Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Was America justified in going into Iraq? and Was it legal?
Today, after, numerous years of "liberating" Iraq, we can reflect on the event. What do you think? Was America justified in going into Iraq to remove Saddam, and secondly was it "legal?" In answering the questions, be sure to refer to sources, that we mentioned in class.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
From my point of view i feel that being able to help a country out in taking away a ruthless dictator is nice... but killing innocent people along the way isn't fair to the country. What the American's did wasn't really necessary and i consider it illegal to go into someone else country without any sort of permission to start bombing and killing innocent people. Overall i feel that wanting to help a country isn't a crime but killing innocent people is.
Politically correct!
However, if it were your mother and father, oh yeah and your aunt and uncle, that "disappeared" and were never heard from again, because Saddam ordered any opposition to be "addressed" wouldn't you welcome his removal?
Innocent people? What about the crazies who are suicide bombers and blow up their fellow countrymen, just because they have a different opinion?
When does the madness stop? Certainly in Iraq, who have been under Saddam's rule since 1979 (and his party earlier)haven't they had enough of "innocent people " being killed by his regime?
Isn't 25 years of oppression long enough? Free the people, Iraqi's are people too!!! They shouldn't be afraid to be able to speak their mind for fear of imprisonment.
Don't you agree?
Bush shouldn't have went into Iraq. He tells the world that he went there to free the Iraqis from Saddam, a murderous tyrant. He tells us he went because Saddam had weapons of mass distruction and that he was this awful leader who killed many and that the Iraqis were a threat to Americans. This is his reasons for going into Iraq or so he seemingly says. For his actions show a different story.
He did what he said he was going to do he freed the Iraqis from Saddam who is no longer in power. Well now the job is done, why are Americans still in Iraq? The other main reason why Bush "supposeably" went into Iraq was to find weapons of mass distruction and to obduct them. So were are these weapons Saddam allegedly had. The UN has found nothing!
The Americans are suppose to be peace makers but some would say there the terrorists. Bush went into Iraq illegially. He had no permission to go into Iraq, and if you enter into another country without permission isn't it considered illegal.Iraq was not a threat to the west, they weren't a threat that is untill Bush invaded there country. Is it now ok just to walk into any country and start bombing them because you "think" they may be a threat. Countrys ask for Americans help but now Americans are just taking it upon themselves to go into countries that they assume is troubled and the next country of concern.
Why couldn't Bush just let the UN do there job? Why did he choose to go at the procise time that he did? He had to wait till September 12, 2002 one year after September 11. Bush hasseled Saddam more the 6 years to return the weapons and he waits till NOW to go and get them. Bush may say he went to get the weapons but he went because Iraq had oil and he knew the cost of oil was bound to rise. He went because his reputaion was down the drian and the economy was screwed. He went because he had no news on Osama Bin Laden and his whereabouts. Speaking of Bin Laden i have to state there is no proff that Saddam had no ties to 9/11.
Saddam had no involvement in 9/11 Bush wanted to divert the attention of the failing economy and the lack of news of Bin laden away so he did what many polititions do he lied and went to war. Bush went to Iraq to free the people that Hussein was killing and who he had rule over but how many has Bush killed in the process. How many inoccent Iraqi lifes has Bush destroyed not to mention all the soilders who lost there lives and families that are left to morn for there loved ones both American and Iraqi. Does Bush smile when he goes to sleep at night knowing all the contraversy he has caused in making this war because America was not justifyed in going to war and it was illegal.
from my point of view i think what bush is doing is nice and all but it has the wrong intentions and bad planning. first of all he went to war because he himself was going through personal problems like decreased economy and he was losing his peoples interest. he was a bad prez, he stood up for his dads "friends" rather than the country. like the sept 11 crash, i know he held back because of all the agreements he had. but anyway back to the subject, i think it was good, but not the appropriate time. but since he did do it anyways i think what he did for the iraqis is great. like he did take away an evil dictator but now what? the u.s is still there. there intentions were to find WMD but there are none i believe. at least not there. its weird how some iraqis love u.s and some still hate. but thats a whole diffrent subject. i feel bush should have carefully planned this operation iraqi freedom. because first off osama isnt there obviously and theres no wmd. if there were then we should have found them already.
so finally i think bush should have took out saddam and then put a new dictator in and let them be. because it is there country, let them do what they want, overall i think u.s shouldnt have went to iraq and started this war
I think that the world is always going to have ultimatums such as this. They were not asked to help, and there was consequences if they helped. There is always going to be some sort of violence that will eventually lead to deaths of people, but if they were forbidden to go to Iraq by the UN and if they were not asked to help by the Iraqi people, then they should not have went. I would agree if they truly went to protect their own, but Saddam would have been stupid to have used WMD. The whole world would have been attacking Iraq if they did, so I beleive that Bush was just going to Iraq to defend his own hide, to direct attention away from the mistakes that he has made with the whole OBL situation. If the US had not moved in on Saddam, America would have continued on in a state of panic. What Bush should have done was continue to try to find OBL instead of destroying all people who may or may not have been in contact with him.
Hey this is Darryl
On my view point of this was America should not have gone to Iraq and no it was not legal. The approval of the UN was against going to war with Iraq that and most of the citizens in America and parts of the world was against the war too. Even though Suddam was an evil dictator he did manage to keep his country in tact. True that Suddam didnt comply with the investigators showing them any type of proof that the so called WMD was destroyed, the U.S didnt show much proof that Iraq had any to begin with. If Iraq or more specifically Suddam was such a high risk to the world why did the U.S take so long to take action in removing him from power. It seems more likely that Bush at the time needed a more likely target to remove the attention of the failing economy and the fact that he had no leads as to who to target after the 9/11 attack.
in my point of view i dont think that america was justifeid for going into iraq to remove Saddam. But i do believe that by killing Saddam made no difference. might as well lock him up somewhere instead of killing him. maybe if they captured him he would have more information about other issues concerning terrorist. like where bin ladden is or any other information about the al queda. but i do think that it was logic move to go into iraq. because if saddam actually did have his "weapons of mass destruction" it could harm everyone not just the americans but canadians as well. but i don't think it was legal for Bush to go into Iraq because he was basically invading it, killing innocent people and not really doing what the main goal of going into iraq.
I believe that the United States should not have gone into Iraq for many reasons. Iraq first of all has no concerns to the United States and did not do anything to indicate any type of violence towards them. I think that Bush needed a scapegoat from the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and decided to turn his sights on Saddam Hussein and the so called weapons of mass destruction that Saddam was believed to have. The economy was also taking a turn and Bush decided to go to war.
The actions that the United States took against Saddam and Iraq were wrong and illegal because the United Nations had already said no to the United States to start another war. The United States forced their laws and constitutions on a country that did not want it. My thought about the United States is that they did not have the right to enter Iraqi soil because they did not have any reason to, and by entering, they had committed an act of war due to invasion. The defence that the Bush’s administration might say is that they are doing it for the people; they are freeing the people from a tyranny and dictatorship, and liberating the people of Iraq because that is in their constitution. This being said proves that the United States are imposing their will and power because they are scared of other countries being more powerful than them. The United States will only take action when they feel they are being threatened and if there are no threats and worries then they will just sit aside.
My proof of this for example is in World War 2, where they only entered the war when they thought that Germany was becoming too powerful. Sights are now also set on Russia because they are now continuing to build their missiles. China is also now in the eyes of the United States because China’s processing of weapons are becoming more modern than even the United States themselves.
This brings me to the conclusion that the United States of America will only do something if it is beneficial to them and that they may profit from it.
In our study of Iraq and the history of their country we can see that a lot has happened to them, including American's either bombing them or invading their country.
Iraq has experienced a lot of different issues for example the US bombing their country and having Saddam killing the Iraqi people. If anything Iraq has been though way too much pain for such a small country. Saddam was probably one of the most ruthless dictators a country could ever have. If anything I'm kinda happy he isn't Iraqi president anymore. That probably relived the Iraqi people. But there were a few events leading up to it that i wasn't quite satisfied for instance, President Bill Clinton bombing Iraq to get peoples minds off of his bad image and his re election. Also President Bush going in and announcing War with Iraq when they didn't do or have anything to relate with 9/11. If they were to have a connection wouldn't he have gone into war a lot sooner instead of waiting 2 months to do something. What the Americans did i feel wasn't legal because of the fact that they didn't have a real reason of going into Iraq to begin with. Their reason was because of WMD and to take out a Saddam. After taking out Saddam there were no WMD found. So were the Americans just after their oil. Even if their true reason was to take out Saddam shouldn't they have avoided killing innocent people at the same time. Couldn't they send some super spy snippers to kill Saddam instead of sending huge tanks and hundred of soldiers, they should have called Mr and Ms Smith instead. Now lets look at the outcome of taking out Saddam Iraq is now going into a civil war the everyone is killing each other and there is no law or justice system at all. So what is the American troops are suppose to do now. Putting in a new leader wouldn't help because of the fact that when people try to vote their getting shot at. At least when Saddam was in control he kept the Iraq in order.
In conclusion what justification did the Americans get from killing innocent people when their main reason was to get rid of Saddam and find his WMD. They ended up killing thousands of people and finding no WMD at all. Also nothing in Iraq i feel was legal since all evidence shows that their reason was to take everyones eye off their Presidential wrong doing. The Iraqis really didn't need the bombings the tanks and the US soldiers coming in out of no where trying to kill them.
The American invasion of Iraq is subject to much political and public criticism. One point of view is that President Bush should not have entered Iraq on suspicion of having weapons of mass destruction. He should not have attacked Iraq until the U.S. had significant evidence of WMD.
Thousand of deaths later, weapons of mass destruction have yet to be confirmed in Iraq.
Bush entered Iraq as a scapegoat because he could not successfully find Osama bin Laden. The Bush family had ties with the bin Laden family over the oil industry. Capturing Osama bin Laden would have severed this multi-million dollar relationship. But since OBL could not be located, Bush targeted the next best thing so he would not look like a failure.
Bush should not have invaded Iraq because the U.S. army largely consists of men and women from poorly educated communities. These people have no source of income other than joining the army.
Bush wanted to remove Saddam from his power because he threatened the lives of his father and former president Bill Clinton. He just saw Iraq as a threat to the world and wanted to prove America was capable of fighting an Arab country.
Bush invaded Iraq to please the public and divert attention away from the failing American economy. Iraq was potentially one of the world’s most oil-rich countries so Bush sought to exploit their resources. After the September 11 attacks, public approval of Bush plummeted. He invaded Iraq to provide democracy to the people and tried to improve his poor reputation. The amount of lives lost in the war was not worth protecting Bush’s public image.
Bush’s mission in Iraq was to free the country from their ruthless dictator. Saddam has since been removed but U.S. troops are still in there. When you go into another country without permission, you start an active war.
The U.S. invasion of Iraq was illegal since the United Nations did not give their approval. Again, America wanted to prove the power of the west by entering Iraq without aid from the UN.
In my opinion,I don't think that it was necessary for the U.S to go into Iraq from what I know now because it's a reason why the war in Iraq is going on.
There were many 'explanations' as to why the U.S such as taking the focus off american economy, the U.S had to attack 'someone'because Bin laden was no where to be found and the most common explanation, Iraq had weapons of mass destruction . These are facts that most people know of but there are other assumptions as well. Bush had his own agenda / reasons for going into Iraq like removing dictatorship to provide democracy. This meant getting rid of saddam to free the iraqi people from his 'torment'? Well anyway I think americashouldnt have went to iraq because there wasn't really a valid reason to. Bush was starting to lose america's interest and so he claimed there were weapons of mass destruction that they needed to get rid of to regain attention.
For me, Bush just wanted to rise his attention to the publicbec. of the 9/11 incident people already had lost hopes on him. So after the "9/11" occured, Bush has been thinking of a way to get off or I supposedly should say he was thinking of an "excuse" in order for him to show people that the solution has been brought up to stop terrorism and 1 more thing is the torment done by Saddam to this Iraqi people. Well is it good/legal to butt in other country's problems if there were no given orders or permission given? I don't think so, If this event has happened to Bush I doubt he will ask for help from other countries and another question, Is Bush really after Iraqi's people freedom and this "WMD" that was brought up be taken away? My opinion is there are no WMD possibly since there were no tracks of them since what? a very long time ago and true to that Iraqi's were happy and glad that saddam was gone but why hasn't america come back yet? and still remained in Iraq, Possibilities is that Bush may be after the "Oil" along the way since the beginning of his plans on Iraq for their rise in economy and his "popularity" as a Pres. to the people.
Latasha Stewart
The war in Iraq is unfair to the people of that country. Going to Iraq was unjustified. Bush said they went into Iraq to find weapons of mass destruction and those weapons have still not been found. There is no evidence that there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The Iraqi people appreciate Saddam being taken out of power because he was a cruel man but they did not appreciate their families and friends being killed in the process. Bush did not declare war for the good of the people he was thinking about himself. Bush also mentioned Saddam threatening to kill his father so it seems like his issues with Saddam were personal. Many people did not agree with this war and I do not either. Bush wanted to increase his popularity and he created more problems. The destruction in Iraq was unnecessary too much property was destroyed. Business homes and people were blown up. There are casualties on both sides of the war but from what I’ve seen the United States has more advanced weapons. The republican guards did not put up much of a fight many of them surrendered. The war is also unfair to the United States soldiers because they have no choice but to stay in Iraq until its okay to leave. Most of the soldiers are people who have less money and they are only in the army to make money. Bush does not care about his own people and he definitely does not care about the people of Iraq. Going into Iraq was not legal because it was not authorized by the U.N. Saddam Hussein probably did not even have the weapons he said he had otherwise he would have used them to protect himself. Saddam was scared and that is why he was hiding when they found him. I think Saddam lied about the weapons and maybe it was one of his evil plans to make the United States look like the bad guys. Going into his country blowing people and things up then having him killed. If the weapons are never found then this war will seem as though the war were for nothing. Iraqi and American citizens being killed for one man. Saddam was a terrible man and it’s not fair that leaders of countries get to make decisions that put peoples lives in danger. The war in Iraq is unjustified because the reasons for being in Iraq have not been proven. Both Bush and Saddam have one thing in common and that is that they don’t care about no one but themselves. They both are responsible for killing Iraqi people. Saddam could have shown the world proof that he destroyed the weapons if he had them and he chose not to.
I would say, Americans should have not gone to Iraq. I mean first of all Bush should have gone to Afghanistan and try to find Osama Bin Laden since he is the culprit of 9/11. What would have been easier is to go search for him and ruin the Bush/Bin Laden friendship rather than have thousands of Americans and other non americans die, he is the President for crying out loud, isnt his job basically keep the country together, not get rid of the people?
Bush created this massive war and ruining the UN councils. He did not get approval yet he still went. He made americans become TERRORISTS in my view. Going to Iraq was uncalled for, just how those hijackers did to the US. Saddam had not post any threats to Americans, had not been involved with 9/11 and sure he said he had weapons of mass destruction, but those havent been found. He's a bad guy, but killing him, only created chaos in his country and didnt really change any course in the war today, I think.
So I say it's illegal that Americans just barged in Iraq without some good stable reasons and killing many civilians in a country that has already suffered. I think Bush should be put in ICC trail.
Post a Comment