Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The role of the United Nations Security Council in international peace and security
The importance of the UN security council
The importance of the UN security council
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In early 2003, the threat of Saddam Hussein and the possibility of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq captured the attention and concern of the world. One nation decided to illegally act on these unsubstantiated claims, invading the country, violating the UN Charter and breaking several international laws in the process. The penalizations that were subject to the invading country, the United States, were never carried out. The United State’s role and influence over the UN and the Security Council, along with the nature of the unenforceable, politics and power-based international laws, allowed them to escape sanctions after their invasion of Iraq. The United States did not have a legitimate reason for invading, and their ability to repudiate international law would be unacceptable for any other country. Their decision to invade Iraq was one based on money and politics, and the US should be subject to penalties just as any other nation would have to face after unnecessarily waging war on a nation.
March 19th, 2003 marked the official start to the US invasion of Iraq. Prior to this, there had been a lot of tension and conflict building up in the Middle East. Just months prior, President George W. Bush said in his state of the union address, coined a term for three countries that were seen as potentially dangerous and threaten the peace of the world. He called them the Axis of Evil, and it consisted of Iraq, Iran and North Korea, with Iraq being the major topic of discussion. He said that Saddam Hussein was carrying weapons of mass destruction and further developing chemical and nuclear weapons. He claimed that they had already used on civilians, “leaving the bodies of mothers huddled over their dead children”. He painted a grues...
... middle of paper ...
...ed-interational-law-dutch-inquiry-finds>.
"Invasion of Iraq." Global Policy Forum. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Oct. 2013.
.
"Iraq War Illegal, Says Annan." BBC News. British Broadcasting Corporation, 16 Sept. 2004. Web. 15
Oct. 2013. .
Scherrer, Christian P. Invasion of Iraq, the U.N., U.S. Unilateralism and Crimes against Humanity.
Hamburg: n.p., 2003. World Uranium Weapons Conf. Web. 15 Oct. 2013.
.
Wingfield, David R. "Why International Law Supports the Invasion of Iraq: A Short History on UN
Declarations of War." Policy Options May 2003: 37-40. Institute for Research on Public Policy.
Web. 15 Oct. 2013. .
September 11, 2001 marked a tragic day in the history of the United States; a terrorist attack had left the country shaken. It did not take long to determine those who were behind the attack and a call for retribution swept through the nation. Citizens in a wave of patriotism signed up for military service and the United States found resounding international support for their efforts in the war on terror. Little opposition was raised at the removal of the Taliban regime and there was much support for bringing Osama Bin Laden and the leaders of al-Qaeda to justice. Approval abroad diminished approximately a year and a half later when Afghanistan became a stepping stone to the administration’s larger ambition, the invasion of Iraq. The administration would invent several stories and in some cases remain silent of the truth where would prove positive for the Iraqi invasion. It seems they were willing to say anything to promote the largely unpopular and unnecessary war they were resolved on engaging in.
Since the 9/11 attacks, the Bush administration has been calling every citizens and every nations to support his Middle East policy. Nonetheless, the U.S. has been involved in the middle-east struggle for more than half of the century, wars were waged and citizens were killed. Yet, political struggles and ideological conflicts are now worse than they were under Clinton’s presidency. As “President’s Address to the Nation” is a speech asking everybody to support the troops to keep fighting in Iraq, I, as an audience, am not persuaded at all because of his illogical fallacy in the arguments. In this essay, I will analyze how and what are the illogical fallacies he uses in the speech.
The night before the anniversary of 9/11 in 2013, Barack Obama delivered a speech to the United States of America on the subject of Syria’s inhumane use of chemical weapons on its own citizens. The United States’ intelligence analysts estimated that more than 1,400 civilians were killed due to the chemical warheads that were launched on the area right outside of Damascus. In President Barack Obama’s address to the nation on Syria, he attempts to persuade the American people to support his plan of a targeted air strike on Syria. By describing the victims of Syria, giving reasons for the inhumanity of the Syrian government, and reinforcing his credibility,
In September 1980, a very destructive war with Iran was started by Saddam Hussein. This was a result of an invasion in Iran. This invasion spurred an eight year war. Saddam used c...
President Barack Obama delivered an address to the nation on the U.S. Counterterrorism strategy to combat ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) on September 10, 2014. The recent issue, which became the basis for this speech, has been President Obama’s response to Syria’s Bashar al-Assad’s use of chemical weapons against diverse civilians. He delivered this speech to prove to the nation that he has an elaborate strategy along with several tactics to destroy the terrorist group. Obama described the ISIL in his speech by stating, “in a region that has known so much bloodshed, these terrorists are unique in their brutality. They execute captured prisoners. They kill children. They enslave, rape, and force women into marriage. They threatened a religious minority with genocide. And in acts of barbarism, they
The Iraq war, also known as the second Gulf War, is a five-year, ongoing military campaign which started on March 20, 2003 with the invasion of Iraq by U.S. troops. One of the most controversial events in the history of the western world, the war has caused an unimaginable number of deaths, and spending of ridiculous amounts of money. The reason for invasion war Iraq’s alleged possession of weapons of mass destruction, which eventually was disproved by weapons inspectors. Many people question George W. Bush’s decision to engage a war in Iraq, but there might be greater reason why the decision was made. The ideas of George W. Bush might have been sculpted by one of the greatest works of all time, "The Prince."
... hand, the principle is still very useful and is referred to in global political and social debate. It is noted that Richard Falk, critic of western wars argues that the just war theory ‘is a vital source of modern international law governing the use of force and it focuses attention on the causes, means and ends of war’ (Shaw, 2005, p.133). It can be acknowledged, that the morality of war still remains urgently central to political argument around the world. In recent years, the Just war theory has seen to respond to the main challenges surrounding the establishment of war in Iraq in 2003. It can be assessed the war in Iraq has distorted into a stimulating theory positioning the existence of Weapons of mass destruction.Therefore, this dissertation will elaborate on the theories that are challenged by Iraq war in relation to the use of weapons of mass destruction.
Herman, Carl. "UK Chilcot Inquiry: The Iraq War was Unlawful." 4 January 2013. Global research.
Iraq’s history is one of both prosperity and violence, and dates back to the ancient civilizations of Mesopotamia. While dominated by a variety of civilizations, the region enjoyed a relatively stable society. Since the birth of Islam, the religion has been the dominant cultural belief of the region, and has made its way into the laws and ruling of the region. (InDepth Info, 2010)
Just War and Human Rights. Philosophy and Public Affairs 9 (2):160-81. Mill, J. S., Bentham, J., & Ryan, A. (1987) The 'Standard' of the 'Standard'. Utilitarianism and other essays.
In 2003 the United States of America launched an invasion of Iraq. This country committed no acts of aggression towards the US, and was no threat to the national security. There were claims that Iraq had something to do with 9/11, which was false. The big lie that got us in is a faction of our government claimed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction also known as nuclear weapons, turns out that was not true. I’m not arguing Saddam was a good guy I’m saying the only way to solve these problems is diplomacy and avoid war at all cost unless it’s the last resort or defensive. This war was a big mistake in a lot of people’s minds. The loss of 4, 486 American military personnel (Goodman), and over half a million Iraqi civilians (Al-Rubaye and National Geographic), is not a fair tradeoff for what the region is like today. This war was supposed to bring peace to the region, not ruin the region. The war also allowed ISIS to expand to what it is today. All this cost 1.7 trillion taxpayer dollars, which is completely insane for the result of the war. The United States must think about the consequence of toppling governments across the world and trying to tell them how to run their governments. The real questions are: Is the United States safer from occupying these countries, or does it give them a reason to attack us? And: Is it a good idea to impose the western way of life on the Middle Eastern
14 UN Press Release SG/SM/7360, echoing Lloyd Axworthy, ‘Forward’ in David Cortright and George A. Lopez, The Sanctions Decade: Assessing UN Strategies in the 1990s (A Project of the International Peace Academy; Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2000)
McCoubrey, Hilaire, and Nigel D. White. International Law and Armed Conflict. Dartmouth: Brookfield, VT, 1992.
In 2004, Secretary General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, explicitly declared that the United States-led war on Iraq was illegal and breached the United Nations’ charter (MacAskill & Borger, 2004). This is due to the war not having been approved or sanctioned by the United Nations Security Council, nor was it in accordance with the UN’s founding charter (MacAskill & Borger, 2004). These facts beg the question; was the Iraq war a just war? More than that, was it illegal, and should the key players who drove it forward face prosecution for war crimes if this is the case? From the perspective of the United Nations’ Secretary General in 2004, this certainly was the case. Annan, while being interviewed, added unequivocally:
Magno, A., (2001) Human Rights in Times of Conflict: Humanitarian Intervention . Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs, 2 (5). [online] Available from: [Accessed 2 March 2011]