Saddam Hussein And Iraq example essay topic

Please Read Below: ter " ror. ist, n., adj. one who commits acts of terrorism. ter " ror. ism, n. use of violence and threats to obtain political demands. Thank You. For most of us, a War on Iraq is something we can relate to. You may have relatives in the military; you may be planning to fight yourself.

No matter how you feel close to this issue, the War is going to hit us all in someway. Hell, it's even going to affect the way you fill your car up with gas. A lot of people are questioning a War on Iraq. They " re questioning George W. Bush's motives, or the entire morality of a War.

Whatever. I personally feel that if you don't support our government's decision to possibly go to War with Iraq, then you should be shipped there yourself, just so you can see why we need to go. It's not for Oil; it's not for a freaking "American Empire". It's for the People of Iraq, and their future. Please, call me a conservative. We should definitely go to War with Iraq.

Now. Saddam Hussein is a terrorist. Saddam Hussein has "Weapons of Mass Destruction". (That is the most over used term in the English language. Please, forgive me for being a user of that term.) Removing Saddam Hussein from power will make the Middle East more stable... duh. I had you read the above definitions of terrorism.

If you didn't, I suggest you read them now; otherwise this paragraph may make no sense to you. Proceeding, and during the last election in Iraq, Saddam Hussein used violence to obtain another term as "president" of Iraq. Iraqi refuges have told us how forced confessions are obtained- by torturing children while their parents are forced to watch. They tell us that in Iraq's torture chambers methods like using electrical shock, burning with scorching irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electrical drills, cutting out tongues, and rape are used. If the definitions are correct, (and why wouldn't they be... Webster is never wrong) I think we can agree that Saddam Hussein IS a terrorist.

Because Saddam Hussein is a terrorist, shouldn't he be a target in the War on Terror? Some people don't think so; or they think that we shouldn't go after Saddam Hussein and Iraq until we take care of Osama Bin Laden. Whatever. That's like saying that just because your batch of cookies is 5 minutes from being done baking, that you can't start preparing dough for another batch (you have to cook 12 dozen for your Cookie Club's" annual party; you BETTER start that next batch). Get over it people, let's go get Saddam. Whether we have proof or not, Iraq has "Weapons of Mass Destruction".

Let's skip back a few pages in our History Books to 1991: The U.N. passed resolution 687. The Resolution stated that Iraq was to declare its weapons programs, and was to destroy all of the existing weapons in its arsenal. Later that year, Iraq came out with a Final Declaration stating that: 1.) They had no chemical or biological weapons. 2.) They had no biological or chemical weapons programs- for either defensive or offensive purposes.

Then in 1993, they came out with yet another Final Declaration stating: 1.) Since 1991, Iraq had had a chemical and biological weapons program for defensive purposes. Then in 1994, Iraq came out with a third Final Declaration stating that: 1.) Since 1991, Iraq had had a chemical and biological weapons program for offensive purposes. (If these "Final Declarations" are really "Final", then why are there three of them?) It doesn't take the brain of a Rocket Scientist to figure out that Iraq lied to us. Remember those weapons that they were supposed to destroy? These weapons included Anthrax, Botulinum Toxin, and Sarin, Mustard, and VX nerve agents. The U.N. recently passed resolution 1441, stating that Iraq must show proof that these weapons are destroyed.

Iraq has stated that they have destroyed these weapons. Yet when asked to show proof that these weapons were destroyed, they can't. One of the most organized regimes in history has not one document saying that these weapons are gone! They are lying to us. And these lies can hurt the American people and their allies. Now, let's go back to the mid 1930's.

Here's the scene: Mr. Adolph Hitler is invading a bunch of countries. Winston Churchill, and other World Leaders told him he couldn't take anymore. Hitler did. And in trying to prevent war, these Leaders kept allowing him to take more. Then finally, they threatened force. Even with this threat though, all Hitler could think about was, "Hello Poland!

I hope you don't mind; I'm overthrowing your government. And oh yeah... your Jews... they " re all going to DIE!" . Saddam Hussein is like Hitler. We " ve threatened force, we " ve imposed sanctions, but none of this has kept Saddam from his conquest of the Middle East.

If the U.N. doesn't follow through, we " ll find that soon, Saddam will be using these weapons to gain an empire. People don't want to go to War right now mainly because the U.N. isn't supporting military action. Excuse me if I'm wrong, but this country has always prided itself on being a "go it alone" country since its foundry, and I am not going to let a bunch of ignorant morons change that. I say, who cares if the U.N. isn't with us? The U.N. sucks. At first the United Nations was a good idea; it was a coalition of countries that were "All for one, one for all".

The U.N. made fair and justly resolutions pertaining to conflicts all around the world. But now, it's like The Three Musketeers on crack (Sorry, Mr. Dumas); it's changed into "Some for one, some of the time". The U.N. is damaged, and appears less strong when members don't cooperate and agree with each other. Perhaps if the U.N. were united, Iraq would be less apt to lie to them.

France et cetera want peace, and if it were so easy to have an immediate peaceful disarmament, we would take it; we have no intention of taking military action if there is a chance for peace. However, we have given Iraq the chance to disarm 18 times, we have waited 12 years; and at some point, giving Iraq more time isn't worth it anymore. France and Russia BOTH want the multi-billions that Iraq owes them, but won't get off their better parts and do anything about it. Psh. I'm boycotting French Fries... and berets (And if I could think of something Russian to boycott, I would boycott that too. ).

I hope they don't expect to be invited to our victory party and get their money. Removing Saddam Hussein from power would make the Middle East more stable. Iraq has invaded Kuwait; Iraq has gone to war with Iran. Iraq is like the bully who makes your high school career impossible. And it's not Iraq really; it's Saddam Hussein. I know I've already made this comparison, but Saddam Hussein is like Hitler.

He's hungry for an empire. Imagine if he resumes his ambitions of taking over the Middle East; he could easily use his "Weapons of Mass Destruction" to control a huge portion of the World's population. The part of the Worlds' population, mind you, that is easily brainwashed into thinking that Christians and all Americans are the devil, and are willing to die for their religion and country. Which makes an attack on the West completely possible. Our Intelligence already has told us that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists from counties throughout the Middle East, and can give them weapons or assist them in making their own. Some people think that if we go to War with Iraq, the economy will get worse than it is now.

If History Class has taught me one thing, it's that war makes the economy stronger. What got us out of the depression? World War II. What got us out of recession in the eighties? The Gulf War.

Okay so, what gets us out of recession in the early 21st century? War with Iraq Version 2.0. I'm not trying to make it sound like we would go to war just to get out of recession, but it would definitely be a perk. The cost of not going to war is much higher. Let's say Iraq funds a Terrorist Attack that happens on U.S. Soil. It's been estimated that a biological attack on the U.S. could cost us more than 750 billion Dollars.

Cleaning up a measly 2 ounces of Anthrax out of a Senate office costs the taxpayers 42 million Dollars. An attack on the U.S. shipping industry could cost ONE TRILLION DOLLARS! One trillion Dollars is a whole lot more than the estimated 132 billion that the War would cost (that includes reconstruction, kiss mine Tom Dash cle). Do we really want this to happen? I'm sure you " ll enjoy watching the value of your 401 k drop when it does. A lot of Left-Minded individuals keep saying that we " re going to War for Oil.

I've heard it a million times, and it makes me really mad. Even if we got control of Iraqi Oil, the cost of War would completely outweigh the benefits of the Oil. Iraq only produces 2.5 million barrels of oil a day. By the time we could get Iraq to pump its potential maximum output of 6 million barrels a day, George W. Bush will be out of office. Anyways Bush has stated that the resources of Iraq would be left for its people. And what's more, any profit of the Oil would still be funneled through the U.N.'s Oil-For-Food Program.

Every Liberal's last defense is "Oh... we " re the aggressor". Psh. One thing you must remember is that this isn't a new war, but rather a continuation of the old one. We still have troops over there patrolling No-Fly Zones. So in some ways, The Gulf War never ended. Iraq actually thinks it won, whatever.

It makes me sick that people think we " re the aggressor when innocent civilians are being tortured and killed by the real one. I'm sure as you " re reading this, Iraq's government is torturing some innocent children, or testing some chemical or biological weapons out on domesticated animals. I saw these tapes on Fox News Network, where you see Iraqi Scientists injecting Botulinum Toxin into Beagles. You see the Beagle struggle, and then it collapses. Could you imagine that happening to the American People?

I can't even begin to fathom how horrible that day would be. For 12 years Iraq has defied us. Now it is our chance to insure the Iraqi People and our futures are safe. I don't want my life cut short by a man named Saddam who's half way around the world.

Saddam Hussein is a Terrorist- he is a Terrorist who is a threat to the safety of the World. Iraq needs a new government, one that is Democratic and allows for the equal opportunity of everyone in the Country. Getting rid of Saddam Hussein's evil regime isn't going to stop all of the World's Terror, but it's going to help, and I think that America should be the country to do it. I have no doubt that the might of our military will lead us to victory- a victory that the entire World will be able to celebrate, knowing that one more "Bad Guy" has been brought to justice..