Bush's Justifications And Mine For The War example essay topic

The United States of America, the world's only superpower, and Iraq, 7000 miles away, half the size of Texas, with forces significantly weaker. Yes Iraq most likely possesses some sort of weapons of mass destruction but is war really necessary? For a man who claims that war is a last option, Mr. Bush is quite persistent in his efforts, claiming that his goal is to disarm the enemy and restore peace and safety to his country and the world. Dear Ms. Brom ely and fellow classmates, in the next few minutes, I will explore Mr. Bush's justifications and mine for the war which he virtually declared in his State of the Union address not long ago.

I quote an unknown editorial, "Those expletive deleted hippies should step to the side and let those of us with the stomach for the fight rectify the issue". These ignorant opinions are wide spread mainly in the USA and why? Because Bush is running a campaign of propaganda and brainwashing his own citizens. He is not publicly announcing a proposition to drop thousands of tons of explosives on populated areas, smashing countless numbers of helpless people to pieces in the process, thousands more to be crippled and blinded, thousands more to made homeless and poisoned by depleted uranium, but rather he is insisting that he is "getting Saddam".

Of course the American administration is most likely right in inferring that Mr. Hussein is in possession of chemical warfare but to wage a war is beyond inappropriate, it is illegal under UN standards. During the Cuban missile crisis, nuclear weapons were 90 miles off US shores and pointed directly at them but a war free solution was negotiated. Bush's second justification for this war can be summed up in a single word, terrorism. The American people suffered a horrendous tragedy on September 11th which modified their views on war. War, when on terrorism was then immediately acceptable, no questions asked. I believe Mr. Bush used this event as a "Get out of mindless war free card", when he broke Afghan rules in search of terrorists.

Now, he is attempting to use the same card, but what he doesn't realize is that this card has expired. The public will no longer accept mindless war but maybe, maybe the Bush administration has an ulterior motive in the destruction of Saddam's empire. This leads to my next topic, why Bush is actually going to war. I will not go to the extreme and say that this war is a corporate scheme, and a stunt in order for Bush to evade his actual responsibilities such as pressing domestic issues and the dwindling environment.

But it does certainly take heat off of his administration in regards to corporate scandals and the weakening economy. Also, Bush needs, like any political power, a justification for his existence, a reason to continue his term in office. Since September 11th, Bush has done little of value. He has run out of caves to bomb in Afghanistan therefore his attention is now turned to Iraq, his latest craze.

Recently, North Korea admittedly announced that they have nuclear weaponry, yet war is not in the forecast according to Bush. It is now time to reconsider the true meaning of this war, and the answer is obvious, beyond Bush's existence. What does Iraq have second in the world only after Saudi Arabia? Oil.

The plan is to tap Iraq's oil fields. And I quote a Buddhist article, "In all the recent wars fought by the Americans, the control of valuable energy resources has played a part. In Kosovo it was the huge lignite coal mining complex at Tre paca. In Afghanistan it was the route for a natural gas pipeline from the Caspian Sea. In Iraq, obviously, it is the oil". Please ladies and gentlemen, blood for oil is not an equal trade off.

Now we can clearly see that the American Administration believes that they can save the world and rid themselves of terrorism by pointing a finger and a gun. But, and I quote Dr Richard Perle "if evidence from one witness on Saddam Hussein's weapons program will be enough to trigger a fresh military onslaught", then Mr. Bush most definitely possesses an ulterior agenda. Either way, a war, be it for peace or oil, is beyond unacceptable. If Bush was simply "getting Saddam", which he is not, then the two of them could engage in a boxing match, rather then an aerial bombardment on which the receiving ends of the bombs will not be Saddam but the men, women and children of Iraq. Not only would this prove disastrous for the current situation, but it will set a president and give other countries justification for similar actions, such as China and Taiwan, or India and Pakistan. Once a decision is made, alia i acta est, the die is cast.

So I plead with you now no more blood for oil and I quote the words of Punnadhammo Bhikkhu, a Buddhist monk, "You can bomb the world into pieces, but you can't bomb it into peace.".