To be successful in Iraq, and in any war for that matter, our use of force must be tied to a political objective more complete than the ouster of a regime. To date, that has not happened in Iraq. It is time it did.
In the past week the situation in Iraq has taken a dramatic turn for the worse. While we may have differed on how we went to war, Americans of all political persuasions are united in our determination to succeed. The extremists attacking our forces should know they will not succeed in dividing America, or in sapping American resolve, or in forcing the premature withdrawal of U.S. troops. Our country is committed to help the Iraqis build a stable, peaceful and pluralistic society. No matter who is elected president in
…show more content…
In recent weeks the administration -- in effect acknowledging the failure of its own efforts -- has turned to U.N. representative Lakhdar Brahimi to develop a formula for an interim Iraqi government that each of the major Iraqi factions can accept. It is vital that Brahimi accomplish this mission, but the odds are long, because tensions have been allowed to build and distrust among the various Iraqi groups runs deep. The United States can bolster Brahimi’s limited leverage by saying in advance that we will support any plan he proposes that gains the support of Iraqi leaders. Moving forward, the administration must make the United Nations a full partner responsible for developing Iraq’s transition to a new constitution and government. We also need to renew our effort to attract international support in the form of boots on the ground to create a climate of security in Iraq. We need more troops and more people who can train Iraqi troops and assist Iraqi police.
We should urge NATO to create a new out-of-area operation for Iraq under the lead of a U.S. commander. This would help us obtain more troops from major powers. The events of the past week will make foreign governments extremely reluctant to put their citizens at risk. That is why international authority for managing the remainder of the Iraqi transition must match international acceptance of responsibility for stabilizing Iraq. The United Nations, not the United States, should be the
The U.S. military made the same mistakes initially in the 2003 Iraq War. The U.S. failed to allocate the proper number of troop strength, failed to adapt to the terrain, and failed to foresee the used of improvised explosive device (IED). The U.S. also lacked control of the civilian population, and the mistakes in Abu Ghraib became the rally cry for the insurgents, which the Iraqis rose to support the insurgency. (Montanus, 2005) However, the lessons learned from the British 200 years ago, the U.S. adapted and formed a concept to win the hearts of mine of the people into their counterinsurgency operation. The U.S. allocated more troops, adapted to the terrain, and employed new method to defeat IEDs. Furthermore, they opened dialogues with the Tribes, resolved conflicts, and addressed issues in order to win their support for the war. The U.S. assisted the Iraqi’s create a democratic government, provided logistic support, training
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
There are many differences between US families and families in Mexico, but there are also many similarities between these two countries when it comes to families.
Absent compelling evidence of significant Iraqi involvement with the al Qaeda network or the events of September 11, the likely costs and risks of a commitment of American military forces to a regime-change campaign in Iraq would outweigh the benefits. A U.S. overthrow campaign would entail a large-scale military operation that the United States would probably have to undertake essentially alone; the increased risk of triggering terrorist attacks against American or allied targets; significant American casualties given the potential for intense urban combat and Iraqi use of chemical and biological agents; and the likely need for a long-term American military presence in Iraq to avoid regional destabilization. While these costs and risks are not so high as to rule out a possible overthrow policy under certain circumstances, they should be sobering to any advocate of sending U.S. troops to war to change the Iraqi regime. The central assumption behind this argument is that Saddam—unlike the religiously motivated Taliban/al Qaeda network—is more interested in
"Politically, action needs to be taken," Allen said. "They need to come together and then I think there will be greater confidence on part of the people of Iraq."
America needs to try a new strategy of war for once. We have become so worried about other countries that we have forgotten to take care of the problems we have inside of our own country. We have proven to not be effective at Fourth Generation wars. We continue to train other armies who do not do as good of a job as they should, and then we have to come in and try to fix the problem.
Justification of the War in Iraq Despite contrary belief, the Iraq War can certainly be justified. This war began in 2003 with the invasion of Iraq by U.S troops under the command of former president, George W. Bush. This invasion can be vindicated for several reasons. The greatest is that Iraq was a severe menace to its own people due to a corrupt and distorted government, spearheaded by the dictator, Saddam Hussein. Furthermore, Iraq was a substantial threat to other nations in the world, including the United States of America because of its previous possession of weapons of mass destruction and ties with terrorist groups. It would be misleading to not mention the economic gains that motivated the American government to occupy Iraq.
The final and most important reason for the United States not to wage war against Iraq is that it will cause many war crimes. Wars always involve taking the lives of innocent people, and many other injustices that can be illustrated if we look to wars fought in the past. First of all, innocent civilians will be killed. The loss of every innocent life is an injustice and a tragedy. Secondly, after the Persian Gulf War fought from 1990-1991, the troops who fought in the war and the people of Iraq developed increased incidences of cancer and birth defects to their newborn children. This was later found to be due to the radioactivity of the depleted uranium used in the weaponry to fight the war. The current war against Iraq employs the same weaponry made of the depleted uranium, and will only cause more generations of people with cancer and birth
Visual images always attract the most attention and bring awareness best. The suffrage movement was always something that we just learned every year as we were going over movements. I did not realize the severity and the extremes women went through in order to have the right to vote. My previous school teaching made it seem as though people were friendly and gentle to women because they are women. The men from the video aggressively attacked the women simply because they wanted the right to vote. Why was wanting something a reason to have your face smashed into the ground and things thrown at you. The majority always has a way of belittling others who do not reside in the majority group.
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
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.
The U.S. must intervene in South Sudan, as it is an enduring interest within our National Security Strategy to maintain “An international order advanced by U.S. leadership that promotes peace, security, and opportunity.” General Rodriguez, commander of AFRICOM, should employ both diplomatic and economic instruments of power. By doing so, the U.S. risks a potentially long-term engagement in East Africa.
The focus of this investigation is to determine if there is a correlation between emotional well-being and the rising cases of adolescent depressive disorders. This investigation will be limited to adolescents, as defined as the period of transition to adulthood, (reference) according to the World Health Organisation. The conversion from childhood to adulthood is known as the ‘tough years’ and appears to have become increasingly complex due to the social, economic, environmental and technological changes faced by today’s generation of young people.
What triggered the Iraq War that we are currently still having? During this time in history we were still in the cold war as well Cold War (1945–1991), a lot of events has happened during this time period. I am going to start with the Iran-Iraq war which started in 1980 and ended in 1988. The war began when Iraq invaded Iran, launching a simultaneous invasion by air and land into Iranian territory on 22 September 1980 following a long history of border disputes, and fears of Shia insurgency among Iraq's long-suppressed Shia majority influenced by the Iranian Revolution. (Wikipedia, Iran–Iraq War, 2011). This war had at least a million and half casualties and it severely damaged both their economies, the Iran-Iraq war conflict is often
One of the greatest challenges for the anti-Assad rebellion has been fighting a well-armed, well-supported Assad regime (Sorenson, pg. 13). The United States has provide arms and support to anti-regime fighters, but not nearly at the same pace as Russia and Iran have resupplied Assad. Also, rebels lack cohesion, as there are numerous anti-Assad factions that are attempting to overthrow the government, often times competing with each other. In order to bring the rebels together, and form a stronger rebellion against Assad, this course of action requires U.S. military presence on the ground. While I do not submit that the United States lead the attacks, we should instead embed ourselves with Syrian rebels, providing direct training and mentoring to the rebels, as well as providing support from aircraft and long-range artillery. Similar to operations in Libya, the U.S.-led air attacks can directly attack Assad himself, paving the way for a more successful rebellion. While we cannot possibly unite all of the rebel groups, we must show and provide a unified front for