Sides The Hawks And The Doves example essay topic

Hawk and Dove Views of the Iraq War On March 18, 2003 the United States invaded Iraq. (The Washington Post) The War with Iraq is a very divisive issue around the world. Turn on any news show and you will see a daily debate on the pros and cons of going to war. Because of the situations that have occurred between the United States and Iraq, very different views and perceptions have developed. Much debate on the justification of the United States for being in Iraq, let alone overthrowing its "government", has been presented from both sides - the Hawks and the Doves. My perception sees it like this.

There are basically two different views of this war, one view being that of a Hawk and the other view being that of a Dove. The ideology of the Hawk symbolizing strength, sternness, and the notion of seeing what it wants and taking it and the Dove which normally symbolizes peach, love, and harmony, to me seems to be a perfect fit for icons of these two views. Hawks idealistically are mostly republican / conservative in the political scheme of things. The United States and the world had a duty to disarm a rogue nation like Iraq. Saddam Hussein was a tyrant that had demonstrated a complete disregard for human life and needed to be brought to justice.

The people of Iraq are an oppressed people, and the world has a duty to help these people. The oil reserves of the region are necessary to the world's economy. The WORLD not just the United States. An element like Saddam and his regime threatens the oil reserves of the entire region. The practice of appeasement only fosters even bigger tyrants. Saddam had continuously reneged on promises made to disarm any weapons and follow UN resolutions made.

The removal of Saddam Hussein and his regime would uphold previous UN resolutions and give the body some credibility. By removing Saddam from power, the world of the future is safer from terrorist attacks. Rush Limbaugh is a very famous journalist and radio personality. He is noted for his Republican / conservative, somewhat brass ways of bringing to light topics with such Debatable justifications. Limbaugh denounces those who are urging restraint against force on Baghdad.

'Everybody and their uncle is begging us not to go into Iraq - the Europeans, the West Germans, the Saudis,' Limbaugh said. 'While everybody wants regime change, they don't have the guts to do it. So if it's gonna happen, we " re gonna have to be the ones to do it. ' Limbaugh cited. President Reagan's successful use of force against suspected terror sponsor Mo ammar Gadhafi by attacking sites in and around Tripoli in 1986. 'Gadhafi has not been the same since his tent was bombed, and that's the episode if you recall where our friends the French would not let our fighter planes fly over France on the way to Libya.

' (World Net Daily). This statement just reinforces the fact that appeasement only fosters bigger tyrants. Limbaugh spends much of his programs discussing the need for deterrence, explaining the world is governed by the aggressive use of force, and that the U.S. is a prime target because of its role as lone superpower. 'When your enemy thinks and knows you " ve got something and you " ll use it, it deters them.

It's when you don't build, it's when you don't keep pace, it's when you just try to do this with words and treaties and all this weak-kneed, limp-wrist ed stuff that you subject yourself to attack. (World Net Daily) The Dove's point of view of this war urges avoidance of conflict through treaties, talks, summits and conferences. Dove's believe that a pre-emotive strike lacks moral authority and violates previous U.S. policy. This war, and any other for that matter, will create civilian causalities which is something every country, not matter what their position in the cast system of the world may be, wants to expose their own people to. The United States Army's troops are being killed daily and the question to them is "Why would we want to have our troops being killed so frivolously?" The Dove's stance is that the UN inspectors might be able to resolve the issue of de-arming. Dove's feel that the U.S. and its allies will be responsible for rebuilding a new nation.

The monies that it will take to take on such a task are astronomical. They say that there is little proof of a connection to Al-Queda that is the group that has taken on the responsibility for the 9-11 attacks on the United States. A world consensus does not exist for war thus the United States should not take it upon themselves to make such radical decisions regarding human life, not to mention the allied relationships the U.S. has with other countries would be damaged. Former Vermont Governor Howard Dean, who was running for the Democratic Party's Presidential Candidate this past year, is a noted Dove regarding the issue of the war in Iraq. Dean has said, "Voters face a crucial moment in history with two distinct approaches to choose from. They must choose between a go-it-alone approach to every problem and a truly global alliance to defeat terror and peace.

They must choose between today's new radical unilateralism and a renewal of respect for multilateral organizations and efforts. The capture of Saddam has not made America safer,' Dean said in a speech to the nonpartisan Pacific Council of International Policy. 'The difficulties and tragedies we have faced in Iraq show the administration launched the war in the wrong way, at the wrong time, with inadequate planning, insufficient help and at extraordinary costs so far of $166 billion. ' (The Washington Post) Although, there does seem to be one common denominator between these very different points of view and that is neither side of this issue has EVER stated that they wanted or strive d for the goal of going to war. This is called the "human factor". No matter which side of the fence you are on here neither side still believes in the morals of a nation and its people, know the differences between right and wrong and have a love for human life.

The Hawk's believe enough is enough and that the U.S. must stand up and end this madness of putting our country in harms way. The Dove's believe this to but believe there is a better way of obtaining this goal and that is by peaceful talks and compromises coinciding with mutual agreement of the entire world. Whether a person is a Hawkish or Dovish, in the end it probably comes down to their values, their knowledge of the issues, their social upbringings, their politics, and maybe their religion or lack thereof.

Bibliography

Balz, Dan and Jim Vande Hie. Dean Stands By His Objections to Iraq War. The Washington Post. 16 Dec 2003.
Kovacs, Joe. Rush Limbaugh: Blast Iraq on 9-11. World Net Daily. Aug 2002.