq (1). This was the beginning of a very costly war on both America and Iraq. The cost of the Iraq War was not just the amount of money spent, but the impact of war on the soldiers and the toll that it took on the families of those who were involved, as well as the amount of time and dedication of resources put into the war by the Government.
In the months encouraging the war with Iraq, numerous addressed why the war was being managed "not if all else fails, but rather as a first resort" (Ricks 62). As simply war hypothesis states, all together for a war to be defended, "all conceivable, serene distinct options for determining the contention being referred to must be depleted" (Orend 2). This was unmistakably not finished with Iraq. A sample of a serene or option measure the United States could have taken in the years, maybe even decades going before the war with Iraq, can be seen through an American named Greg Mortenson. To clarify it essentially, Greg Mortenson has put in the most recent fifteen years advancing peace in the Middle East "with books, not bombs" (Mortenson and Relin 272). By building schools in Pakistan and Afghanistan, Mortenson is battling terrorism as a result of his conviction that "terrorism doesn't happen due to some gathering of individuals some place like Pakistan or Afghanistan basically to choose to
The date was March 19, 2003, people sat beside their television sets and radios to listen to U.S. President, George W. Bush, announce, “At this hour, American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger” (“War in Iraq Begins,” 2003). Bush and his advisor’s actions were based on the information that the Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein, was building weapons of mass destruction. The Iraq War is a “just” war because it was a reasonable response with a moral purpose.
General Casey sought the advice of counterinsurgency experts in an effort to determine operational shortcomings but he misunderstood the relationship between existing conditions and security failures. His deliberate analysis resulted in a full spectrum counter-insurgency strategy aimed at driving a wedge between the population and the insurgents. Casey failed to recognize that de-Ba’athification, disbanding the Iraqi Army and the Sunni resistance to the new political structure formed the basis of ethnosectarian violence. Improving the security situation required resolution of these tensions but Casey’s kinetic counter-insurgency tactics drove a wedge between
On September 11th, 2001, a series of terrorist attacks orchestrated by the terrorist group al-Qaeda saw the death of almost 3,000 individuals alongside +6,000 injured people. In addition, this event caused over 10 billion infrastructure damage and $3 trillion in total costs (Carter). Despite 15 of the 19 attackers originating from the nation Saudi Arabia (Sperry) and recent documents reported to show that the nation even supported the attacks, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia faced little backlash from these attacks. Even though none of the individuals involved in 9/11 were from this country, it was in fact the nation of Iraq that suffered the most from these events. Through purported link between the regime Saddam Hussein (the then leader of Iraq)
The Iraqi war has left major long-term damage. Oftentimes, in the wake of and the after effects from the war the psychological effects will go unnoticed (Behrouzan, 2013). When war arises, there will be catastrophe on various levels that the country will experience. There has to be a lot of effort and strategic planning required from everyone concerning the war damages left behind. Therefore, after there has been a war, the country needs rebuilding from its damages. Furthermore, this paper will discuss humanitarian organization that will be aiding in the rebuilding. There will be a brief description of the Iraqi culture. This paper will also discuss three major topics in order to gain a better understanding then
The Persian Gulf War was held August 2,1990-February 28,1991.It is called Gulf War which was waged by a UN authorized coalition force from 34 nations.USA led the coalition against Iraq for continuation of the state of Kuwait.It is called the mother of all battles by Saddam Hussein.Its military name is Operation Desert Storm.It is also known as the 1st Gulf War,Gulf War1 or the Iraq War before the term became identified with the 2003 Iraq War.
in their political power, allowing the the bourgeois to continue their monopoly on politics through exploiting the campaign finance system. With this, the proletariat pays the most heavy price as they now face a disadvantaged economic class struggle in the voting booths where their interests continue to be marginalized.
This was a war between Iran and Iraq occurring on September 22,1980. This war ended up taking a lot of lives as it’s very tragic. It started off when Iraq attacked Iran along the country's border. Iraq mainly attacked to get there oil producing because of the value they could get. When they attacked it was basically a win for them as they then advanced. When they advanced they went into khuzestan but they came in very cautiously and carefully.
years. We are a nation of freedom, but we are also a nation of strong
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.
When the gold mining and gold trade era came to an end, the whole world set its eyes on the next most expensive natural reserve on this planet earth- The Oil. And as we know, the Middle East has been an oil rich region from the start, therefore, the whole world wangled around the Middle Eastern countries to meet their oil consumption needs by getting their hands on this natural resource.