Possibility Of War With Iraq example essay topic

Fear, power and control are the three forces that have a tremendous influence on social, political and business life in America. Although there are a lot of examples to be found, one of the current examples is the possibility of war with Iraq. Its influence on the aforementioned areas of American life are profound and various, and both three elements are present. Fear American people fear the consequences of war on Iraq, since the terrorist acts of September 11 are still in everyones memory. Power and control are evident in a sense that most of the population of the US do not want the war to start, nevertheless, it is a possible option because of the power and control the government possesses.

The war on Iraq definitely fails the just war test, but despite all the objections, it might easily be fought in the nearest future. Even the possibility of such a war has great influenced on social, political and business life of America, and the fact that the war is not just and most of the people oppose it shows that power and control are the decisive elements of the three mentioned above. The war with Iraq should be the last resort. The USA should not use force during the weapon inspections unless Iraq is not willing to participate. War is unnecessary unless Iraq is not willing to play by the rules.

A basic question is raised: Can we justify war against Iraq? Certain conditions, according to Locke, must be met for a war to be "justifiable". The conflict must: 1) Have a just cause such as self-defense or restoring rights. 2) Be waged by a lawful authority. 3) Be formally declared. 4) Be fought to restore peace.

5) Be a last resort. 6) Have a reasonable expectation of success. 7) Be proportional in means and ends; it shouldn't make matters worse. There are arguments that everyone would be better off if Saddam Hussein was ushered out of Baghdad because of the terrible things he has done. He has invaded Iran and Kuwait, lobbed missiles into Israel, and gassed and murdered dissenters among his people.

He continues to seek weapons of mass destruction. There is insufficient justification for war. There's no evidence that Iraq was involved in the Sept. 11 attacks or that it has nuclear weapons. If there was, the Bush administration certainly would have presented it to make its case to the nation.

A lot of people believe that America has a right to wage war against Iraq, they claim that the US is one of the worlds superpowers and can decide for itself what to do in almost any situation. Locke, however, would certainly oppose such a statement: The title of the offender, and the number of his followers, make no difference in the offence, unless it is to aggravate it. The only difference is, great robbers punish little ones, to keep them in their obedience; but the great ones are rewarded with laurels and triumphs, because they are too big for the weak hands of justice in this world, and have the power in their own possession, which should punish offenders. (Begley, p. 86) If war was to occur then thousands would be killed, including thousands of Americans. Iraq's civilian population, who suffer from Hussein's policies, would be demolished. Also, if Hussein thinks he will be attacked no matter what he does, war is made even more likely.

He will have no reason not to use his weapons, including chemical and biological arms, on his neighbors or U.S. targets. A U. S invasion force would likely go without our traditional allies. Such unjust action would undermine international cooperation in anti-terror activities, particularly among Arab states. It would further threaten the Gulf region, fueling anti-American hatred, igniting attacks on the United States, and throwing fuel on the fire that is consuming Israel and Palestine. One of the primary reasons why US want to wage war is to get Saddam out of the country.

However, there is no guarantee that a person that comes to power instead of him would be any different, unless US would put their own person in charge. That, Locke states, is not possible: Over those then that joined with him in the war, and over those of the subdued country that opposed him not, and the posterity even of those that did, the conqueror, even in a just war, hath, by his conquest, no right of dominion: they are free from any subjection to him, and if their former government be dissolved, they are at liberty to begin and erect another to themselves. (Begley, p. 101) The main reason why I think that war is a bad option, is that as of lately, there is a complete lack of allies willing to support such a war. Especially in Arab states surrounding Iraq, most notably Saudi Arabia.

If they do not allow attacks against Iraq to originate from bases within their countries, this seriously handicaps a war with Iraq. Another one of the reasons I am against a war with Iraq is that it would require heavy military commitment. And all those men materiel and SMART bombs are terribly expensive, and the costs would run into the billions of dollars a year. And if a possible war with Iraq extends itself into a long occupation war like some experts suggest, I think it could really hurt the U.S. economy, and cause the American people to lose heart in finishing up what was begun. I think that by judging Saddam Hussein actions that he has previously taken against the U.N. weapons inspectors, and his defiance towards U.N. security resolutions, that he is trying to hide something, and is most likely trying to acquire nuclear, or biological weapons.

If I remember correctly, he would limit access to facilities that inspectors wanted to visit, and would generally just harass them. I think one would have to be foolhardy to believe Saddam when he claims that he has not, and is not trying to develop weapons of mass destruction. However as of yet, I believe that a complete return of the weapons inspectors, and tough follow up by the U.N. is all that is required to stop any future attacks that Saddam might be planning. Yet these inspections need to be thorough, and if Iraq refuses to disarm, I believe that war would be an acceptable solution, and should be supported by the U.N. Security Council.