Against War In Iraq - Essay Example

Against War in Iraq Introduction Taking terrorism to another country in order to combat it on one's own is certainly beyond prudent comprehension. USA has invaded Afghanistan and Iraq in its attempt of fighting back the 9/11 attacks of terrorism. Instead of strategizing this war on terror, USA has struck the innocent beings of Iraq harsh. In this essay I aim to argue against this war in Iraq, supporting my argument by war facts and various published reports. Body of Essay Whatever the motive Bush Administration had, it certainly does not seem to bring anybody or us any good to take war on Iraq. It has been a policy of the US in the recent years to take preemptive actions in the most bloody and deadly manners, against the nations who pose to be potential threat to the American nation. It did so to the Iraq too, creating an impression that it has weapons of mass destruction that pose a threat to the security of its region. If it were so then how come the UN officials did not find any such weapons upon its inspection prior to the US invasion in Iraq The fact of the matter is that Iraq had been dispossessed of any sort of mass destruction weapons ever since the Gulf War in 1991. And the UN officials destroyed whatever weapons and military possessions including chemical and nuclear weapons and missiles that Iraq had, back in 1998 during its inspection. It was further deprived of the financial aid that might be required for redevelopment of its military possessions for mass destruction. Iraq's military potential had grown considerably weaker ever since and was of no threat to its region, let alone America. Once the notion that Iraq is equipped with mass destruction deadly weapons was disqualified to a considerable extent, the US administration went forward to accuse Iraq for aiding the terrorist groups like AlQaeda. Since these terrorist groups were major threat to the security of the United States, Iraq was made to be justified target for preemptive actions. The administration blamed Iraq for passing on the destructive weapons to these militant groups, hence involving in terrorism. Any solid evidence and the US administration itself could not support even this accusation. Saddam Hussein could in no way be a threat to either its own region or to the United States in any such way. The obvious reason for this being that the Islamic extremists and terrorists were not in favor of Saddam's secular regime and were a hazard to his direction in the Arab world. The US administration went onward in its baseless accusations against Iraq saying that it was behind the anthrax virus spread as well. Again no evidence could be found to support such blame. Even if it were so that the charges of possessing mass destructive weapons were proved true, the question arises whether the US is right in its strategy of taking preemptive actions. The very same issues could have been resolved by talks and negotiations, by passing pacts or bringing strategic regimes within Iraq. So much bloodshed and brutality was brought to the nation of Iraq all in the name of protecting the world's super economic and military power from potential and supposed Iraqi weapons. This is all but beyond acceptable for any logical thinker. It was not Iraq that had been posing security threat to the American nation, due to its supposed alliance with the Islamic militant groups. In fact, now the Americans have far greater enemies disgusting its violent moves upon a nation that has never been proved to be a direct or indirect threat to them. George Soros opines in his new book, "Something is fundamentally wrong with President Bush's contention that he has made us safer at home by taking the war on terror abroad. There are many more people willing to sacrifice their lives to kill Americans than there were on 9/11." http://www.georgesoros.com/iraq-wargclid=CJrU0PKP_ogCFQriXgodNzjz9Q I completely agree with the opinion of George Soros, now not just other nations (Islamic ones to be precise), but also American nation itself is against such decisions of the government. The many protests by Americans against the war on Iraq prove this. The aftermath of this war isn't as assuring either. A civil war has started within Iraq and the situation has worsened. More and more people are dying everyday, and the death poll has risen ever since the outbreak of war. There are bomb blasts almost everyday, most of which are suicide attacks. Iraqi people are suffering from famine, inadequate food supplies and health facilities because the US shelling on Iraq destroyed completely the country's infrastructure. It is not just Iraqis that have been dying and suffering at hands of this bloody and baseless war. Even the American soldiers and other nation's troops who came to ally with Americans have lost their lives as well, all for a groundless cause. According to an estimate, "There have been 3,153 coalition deaths, 2,906 Americans, two Australians, 125 Britons, 13 Bulgarians, six Danes, two Dutch, two Estonians, one Fijian, one Hungarian, 32 Italians, one Kazakh, one Latvian, 18 Poles, two Romanians, five Salvadoran, four Slovaks, 11 Spaniards, two Thai and 18 Ukrainians in the war in Iraq as of December 5, 2006, according to a CNN count." http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/ And now the situation of the whole world is disturbed, in my opinion, even more so than it did when the World Trade Center was attacked. The things had started to fall back to normal, and the Americans were a nation who could then gather sympathies as well as cooperation from around the world. But the manner in which US administration has responded to those attacks, that is, by taking the war out to those nations that in no way seem to be associated with this mess, is in no way rational. Lebanon had to be a victim in a way to this war on Iraq. Here I will again quote Soros, "The United States has thoroughly destabilized the Middle East by invading Iraq. The task of the occupying forces is no longer confined to fighting a Sunni insurrection; they have to contain an incipient civil war. The country has divided along sectarian lines and each faction has established a fighting capacity. Now the situation in the Middle East is dire. Iran threatens to become a nuclear power. The low-grade civil war in Iraq threatens to broaden into a regional conflict. We are facing a clash of civilizations and/or armed sectarian conflict. And all this in a region that is responsible for the bulk of the world's oil supply." http://www.georgesoros.com/iraq-wargclid=CJrU0PKP_ogCFQriXgodNzjz9Q Conclusion In this short argumentative essay, I have attempted to convince the reader(s) that the war in Iraq is all a big mistake. It is going to earn nobody any good. Except maybe huge reserves of oil to America, which to me seems the only motive behind its invasion in Iraq, which is the world's greatest oil producing country. Such attempts should be at all costs avoided, as these do not seem reasonable at the end of the administration of world's super economic and military power. This war is costing the US economy greatly as well. Works Cited CNN.com Special Reports http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/ Accessed December 6, 2006. Elizabeth Wishnick, 2004. "Strategic Consequences of the Iraq War: U.S. Security Interests in Central Asia Reassessed." Strategic Studies Institute. Carlisle Barracks, PA. Samaa Abu-Sharar, 2003. "Lebanon Paying a Price for the U.S. War on Iraq." Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. Volume: 22. Issue: 4. Page Number: 40+. The War In Iraq http://www.georgesoros.com/iraq-wargclid=CJrU0PKP_ogCFQriXgodNzjz9Q Accessed December 6, 2006. "WAR ON IRAQ: Bush Asks Congress for Pounds 48bn Funding." Western Mail. Publication Date: March 26, 2003. Page Number: 4. Read More