Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The United States invasion of Iraq
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The United States invasion of Iraq
In 2003 the United States and Britain believed that Saddam had WMDs
The United States and Britain invaded Iraq without the United Nations support
The United States in 2003 invaded Iraq and captured Saddam
Many Iraqi Civilians were content for the end of Saddam's regime but were unhappy about foreign occupation
The main reason why the US invaded Iraq in 2003 was because the bush administration had said that Iraq had Weapons of mass destruction(WMDs)
WMD is defined as a chemical, biological or radioactive weapon which can cause death of millions of individuals and destruction
Saddam Hussein would use the WMDs to threaten the United States
Iraq had direct contact with Al Qaeda- A terrorist organization responsible for 9/11 attacks
2003 Us
invaded Iraq and imposed their ideologies because they feared Weapons of mass destructions(WMDs) because Saddam had previously used it on his people and attacked the Kurds in the North killing over 20,000 with chemicals earlier in late mid 80’s. Therefore, the United states feared for their safety for their country and in order, to protect and maintain their safety they sent American troops into Iraq. Under Saddam Hussein as a dictator, he did not believe in the concept of rule of law. It was applied very little to being non-existent under his rule. Thus, the United States believed that it was their duty to make sure the chemical weapons would not be released. Moreover, Saddam gave his citizens limited amount of individual rights and freedom and when the US invaded Iraq they strived to impose their liberalism unto the civilians of Iraq and show them a liberal democracy and the rights exercised under it. In addition, United states strived to impose a democratic government and tried to aid them by recovering their political stability. Liberalism provide Iraq with no-fly zones along with the risk of individuals shooting down on the civilians. Furthermore, the Kurds up North were not in danger of the threat of the chemical warfare and gained more political power. In 89 Saddam invaded and took over Kuwait which was the first Persian Gulf War. It was the biggest coalition to occur in history between more than 20 countries. Therefore, Saddam went to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and got pushed into the North and that's where his stopped. Iraq had pushed him out of Kuwait. Many Individuals from his race supported him. For example, he was a Sunni so as long you were a Sunni you were treated well as opposed to the Shias and Kurds. His goal was to protect the Sunnis and strived to accomplish his ideologies through force and torture. However, the biggest challenge Us faced was when they went into Iraq 1) they did not expect the Iraqi military to give up as quickly as they did 2) They were not prepared with the necessary things like generators and things to get the infrastructure back up again. If they did, Iraq today would be a different place. When Saddam Hussein fell, it had opened up a power vacuum for other groups to come in and as well as rather than staging an election right away, The Kurds supported an Iraqi ruler but because he was an Iraqi who did not live in Iraq for a long time under the rule, a lot of the individuals were upset with the current Islamic current government. Moreover, it was Vital for the United States to invaded Iraq and prevent the weapons of mass destruction from being released and being used. Saddam Hussein fell down his regime and was no longer a dictator and kill the citizens of Iraq just because they did not comply with his ideologies.
Saddam Hussein’s main purpose of sending troops to take over Kuwait was to take control of their oil fields, which Hussein believed would be an easy task; however, he failed to understand that the United States and United Nations were keeping a very close watch on the Iraqi’s actions. Hussein also had other motives, such as freeing himself from the debt he was drowning in from the Iran-Iraq War just two years earlier. He set the pretense for war with Kuwait by defining their refusal to give land to Iraq as an act of military belligerence. President Bush ordered the United States to respond just five days after Iraq had invaded Kuwait. If the United States had not taken action, Hussein would have possibly continued to invade other oil producing countries and take control of the United States main sources of oil as well as threaten a number of innocent people’s lives.
The war in Iraq was declared in March 2003 for many reasons. Some of the reasons are to free Iraq, the oil, and because Saddam Hussein did not allow weapons inspectors search for nuclear weapons. The US wanted to take over Iraq and free its people from the torture they had been enduring for so long. Saddam Hussein had developed weapons of mass destruction that posed a long-term threat to America. He denied weapons inspectors access to search for nuclear war weapons and this served as a threat to other countries. The aim had been the destruction of the Iraqi society enabling the US and Britain to gain control of Iraq's huge oil reserves.
The two theories I have decided to merge are Agnew’s General Strain Theory and Hirschi’s Social Bond Theory. I picked General Strain Theory because it does a good job at discussing some of the things that can trigger the release of a person’s negative emotions which in turn may lead to deviant behavior. I also decided to write about Social Bond Theory because it describes some of the factors that keep people from committing crime. Both of the theories have strengths and weaknesses individually, but when merged they help fill in each other’s gaps. (Agnew, 2011; Hirschi, 2011) +1 (888) 295-7904
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.
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."
Woods, Kevin M., Stout Mark E. 2010. “Saddam’s Perceptions and Misperceptions: The Case of ‘Desert Storm’.” The Journal of Strategic Studies (February): 5-41.
The reasons for going to war with Iraq were just and reasonable. Terrorists from Iraq attacked national monuments and important US buildings killing many innocent people. It turn, the bush administration put forth a statement to rid the middle east of their WMDs and to impose a “power house” of sorts to keep terrorism out of America. The goal was always to find WMDs in the possession of the Iraq Terrorists and to get out. Bush even said himself that we would be at war as long as it took and not a day longer. Yet one day it was announced that we had found these WMDs we were looking for...
Iraq for the past several years has violated numerous U.N. resolutions that call for destruction of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and allowance of weapons inspectors to monitor the disposal of such weapons. Ever since the end of the Gulf War, Iraq has disregarded these policies by removing weapons inspectors, which in turn has allowed Iraq to further research weapons of mass destruction. In 1998 the U.S. launched Operation Desert Fox with the objective of allowing weapons inspectors back into the country. After the operation succeeded and inspectors were allowed back in, all seemed well and little attention was paid to Iraq. Since political powers did not deem it worthy to check on Iraq and put their main focus on Wall Street, Iraq renewed their weapons program and everyone just did not pay attention.
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)
This had to be frustrating to the Iraqi people, they wanted to rule themselves but the US kept micromanaging everything that Iraq was doing.
...most distressed by outcome of a war, could exercise only inadequate control on the issue of armed action against Iraq. Most of the regional actors discarded the U.S. policy towards Iraq with varying intensity as they feared insecurity after Iraq’s disintegration (Reuters, 2003) whereas; Jordan decided not to endanger its rewarding ties with Washington. Another key actor at this level is the Baathi party in Iraq which was based on tribal division, domestic oppression and economic enticement. Under Baathi regime military, bureaucracy and security services was divided into several competing institutions which reinforced Hussein’s dictatorship in Iraq. In the post war Iraq, the USA in collaboration with the Iraq National Congress and the Supreme Council of Islamic Revolution started to make Iraq a democracy that is similar to the American political culture and values.
George W. Bush itself claimed that Iraq had weapons that can lead to a mass destruction, but that was just the strategy that his administration used to sell the war to the citizens. After, that was proved to be a total lie, Iraq did not have those weapons that were supposedly going to be used against the United States, many times and different people of Bush repeated that. One instance of that is when in the editorial board says “January 9, 2003—White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said, “We know for a fact that there are weapons there.” (Editorial Board 1). The White House Spokesmen was not the only one who declared that Iraq have weapons, there were others that even said that there were proves that is was true, what the leaders did was to
11, 12) ?Conflicted Feelings About the Capture of Saddam? (2003). Online at: <http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1223-08.htm>, consulted on March 30th, 2004.
After World War II, the Hague convention was signed. This made it illegal to use weapons of mass destruction. The Geneva Convention, another official document, was signed in London, Moscow, and Washington on April 10, 1972. This particular Convention prohibited the use and production of chemical and biological weapons. While this particular document makes it illegal, most countries are still accused of making such weapons. Everyone was fearful that the Japanese and Germans were developing such weapons (Ali).
A weapon, according to Oxford Dictionary, is defined as “a thing designed or used for inflicting bodily harm or physical damage”. Due to the fact that humans have always fought and killed each other, it is hard to determine an exact time in which weapons were first used, but according to ancient cave paintings dating back from 10,000 to 5,000 BC weapons such as bows were used. Over centuries weapons steadily advance till the 16th century when guns were invented. In the beginning of the 19th century a man by the name of Sir William Congreve engineered the first rocket used in warfare. The rocket was not a very good one, it lacked accuracy, but because of a need to have the best and most powerful weapon, improvements and other designs were created which lead to the first super weapons being built. What exactly is a super weapon? A Super weapon is a “very powerful weapon compared to others in its era.” Although many countries have their own different types of super weapons, it has been very rare that a super weapon has been used in history. One of the most well-known uses of a super weapon would be the nuclear bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II. Super weapons today are known as weapons of mass destruction. Today any involvement with super weapons is closely monitored. Any country that operates, research, or funds super weapons is observed. The ethical issue involving engineering weapons is “when is it too much?” Weapons have evolved from being just an item for protection, to now having the capacity of annihilating an entire country. Many argue that having a single weapon that could eliminate an entire country is extreme, because the weapon not only eliminates the enemy but also many innocent civili...