The occupation is counterproductive in the fight against radical Islamic terrorists and actually increases support for Osama bin Laden in Muslim communities not previously disposed to support his radical interpretation of Islam. Given the failure to find weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq, and the similar failure to establish a linkage between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, the military occupation of Iraq can be made to look like the second phase of a U.S. war of conquest by individuals such as bin Laden who hunger for a civilizational clash between Muslims and non-Muslims.
II. Historical Background to the Conflict
A. Iran-Iraq War
Iran-Iraq War was an armed conflict that began when
Even though there had been border agreement, relations between
Secondly, it was both countries that were politically unstable. When either
B. Persian Gulf War
This was the conflict that begun in August 1990, when Iraqi forces invaded and occupied
Causes of Persian Gulf War
III. Bush's Policy Towards the War
In his address, Mr. Bush sought to put the war in
It would be hard for Americans to see the war in
However, according to Michael O'Hanlon, a defense analyst at the Brookings Institution, the speech was "personally disappointing" (as cited in The Washington Times 2005 October 7).
According to Buckler Jr. (2006), the main reason behind all woes is
The Bush doctrine, however, has met with significant criticism. The arguments against the doctrine expressed both before and since the invasion of
"It cannot be in either the American national interest or the world's interest to develop principles that grant every nation an unfettered right of preemption against its own definition of threats to its security" says Henry Kissinger, former U.S. Secretary of State.
Two of the most prominent critics of the Bush doctrine are former national security advisors Brent Scowcroft, who served under President George H. W. Bush, and Zbigniew Brzezinski*, who served under President Jimmy Carter. An open policy of preemptive war, Scowcroft told the media, "tends to leave the door open to others who want to claim the same right. By making it public, we also tend to add to the world's perception that we are arrogant and unilateral." Brzezinski echoed a similar theme, saying, "Our doctrine of preemption may encourage others to preempt their neighbors, thereby legitimating increasingly indiscriminate use of power."
Finally, as some so-called realist critics of the Bush doctrine argue, history demonstrates that nations tend to seek a balance of power. By asserting that it intends to prevent other countries from "surpassing, or equaling, the power of the
Both opponents and proponents of the Bush doctrine, however, are likely to agree on one thing. It is the most radical change in
IV. For and Against the War
Supporters of the war have seen Saddam as the cancer of the world and needs to be eradicated. Not only is he a threat to the
Even the veteran of
Anti-war supporters claimed on the morals and ethics. They remarked the poor decision-making of the Bush administration that would have save lives and less damage to the
As with so many public policy issues, this means coming to grips with the problem of sunk costs. Some observers might argue that the
The same men and women who previously predicted that the war would pay for itself, and that postwar
A decision by the Bush administration to quickly hand over full political power to the new government of Iraq, and to follow on that decision by removing all U.S. military personnel from the country, will minimize the enormous costs and risks associated with a military occupation and could eventually set the stage for a stable and sustainable relationship between Iraq and the United States.
Buckley Jr., W. (2006 February 24). It Didn't Work. Universal Press Syndicate.
Preble, C. (2004). Why the