The United States ' 2003 Invasion Of Iraq

The war on Afghanistan and Iraq was a learning experience for the United States foreign policy. On September 11th, 2001 nineteen Al Qaeda members hijacked four planes, two of which crashed into the world trade center, another into the pentagon and the last into Shanksville, Pennsylvania (Scholastic). The man who was behind this attack was Osama bin Laden and with refusal to hand him over, the United States quickly prompted an attack on Afghanistan. The second war which began in 2003 was due to the belief that Saddam Hussein had acquired weapons of mass destruction which was a direct threat to the safety of the United States, in addition there were also claims that Saddam Hussein had ties with Al Qaeda and was being supported by Osama

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,

Qaeda planned carefully in the attacks on the Unites States by sending nineteen militants over a period of several years to keep our suspicions down. They also held their meeting all across the globe. The planning meetings were held in Malaysia, they took flying lessons in the United States, and the leaders of al-Qaeda were in Hamburg, Germany. This is how many militants got over to the United States undetected especially the lead hijackers Mohammed Atta who was on our “watch list”. He was the one who communicated with Osama Bin Laden over e-mail about when the attacks were going to take place. This was just the preparation of what is about to come the United States’ way.

It has now been fourteen years since the tragic event of Sep 11 in New York, when hijackers struck two planes into the northern and southern building of the twin towers. Unfortunately two thousand and nine hundred and ninety six people lost their lives that day including over five hundred Muslims. Few days later it was concluded that alqeda terrorists in Afghanistan under the leadership of Osama bin laden were responsible for the deadly attack. Less than a month after the attack the U.S invaded Afghanistan in order to capture those who were responsible and a short time after Iraq was also invaded for the same purpose. For the next decade the U.S spent an annual of one trillion dollars towards the fight on terror. Fourteen years later it is

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.

Since the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the United States (US) government has focused on terrorism as the biggest threat to stability and national security in the homeland. There have been controversial laws enacted which tested an individual’s Constitutional rights versus the security of the country as a whole, military engagements in foreign countries designed to stop terrorism overseas before reaching the homeland, and a number of law enforcement and government initiatives implemented to identify and investigate terrorists before they commit acts of terrorism or pursue material support activities in support of terrorism. Federal law enforcement agencies have been criticized recently for failing to predict when homegrown violent extremists

After Clinton left office, a republican from the state of Texas takes the presidency. George W. Bush wins the election of 2000 against Democrat Al Gore. Even though the Al Gore won the popular vote for the presidency, Bush won the vote from the Electoral College vote, causing him to win the running. Gore didn’t believe Bush won the votes, demanding a recount of the votes to ensure that he one but was later stopped by the Supreme Court. As president, bush supported many things, including the stem cell research, education reform, and the major tax cut for the people. Foreign policy became a great issue after the attacks on September 11, 2001 hit in the world trade center. 2 planes hit the towers each which caused them to collapse, 1 plane hit the pentagon and 1 plane attempted to hit the white house.

The start of the 2003 Iraq War has been debated by many historians. The arguments made by Krebs and Lobasz in their article “Fixing the Meaning of 9/11 - Hegemony, Coercion, and the Road to War in Iraq” are very persuasive, as are the arguments made by David Lake in “What Caused the Iraq War?”. These arguments center around the mindset of the Bush Administration, which was fearful of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) and eager to use the terrorist attacks of 9/11 as rationale for war regardless of clear evidence. Other historians have presented considerable arguments as well, such as Debs and Monteiro, who argue that Iraq’s possibility of having nuclear weapons posed concern to the Bush administration. However, the best rationale for the start of the 2003 Iraq War combines the coercion model put forth by Krebs and Lobasz with the Lake assertion that the post-war rebuilding was not adequately considered. Krebs and Lobasz have the most salient arguments on manipulations of information, with insightful points regarding the motives of the Bush administration. Their points, however, aren’t complete as David Lake contains stronger information in certain parts of the debate. Lake adds important observations about Saddam’s inability to admit to not having nuclear weapons and the U.S.’s failure to estimate the costs of the post-war were key causes for the start of the war.

The 2003 Invasion of Iraq not only signalled the beginning of the Iraq War, but also demonstrated the power and unchallenged military dominance of the United States. Unlike the first Gulf War, many of the US public, media and officials criticized the Bush Administration’s decision to invade Iraq by questioning the legality and the evidence used to justify the war. These arguments as to whether the Bush Administration was justified in its use of hard power to invade Iraq are diverse and disputed among many historians. The opinions of several historians including Pollack, Mearsheimer and Siilberman, in conjunction with the primary accounts of US president George W. Bush and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein create a conflicting and questionable

The war in Iraq lasted for eight years and resulted in many casualties; the cost of the war was tremendous. The reason for the war changed as time went by, starting with getting rid of weapons of mass destruction and then, when the weapons of mass destruction were not found, the name changed to Iraqi Freedom. A debate between two writers that emerged of the war in Iraq shows different perspectives. Writer John Mueller, who holds the Woody Hayes Chair of National Security Studies at Ohio State University, makes the case against war on Iraq. Also, writer Brink Lindsey, who is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, is in favor of this war. This paper will examine the perspectives as reported by both John Mueller and Brink Lindsey as they argue about the case of the United States invading Iraq. I will conclude from the evidence that the war on Iraq was unnecessary and counterproductive because it increased not decreased the terrorism, refugee crises, cost lives and money without achieving any of its objectives.

The tragic events of September 11, 2001 highlighted the vulnerability to terrorist attacks. The importance of critical infrastructures to the government, people, and organization can be dependent on the vulnerability towards a national disasters, manmade hazards, and terrorist attack. Contemporary standard of what constitutes critical infrastructures has evolved as a wide array of threats has increased in modern times. Critical infrastructures represent aspects of the economy that makes the nation function as a whole and protecting America’s critical infrastructures and key assets presents an enormous challenge to the Department of Homeland Security.

The terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 affected American perspectives on many issues, including immigration. A total of 20 foreign terrorists were involved, 19 of whom took part in the attacks that caused the deaths of 2,977 victims, most of them civilians. The terrorists had entered the United States on tourist or student visas. Four of them, however, had violated the terms of their visas. The attack exposed long-standing weaknesses in the U.S. immigration system that included failures in the areas of visa processing, internal enforcement, and information sharing.[8]

In March 2003, President George W. Bush announced that Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) began: a mission to rid Iraq of Saddam Hussein, ensure that Hussein has no ability to develop weapons of mass destruction, and pledge to employ direct, pre-emptive strikes against Iraq to protect the United States. The United States government claimed they wanted the Iraqi people to achieve a united, stable and free country which would require our “sustained commitment” (History). After the United States’ Government deposed the Ba’athist government of Saddam Hussein, the divide between the Kurds, Sunnis, and Shi’is deepened. As the government disappeared, so did the control between the Iraqi groups. Violent conflict ensued for years as the groups competed for power (Iraq Timeline). Despite Iraq’s recognized borders, exercised sovereignty, and international recognition, the people remained segregated, and even pitted against each other.

Realism tends to focus on the struggle for power between states in an anarchic international system. The major actors of realism are the states themselves. Realism presents a realistic view of international relations and focuses primarily on how the world is literally, rather than how it ought to be. Realist believes that states are rational, unitary actors whose aim is to enhance their power and security by all means. There is evidence that Iraq was a unitary actor who, just as the realists believe, fought in order to enhance its power and security. Though, some could argue that the Persian Gulf War was justified, there is sufficient evidence that concludes otherwise. Whether or not the public considered the Persian Gulf War justifiable, the main issue is that it was a battle that resulted in the death of thousands of lives, both soldiers and civilians.

Followers of Realist school of thought argue the case of 2003 Iraq war from the standpoint of power and Security. The Bush