Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
Introduction
President Bush stated the country’s intent to initiate a ‘War on Terrorism’ as a reactionary response to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on America. He characterized this war as a prolonged battle against those that would employ terrorist actions along with the nations that enabled them. The ultimate culmination of this rhetoric combined with selective legal reasoning was the invasion of Iraq, an illegal act on many fronts. This war has caused great suffering and death, is costing the U.S. the respect of the world’s nations, continues to incite and encourage terrorism and has costs ranging in the hundreds of billion of dollars.
Main text
The Bush administration was head-strong in its cavalier use of military force and lacked respect for laws agreed to by the world’s community of nations. Bush has constantly maintained that these actions against sovereign countries were legal. First, he argues, because of existing language within the UN Security Council resolutions on Iraq, secondly, the invasions are an act of self-defense which international law permits. However, according to Richard Perle, a top official of the U.S. Defense Policy Board and advisor to U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, “international law… would have required us to leave Saddam Hussein alone” (Burkeman & Borger, 2003). Yet, this would have been “morally unacceptable” according to the Bush administration.
The U.S. justified its invasion and occupation of Iraq to the nations of the world by proclaiming, if not proving, that it was a mission to remove weapons of mass destruction which threatened not only the U.S. but all other nations as well. Secretary of State Colin Powell and other administration officials, particularly with the U.S. Department of State, eagerly endeavored to state their rationale for aggressive military actions and make it as palatable to as many other countries as they could.
Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz is quoted in an interview with Vanity Fair magazine dated 28 May 2003 as saying, “For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction” (Shovelan, 2003). Prior to the invasion, Hans Blix, who headed the UN weapons inspection team in Iraq, stated without a doubt and quite publicly that they had not been able to uncover any evidence of biological, nuclear or chemical weapons in Iraq following three years of inspections. He went on to say that he doubted that these weapons had ever existed (“Hans Blix”, 2003).
Following the dubious invasion of Iraq, no ‘massive stockpiles’ of weapons were ever found. On August 2, 2004, President Bush again claimed he had received false information from his own intelligence service but by now had changed his reasoning for invading Iraq. “Knowing what I know today we still would have gone on into Iraq. He [Saddam] had the capability of making weapons of mass destruction. He had terrorists ties … the decision I made is the right decision. The world is better off without Saddam Hussein in power” (“Kerry”, 2006).
At best, the information provided to Bush was faulty, at worst; his justification for war was based purely on fabrications. The alleged link between the terrorist group Al Qaeda and Iraq was referenced before the war and became the primary excuse of the Bush administration following the lack of weapons evidence. Contrary to these assertions of terrorist ties, then Secretary of State Powell stated in January of 2004, “I have not seen a smoking-gun, concrete evidence about the [terrorist] connection” (“Iraq After Saddam”, 2004).
Conclusion
The rationale for the invasion of Iraq was not based on the stated goal of fighting terrorism and it has provided fresh examples of U.S. brutality for al-Qaeda recruiters. The illegal war in Iraq has caused terrorist attacks to increase as well as the loss of many thousands of Iraqi and Allied lives as a consequence and has cost the U.S. dearly as far as international respect is concerned. Additionally, this ‘war’ has monetary costs reaching into the hundreds of billions of dollars which has crippled the U.S. economy and will continue to for many years in the future.
Works Cited
Burkeman, Oliver & Borger, Julian. “War Critics Astonished as US Hawk Admits Invasion was Illegal.” Manchester Guardian. (2003). Web.
“Hans Blix’s Briefing to the Security Council.” Guardian Unlimited. (2003). Web.
“Iraq After Saddam: GIs Swoop Down On Tikrit Suspects Iraq.” CBS News. (2004). Web.
“Kerry Seeks Urgency Against Terrorists.” MSNBC. (2004). Web.
Shovelan, John. “Wolfowitz Reveals Iraq PR Plan.” The World Today. (2003). Web.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.