Waging War: The Iraq War and its implications

The United States of America has always viewed itself as a â€Å"Big Brother† responsible for protecting others and helping them is desperate times. This may prove to be a Good Samaritan act. However, at times, circumstances warrant that things be done according to what is just.   George Bernard Shaw once said that the reasonable man adapts himself to the world but the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself that as a result, all progress depends on the unreasonable man. In the course of history, this appears to be the truth (Young, 1995). World Politics determine the relationship that exists among states today.   Even the course of history is greatly affected by decisions pertaining to politics and international law. It has become a determining factor in assessing the harmonious relationship between and among states, recognizing equality, sovereignty and respect for power and authority (Jensen, 1982). Quite noticeable is how, historically, States to what the United States has dictated. Political camaraderie has always been far more important than plain public service to subordinates and constituents. The Iraq War has magnified all the necessary details of unjust practice of desire for political advancement and world dominance (Graham 2000). This paper seeks to discuss how the Iraq war has not served its purpose at all, making it being unjustified all the more understandable. The premise on Iraq war lies on the misery experience by the people. President George W. Bush has aggressively pointed out that the threat of weapons of mass destruction such as chemicals and biological weapons, contribute to the misery of Iraq. This is because of the fact that sanctions in connection with this threat has added significantly to the poor living conditions of Iraqi people when it comes to the exercise of their freedom. President Bush labelled Saddam as a Madman in control of a very dangerous weapon and capable of spreading terror and strife. This argument has reached far and wide, magnifying the unjustified conditions of Iraqis under the leadership of Saddam Hussein.   This is evident on the fact that for almost 25 million inhabitants of Iraq, the per capita income is becoming less and less compared to five or six years ago. Its economy shrank to more than six percent and among its major problems are mortality, malnutrition and poverty. The life of the Iraqis on a daily basis has been tremendously difficult, far worse than its situation a decade ago.   This is the main reason on which President Bush has hoped to bank on when convincing others to join in the United States’ plight to wage war against Iraq. Now that everything has been done and over with, has it been a justifiable cause? The answer is a resounding NO. Primarily because the condition of Iraq has not improved after such war waged against it. More significant is the fact that mortality rates have increased, hurting more American troops and Iraqis in the process. Terrorism has not decreased but all the more became rampant. Another argument is the catching of a â€Å"madman† on the loose. Saddam Hussein has been captured and his demise has not changed anything. Terrorism still exists, and his avid followers continue to flourish long after he is gone. The end result—- misery and struggle among the people. The war on Iraq is nothing but a political move to help sustain American economy, which is practically a war economy. The fact that waging war would solicit support from other countries means that America would once again flourish in the eyes of so many people thinking that the â€Å"saviour† is here again. But come to think of it, has anything resulted from such war? Aside from achieving President Bush’ goal of seeing Saddam in his demise, nothing else has been considered a productive result. The claim of existence of weapons of mass destruction has been proven futile. No proof f such claim has been produced. In effect, what could be concluded is the fact that the United States has took advantage of the terrorism issue, magnified it and pointed it directly on Iraq, so that people all over the world will sympathize and unite with them in removing Saddam and waging war. Presently, what we have is an Iraq with a civilian government, a more â€Å"free† society but at the end of it all still looms the fact that people are suffering, having lost the identity of a country invaded by foreign entities. The war on Iraq was based on less compelling reasons. At the expense of the people, President Bush has been successful in removing Saddam, but has he been successful enough in making true his promise that suffering and poverty will be addressed and given proper solution? NO. Years have already passed since the war, nut no improvement has been evident. The plight of the Iraqis now is far worse than when they had a dictator for a government. REFERENCES Jensen, Lloyd. Explaining Foreign Policy. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1982. Ray, James Lee. Democracies and International Conflict. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1995. Greenstein, Fred. Personality and Politics .Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 1987. Neustadt, Richard. Presidential Power. New York: Wiley, 1976. Graham, Allison. Essence of Decision. Boston: Little Brown, 2000. Baumgartner, Frank. Agendas and Instability in American Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993. Young, Oran. System and Society in World Affairs: Implications for International Organizations. New York: Mc Millan 1995.