Evidence Of Iraq's Weapons Of Mass Destruction example essay topic

The past few months have been filled with tension. Everyone has pretty much chosen sides in the debate. The war with Iraq has been on everyone's mind. I don't know about you, but I think that America is not ready to ship off the soldiers. America as well as the world has been battling Saddam Hussein for decades and I don't think its time to fight him again.

He poses a treat to this country and the world on many different levels. Terrorism has destroyed our economy and devastated our people. While we need an antiterrorism solution, I don't think that war is the answer. I am sure that America can find a better resolution to fix our problems in the Middle East. Another war would not only cause more turmoil and destruction. War would send over people to the enemy lines, killing off innocent people.

We can't possibly believe this will be a solution to our problem. War would put our country in an economic position even worse than it is right now. Whatever Bush decides to do we are still in economic turmoil. Before we decide to send our soldiers off to war we as a country need to be economically secure. Also, America needs to have substantial allies before shipping away the troops. Right now we don't have enough international support for a war.

We need allies to help us fight Iraq. We stand no chance on the battle field without friends. The US administration has repeatedly stated that Iraq is a "clear and present danger" to the safety and security of ordinary Americans. Yet the Iraqi leadership have never used weapons of mass destruction against the US or Europe, nor threatened to. Plans or proposals for the use of weapons of mass destruction by Iraq against these countries have never been discovered, and in their absence can only be presumed to be non-existent. Iraq would face massive punishment if its leadership ever ordered the use of weapons of mass destruction on the US or Europe.

It is difficult to imagine circumstances in which the Iraqi regime would use these weapons directly against any western country. The only conceivable exception would be if the Iraqi leaders felt they had nothing left to lose: that is, if they were convinced of their own imminent demise as a result of an invasion. Weapons of mass destruction were not used by Iraq in the 1991 Gulf War, despite having both a much more developed capacity than it holds at the present and the routing of its army. The best way to avoid prompting Iraqi leaders to use any non-conventional capacity would be to refrain from invading Iraq or attempting to assassinate or depose its rulers. In 1998, when the US ordered UN weapons inspectors to leave Iraq, it was widely accepted the Iraq's nuclear capacity had been wholly dismantled. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), charged with monitoring Iraq's nuclear facilities after the Gulf War, reported to the Security Council from October 8, 1997 that Iraq had compiled a "full, final and complete" account of its previous nuclear projects, and there was no indication of any prohibited activity.

The IAEA's fact sheet from April 25, 2002, entitled "Iraq's Nuclear Weapons Program", recorded that "There were no indications that there remains in Iraq any physical capability for the production of amounts of weapons-usable nuclear material of any practical significance". Many of the assessments of Iraq's development of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons are based largely on a hypothetical analysis of what could be done by the Iraqi regime if it was determined to produce these weapons. Using worst-case scenarios, they present Iraq's potential activities - such as importing producing anthrax spores - as an immediate threat. While such assessments may be valuable in order to understand the range of possibilities, they do not provide any evidence of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction or the Iraqi regime's intention to use them. You cannot launch a war on the basis of unconfirmed suspicions of both weapons and intentions. It would be better to take up Iraq's unconditional offer of September 16 to allow inspectors to return, and to reject the plans for an invasion to achieve "regime change".

The US and UK policy has been to provide disincentives to Iraqi compliance rather than incentives. The UK has refused to rule out its support for "regime change" even if a full weapons inspections system is in place. Before Sept. 11 there was not the present excited talk about a strike on Iraq. Why would that event change the situation? There is no evidence of any connection between Iraq and that act of terrorism.

Is it possible that the Bush administration is using the fear created by Sept. 11 to build support for a war on Iraq that otherwise has no legitimate justification? The talk of war has raised the question of American casualties, and rightly so. Are the lives of our young people to be expended in the expectation that the demise of Saddam will bring democracy to Iraq?

And what of the inevitable death of thousands of Iraqis all of them made doubly victims first of Saddam, then of Bush? Shall we add a new death toll to the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who have died since the application of sanctions? A war against Iraq has no logical connection to the tragic events of Sept. 11. Rather than diminishing terrorism, such an attack would further inflame anger against the United States and may well lead to more terrorist attacks. We have a right to wonder if the motive for war is not stopping terrorism but expanding US power and controlling Middle eastern oil.

A war against Iraq is legally impermissible, morally unpardonable, and would be a cause for shame to future generations. Also, another question comes to mind when thinking of the war with Iraq. Is President Bush after Saddam Hussein because he threatened his father? Or is it because Iraq has a bountiful supply of oil? These are just some questions to think about. In conclusion, I think that a war with Iraq is out of the question.

America and the world is not ready for a war. We don't have enough international support and money to fight Iraq. A possible war is estimated to cost two-hundred-and-sixty billion dollars. This is something you should think about considering our country is in an economical crisis..