The War Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction

The Iraq War, also known as Operation Iraqi Freedom, took place in 2003 and dragged on for almost nine years, until the withdrawal of US troops in December 2011. The invasion was justified by the US using the new National Security Strategy that was proposed by the Bush administration. One of the key features of the National Security strategy was the justification that the US could preemptively strike targets nations that it deemed a threat to the security of the US. In order to justify the invasion of Iraq, the governmental leaders in the US claimed that Saddam Hussein had ties to Al-Qaeda and other terror groups, as well as using Saddam’s use of chemical weapons as legitimization for the war. Once the war began on March 20, 2003, the original

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.

In 2003, President George Walker Bush and his administration sent the United States military to war in Iraq to overthrow Saddam Hussein, Iraq’s ruler and dictator, who murdered over 600,000 innocent people, and “...used chemical weapons to remove Kurds from their villages in northern Iraq…” (Rosenberg 2). According to the Department of Defense’s website, the war removed Saddam Hussein from power, ending an era when “Iraqis had fewer rights than when its representatives signed the Human Rights Declaration in 1948” (1). American blood, money, and honor was spent in what was allegedly a personal war and perhaps a fight to gain oil and natural resources, but only history may reveal the truth. Although the Iraq War removed tyrant Saddam Hussein from power, the failures of the war dwarf the successes.

The invasion and the war in Iraq remains a continuous topic of divisiveness and sensitivity in today’s America. One of the negative evaluation of the war is attributed to the false impression of the length of the war which lasted seven years, not six months as presumed in 2003. As the invasion initiated, the ideologies of American government then failed to perceive the large number of troops required, casualties and the financial toll in the interest of the preventive war doctrine. However, when weighing the failures of this war, there are successes brought home that relate mostly to the lessons the American military and the government learned with the use of counterinsurgency tactics after “winning the hearts and minds” of Iraqis (Young). Nevertheless, with evaluation through levels of analysis, the accomplished agenda of ending Saddam Hussein’s regime justifies success and failure, mutually.

One must examine the fine points of each argument that the administration had proposed for the immediacy of war in order to best refute them. The first and often most repeated argument that Saddam Hussein posed a direct threat to the United States is that he possessed weapons of mass destruction. I am willing to concede that the Iraqi military possessed both chemical and biological agents. Saddam Hussein had stockpiles of them that were never accounted for after the first Gulf War. He has even used them on several occasions on Kurdish minorities in Northern Iraq. However, no proof was ever offered that he possessed nuclear weapons or the means to develop them in the near future.

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.

The United States has been at war since its creation in 1776. It has battled confrontation 222 out of 239 years or, 93% of its existence. Notably, one of the most crucial wars is the War on Terror. Beginning in March of 2003, this war initially served the purpose of getting rid of the country's leader Saddam Hussein to prevent his use of suspected stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. Hussein has the questionable refinement of being the best known Middle Eastern ruler. He governed Iraq from 1979 until his capture in 2003. President Bush presumed he was harboring many chemical weapons such as synthetic warheads, shells, or aviation bombs. While politics justified this war the real war between Iraq and the U.S. began long before what recognized.

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.

The Great War of Our Time was a pleasure to read. It was an emotional ride for me throughout the entire book. It made me laugh out loud; giggle to myself, tear up, become upset and sometimes it caused a pleasant grin to grow across my face. From the beginning of this book to the very last page, I thought was an easy read.

The leading question on our mind is “Should the United States have gone to war with Iraq”? A majority of individuals believe that President George W. Bush was not being the person everyone was reliant on in 2001 when he confirmed war on Iraq. After war was declared, the world transformed immensely, even more than what people thought it would. It is clear that going to war with Iraq was a bad choice and only made the situation worse.

Mainstream media has extensively covered the war called Operation Iraq Freedom where thousands of our armed forces were killed leaving millions without their mother and father. It has been said that this was a senseless way that should have never begun; in the same manner, it is a war that many feel was needed and very necessary. The purpose of my extended is to uncover the facts of this topic that has been considered off limits and inappropriate especially in the mainstream media. In efforts to uncover the facts, there are many questions that must be answered; however, in making the attempt to answer any question, the questions leads into millions of other unanswered questions. For instance, is this war between Afghanistan and the United

The Reason for Going to War Since the beginning of the war on Iraq, over 8243 civilians, 11000 Iraqi soldiers and 642 Coalition soldiers have died. There has not been one day since a US soldier was killed and since the beginning of the occupation, 39750 bombs have been dropped and $117 billion dollars have been spent. And no weapons of mass destruction have been found.

The war against Iraq began on March 20, 2002, when the U.S lunched “Operation Iraqi Freedom”. This was after President Bush called Iraq part of an “axis of evil”, also calling the country dangerous which is threatening U.S with the world’s most destructive weapons. The major phase of the war began when U.S troops marched within 50 miles of Baghdad with heavy aerial attacks on Baghdad and other cities. After the attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon which was believed to be the work of Al Qaeda, U.S was concerned about the security of the Untied States which lead to the war in Iraq. Even though U.S officials felt the war in Iraq is the main priority, but many people in U.S opposes the war which brings up a lot of controversial issues.

Fundamentally speaking, warfare is the means by which human society has been organized. The modern world is divided up into a number of states whose sovereignty is based either on the results of warfare or the threat of warfare. The ability of a states to wage and win wars is what determines the geopolitical pecking order. Those who cannot hope to win wars alone pursue policies and deals that ensure the intervention of more capable states in their defense, should one come about. Domestic policies and cultural developments, as well, are understood as wars: at this very moment, there is a War on Drugs, a War on Terror, a War on Women, a War on Poverty, even an alleged War on Christmas. Indeed, the uneasy peace that exists between the world’s current superpowers is a result of the expected outcome of Nuclear War. The nature of war, being so essential to the shape and nature of the world we live in, must be understood. To aid us in our own understanding of war, we can benefit tremendously from exploring the ways in which war was practiced, understood, and experienced by our cultural and ideological progenitors, the Greeks and Romans of Classical Antiquity.