“All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”1 â€œThis immortal statement was made in the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America in 1776. In a broader sense, this means: All the peoples on the earth are equal from birth, all the peoples have a right to live, to be happy and free.â€2 Nevertheless, on March 20, 2003, the above announcement was violated by the very country which made it when the United States, on the strength of troops and modern armament waged war against Iraq. The Bush administration maintained its justification for this pre-emptive attack against Iraq that Saddam Hussein who owns a deadly weapon of mass destruction is really a threat to the United States, its allies, the United Nations, and the rest of the world, and that if they and their allies do not deal with the threat from this international outlaw and his regime, they and their connection will set themselves up for catastrophic consequences. This war, in its terms, is to eliminate weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and to combat terrorism. The opponents, whereas, argued that WMD and terrorism are not what the Bush administration is concerned about. They said that all the accusations are the guise for an invasion and such a war should be stopped. That is the main tendency of peace lovers struggling to stop this massive suffering war because of no justification, many fatalities, and wrong response to worldwide terrorism threat.
Firstly, the Bush administration paved its way to war by false accusation. It said that Saddam Hussein with WMD on hand and the connection with terrorism is a real threat not only to the United States, but also to the world. To protect the United States as well as the world, a war is necessary. For those excuses, the United States realized that it was justified for going to war, and started it despite the fact that many countries and organizations opposed it. However, this accusation was not confirmed when the UN investigators, after spending their times working for the evidence in Iraq, could not find even a slightest hint of the so called weapons of mass destruction. Actually, the disarmament after the Gulf War dismantled all Iraqâ€™s weapons, and as a result, disabled any possibility of Iraq, in general, and Saddam Hussein, in particular, in posing a threat to any country. Therefore, owning weapons of mass destruction is an impossible fact. According to Ex-Marine and former UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter, after the dismantlement in the 1990s, Iraq no longer represented a threat to its neighbors or anyone else. Besides, other investigations related to the connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda presented no sufficient proof which can link Iraq to Al Qaeda organization. The judgment for this accusation was stated clearly in Statement No. 15 (“Overview of the Enemy”) from the conclusion of the 9/11 Commission’s staff stated: â€œWe have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States.â€ If so, the Iraq War has never been justified. The Bush administration has lied to go for war. Weapons of mass destruction or terrorism are just expedient reasons for its invasion in Iraq.
Secondly, this war has caused far too many fatalities to both countries. As a consequence of the war, Iraq currently has been drowned in a sea of blood. Since the time the United States set about the changing the history of the Middle East and became ensnared in a guerilla war in Iraq, the Bush administration led America to the Assassinsâ€™ Gateâ€“ the main point of entry into the American zone in Baghdad and accelerated violence to its peak. Consequently, soldiers, reporters, civilians of all backgrounds share the same plights. So far, there have been 2,571 coalition soldiers were killed and other dozens of thousands wounded. However, the civilian death toll is fifteen times more; approximately, 33,831 fatalities counted for the entire duration of the US-led military presence in Iraq. To come along with these deaths is the break-up of families. The survivors have to struggle with their bereavement and live with the demolition caused by this war. Besides, the violence in Iraq has become serious. Car suicide bombers, ambushes, and kidnaps happen increasingly in the day light. According to NBC News, this fatality rate keeps increasing together with occupancy. Within two weeks, a series of violent attacks occurred continually. The targets are the Jordanian Embassy in Baghdad, Basra, the Turkey main oil pipeline, the major water main in Baghdad, and the United Nations headquarters in Baghdad. Iraq really became an extremely dangerous zone for anyone. There is no justice in the world when people can be made to suffer like that.
Finally, the Iraq War is a wrong response to worldwide terrorism threat. Reality shows a widespread opposition to a US attack on Iraq within the Arab world. The fact that many Arab countries who were supportive of the Gulf War turn to oppose the Iraq War has confirmed this tendency. Concretely, the Beirut summit of the Arab League, in March 2002, signaled that all 22 member governments want to see an end to the US conflict with Iraq. Undoubtedly speaking, the war inflamed resentment or anger toward the US, provoked all the antagonists to take further actions against the occupied forces. So, it sows the seeds of terrorism, and proliferates these antagonists, instead of weeding it out. This explains why, after the war initiated, the terrorists spilled over into Iraq, including members of Al Qaeda, who werenâ€™t there before. On the other side, the US occupancy has destroyed the existing Iraqi political and military infrastructure and not replaced it with anything viable. Iraqis that are at the mercy of guerillas fighting the coalition troops are increasingly vulnerable to terrorist recruitment. On the other hand, the objective of Islamic extremists is to overthrow any government in the Islamic world that does not adhere to a fundamentalist version of Islam. The Baathist regime in Iraq does not qualify; thus, under Al Qaeda doctrine, it must be swept away, along with the equally deficient governments in Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Therefore, an effort to oust Saddam Hussein and replace his regime with another secular government will not diminish the wrath of Islamic extremists, but rather fuel it. With the intention to pacify the terrorism, the United States has wittingly and unwittingly cultivated terrorism instead. The war, by all these meanings, is the wrong response to terrorism.
Unjustified for going to war, the so called â€œwar on terrorâ€ turned out to be an invasion. Still, all the excuses made by the Bush administration, for instance WMD and terrorism, and are to mislead the war and public opinions. Supposedly, the threat of WMD attack and terrorism were the Bush administrationâ€™s concern, then it would have surely paid the greatest attention to the really greatest threat of WMD, and utilized available U.S resources â€“ troops, dollars and diplomacy â€“ accordingly. In this way, it chose to wage war against Iraq even though North Korea and Pakistan are just the true perilous threats. Iraq, by contrast, possesses no nuclear weapons today and is thought to be several years away from producing any, even under the best circumstances. Similarly, policies aiming at fighting terrorism are deviated from the facts. The administration has argued at great length that a U.S. invasion and â€œregime changeâ€ in Iraq would mark the greatest success in the war against terrorism so far. However, this greatest success has never been made entirely clear. It is said that Saddamâ€™s hostility toward the United States somehow sustains and invigorates the terrorist threat to America. Saddamâ€™s elimination would thus greatly weaken international terrorism and its capacity to attack the United States. However, there is no evidence that this is the case. So, WMD or terrorism is not the main issue for the Bush administration; certainly this war. On the other hand, a war is not the only choice for any conflict. When North Korea announced that it was close to constructing a nuclear weapon, the Bush administration did not threaten war â€“ instead, it started cooperating with its allies in Asia to defuse the situation. The North Korea experience shows a way of dealing with weapons of mass destruction and proves that negotiations are preferable to war. If the Bush administrationâ€™s end goal is to enhance the national security, then dialogue is preferable to conflict. As such, the Iraq War, !
by all m
eanings, could not accomplish its mission to eliminate WMD and combat terrors despite all the excuses. It is a wrong response.
On the whole, the Iraq War designated as â€œthe war on terrorâ€ has been an unnecessary war. It was initiated simply by the Bush administration with false reality. Firstly, the Bush administration could not show any evidence to demonstrate for its arguments and justify for going to war. Weapons of Mass Destruction or terrorism are just the beautiful coating of the real invasion. Secondly, it brought about so many fatalities. Violence accelerated has turned Iraq to a dangerous zone for any inhabitants. Finally, this was was the wrong response to terrorism. More than likely, it exacerbates the antagonists to turn against US rather than to pacify terrors. In addition, the Bush administration did not demonstrate this war as a blow to the real target. The fact that North Korea and Pakistan are not the main targets disables its mission to eliminate WDM and fight terrors. Besides, some feasible solutions other than war have refuted the necessity of â€œthe war on terrorsâ€. This war started unnecessarily and must be stopped to save human losses.
o The Assassinsâ€™ Gate America in Iraq â€“ George Packer
ïƒ˜ The War on terrorism.
ïƒ˜ How should US troop withdraw from Iraq?
AlterNet: Bogus REasons for War on Iraq
Global exchange: top ten reasons why the US should not invade Iraq