World Politics

World Politics

Dr. Farlow

11/13/03

May 1st, President Bush flew into the airbase in Dallas with good news for the military and all American people. Behind his enthusiastic speech read a sign, “mission accomplished.” May 5th, President Bush announced and posted on the internet that “Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended,” and although sometime between then and today he changed that message to “Major Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended,” isn’t this still a victory? I wonder exactly what “mission” Bush was speaking of? Although the war has been technically declared finished, more soldiers die now than ever before. Maybe the excessive bombing has stopped, but why are soldiers still there six months after the supposed “Combat Operations” ended. Even if the war has ended, what missions were accomplished, how has our success been measured? Clearly the President wasn’t implying the discovery of Saddam, Bin Laden, or even the infamous weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). It also seems highly unlikely Bush would be referring to finally getting world support for our preemptive and destructive acts. Maybe the Iraqi people received electricity, running water, and the ability to live in their homes without the feeling of occupation from the American Freedom Fighters. Is the new Iraqi government now in place, and do they understand that they get to help the United States economy with huge construction and oil contracts? Obviously, democracy works everywhere, just ask Afghanistan. Their President might not have any power outside of Kabul quite yet, and terrorist groups are starting to re-group again without strong American presence there anymore, but the one billion dollars to rebuild their ENTIRE nation should do the job quite nicely. There are just too many victories, so many “missions accomplished,” or in my opinion too much rhetoric streaming from Bush’s mouth that he may actually start to justify the war to the US and maybe convince the rest of the world too. (Laughter)

In all seriousness, this paper I intended to show several facets of the War on Terror, mainly focusing on the most recent suspected country of Iraq. First, does finding the weapons of Mass Destruction matter? Second, how will that outcome affect this country’s view and the world’s outlook on our leadership and their decisions to preemptively get involved in Iraq? Third, what will be the future for the people of Iraq with a new government and American helping running the scenes and their main export? Fourth, how does their fate compare to those in Afghanistan, and the future citizens of other evil countries that too may hold WMD? With examination of these four areas of the ongoing war, I think it will become clear that our entrance into this war was premature if not wrong, our denying the help form the UN and other countries clearly asserts our selfish objectives of entering this war, and lastly without changing our leadership in the near elections, the future of the people in Afghanistan, Iraq, and any new “evil” county possibly threatening the US, will be in extreme jeopardy.

Imminent threat of nuclear attack pushed Bush into a corner where his only way out was to throw away years of progress with the United Nations and war rules, such as preemptive strike. Although many of our own leaders and almost all of the other country’s leaders urged Bush to wait longer, until the threat was undeniable and un-ignorable, he insisted that he could not wait. Bush and his accomplice Blair simply felt they had enough evidence to strike, and it would be only a matter of time before they could show the rest of the world as well. The inspectors have pretty mush been at a loss. Almost nothing has been found, and what little particles or traces of a possible weapon of mass destruction in the making was found, it was incomplete and exaggerated. Time magazine gave their verdict on WMD.

“After three months of searching, the top U.S> weapons inspector in Iraq has come back with news that all sides are using as an occasions for “I told you so.” In an interim report to Congress, David Kay said his 1,200 member team had “not yet found stocks” of illicit weapons—no large caches of poison gas or germ agents, no proof that Saddam was remotely close to reconstituting a nuclear program and no evidence of an attempt to buy uranium from Africa. In fact, the repost said an African country had offered uranium to Iraq, but Saddam apparently did not follow up. Kay even backed away from Bush’s claim that two trucks found in April and may were mobile bioweapons labs, saying that they could have been used for other purposes.”

True, it has always been assumed