President George W. Bush, It has come to my attention that the media has been cluttered with seemingly endless coverage of your administration’s idea to enter into a war with Iraq, from the images of Saddam Hussein as a tyrannical dictator to the stories of angered citizens burning American flags and protesting, happy with Hussein’s reign over the country. With this confusing mixture of propaganda, it is increasingly difficult to determine whether or not you and your administration’s idea to invade Iraq was just. Considering a variety of different analytical views and coverage of the time before the invasion, I can conclude that America was unjust in its decision to enter into the war in Iraq. By examining the reasons for going to war, I
George W. Bush, immediately upon waging a successful military campaign against Afghanistan, the primary harbor and sponsor of the September 11 terrorist attacks against the United States, decided that Saddam Hussein must be removed from his position of power in Iraq. George W. Bush, fresh of a “high” resulting from a combination of the “rally-around-the-flag effect” and the swift domination of Afghanistan, saw the opportunity to inject his worldview into U.S. foreign policy. Bush encompassed a worldview similar to his father’s (but amplified, in a sense), and saw the United States as a “heroic liberator,” compelled by God to deliver peace and democracy to evil, misguided nations through force if necessary. (Hybel 127) With such an unwavering worldview guiding the way, decision-making on whether or not to invade Iraq was predicated on regime change. Undoubtedly, George W. Bush, like his father, viewed the war in very personal terms.
September 11th, 2001 In my perspective, what happened on September 11th, 2001, was an act of terrorism on the United States. It was a decade ago that 19 terrorists took control of four planes, flew two into the twin towers of the World Trade Center, hit the Pentagon with a third, and crashed the fourth in a field in Pennsylvania after passengers resisted and made it impossible for the terrorists to complete their mission. The government also thought that 9/11 was an act of terrorism put on by the Muslims. While conspiracy theorists have a different perspective because they believe that there was more to this attack, it was plotted out and people from America were in on it. There have been many different perspectives on what really happened on this day.
Daniel Ellsberg learned many different lies from reading the pentagon papers and thru ought his involvement to RAND.one of the earliest lies was that, “American warships were under attack in the Tonkin gulf, off the coast of North Vietnam,” (Most Dangerous Man in America). President Lyndon B. Johnson created this lie in order to have complete control of the military. With this power, Lyndon would be able to wage war with the Vietnamese and keep capitalism intact. Another lie was Americans were being killed in the Vietnam War before Lyndon Johnson pushed for the bombing campaign. McNamara had created that lie to give Johnson a reason to bomb the Vietnamese (Most Dangerous Man in America).
When the war in Iraq began on the 20th of March 2003 the decision to go to war was already surrounded with controversy because of all the rumours cooked up by anti war protesters. One of the main keys of going to war was oil and terrorism but as the months went on these objectives were unfinished with extended deadlines and more objectives were made. Has the war in Iraq benefited society in any way? In this essay I intend to look at the controversy surrounding the war in Iraq how we have all had to pay the economical cost of being at war with a country whose leader is now deceased and the terrorists who preside there and who kill our men with barbaric methods of execution and scare tactics and their old favourite the road side bomb. When President Bush told Americans that they were going to war because of the imminent threat of Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction and his relations to terrorism but if this was the case why did the Americans press on with the war even though no weapons were found and no relations with terrorists were uncovered?
Osama bin Laden, the terrorist leader wanted for murder of U.S. citizens overseas and suspected of running the September 11, 2001, airliner attacks that killed 3000 people, issued a new video addressed to Americans, just days before Congress returns to again consider the course of the Iraq occupation90x91. In the video he knocked Democrats for continuing to fund the occupation, and taunted President Bush for failing in Iraq. He also knocked Bush for leading a corporatist crony system, and for rejecting the Kyoto treaty and worsening global warming. And he praised socialist thinker Noam Chomsky as one who advised against invading Iraq. Bush commented on the video: “I found it interest[ing] that on the tape Iraq was mentioned, which is a reminder that Iraq is part of the war against
embassies in East Africa bombed. The website explains that a dual terrorist attack occurred at U.S. Embassies both in Kenya and Tanzania on August 7, 1998 by Al-Qaeda. It continues to explain that the U.S. accused a Saudi exile terrorist leader named Osama bin Laden; President Bill Clinton ordered cruise missiles to destroy known training camps and plants that produced chemical weapons by Osama with the hopes of killing him and/or derail operations of Al-Qaeda. One may say it shouldn’t take this incident to increase tactics regarding terrorism; it should have been tackled from the first incident of 1993. More should have been done between the President, CIA, FBI and other appropriate anti-terrorism officials regarding this group and/or its leader.
The War in Afghanistan was extremely successful; the U.S. dethroned the Taliban and destabilized al-Qaeda. In 2003, The War on terror expanded. On March 20th of that year The United States, Great Britain, and other nations went into Iraq in an “…effort to remove of the government of Saddam Hussein and his alleged weapons of mass destruction, considered by the US-led coalition to be a global threat, and the replacement of the Iraqi government with a democratic, pro-Western government.” (CITATION?) Unfortunately, this was not as successful as the war in Afghanistan, and quickly
Thesis statement: Some believe that those events that happened thirteen years ago was a staged event by the US government to influence the general public into fully supporting a war in Iraq. Can this ISIS conflict just be a part two? INTRO: It's becoming more a familiar sight day by day...unless you live under a rock, it is now next to impossible to open a newspaper, or turn on the television let alone surf the internet without running accross a story about the ongoing ISIS conflict happening in the Syria-Iraq region. Whether you are an advit follower of the esculating situation or like many when asked about the conflict;"just doesn't care". One thing is certain, ISIS has been very successful at not only grabbing the US government's attention but the media as well.
Rhetorical Analysis This letter was written by U.S President, George Bush on 9 Jan 1991, to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein in order to justify the reasons for an outbreak of war against Iraq in case the country does not withdraw from Kuwait and does not comply with the UN Security Council resolution 678. Although only written to the Iraqi President, the letter addresses to the world to give the cause of a future action due to noncompliance. The writer’s thesis can be seen at the start of the text, where he clearly mentions a probable outcome, that is, war, if Iraq does not surrender. Thereby grasping the attention of the reader and develops curiosity to determine a way how war can be prevented and whether there is any logical reason for the