Argumentative Reflection War Essay

Cipher likes war ; it is so dearly-won in so many ways. Lifes are lost. belongings is destroyed. people are injured and some are disabled mentally and physically. Because of this many people think war must be avoided at all costs.

All these facts sing the high cost of war on a state are true. On the other manus there are state of affairss in which a state has an duty to travel to war. Their were many times in the United States history when the determination to come in a war was in inquiry. World War II was a clip when people were reasoning about whether or non the United States should come in a war against Germany. Japan and their Alliess. When this war started WWI was still fresh in people’s memories. The citizens knew how bad war could be.

Many people felt that these new jobs were non the United States jobs and war should be avoided. Author Jon Bridgman tells us in an article in the Seattle Post- Intelligencer “The state was profoundly and bitterly divided on the inquiry of our engagement in the war.American isolationists felt that the war in Europe and Asia was non our job and that we should remain out of it” . Of class other people knew that war was traveling to come. because Germany and Japan were turn outing they wanted to take over the universe.

The statement was settled by Japan. There furtive onslaught on Pearl Harbor solved the statement. They forced us into the war. The onslaught they made in Pearl Harbor was a direct onslaught on the United States military and a direct onslaught on United States land. Now US citizens knew it was all out war for the states survival. On September 11. 2001 the US was once more attacked.

This clip it wasn’t by another state but by terrorists. It was similar to the Pearl Harbor onslaught because Americans were surprised and 1000s of people lost their lives. The large difference was that the onslaught was non done by a state but by terrorists from many different states.The citizens of the United States reasonably much agreed that this was an evil act and that the terrorists needed to be stopped so that they could non assail once more. The job was that it was non a state that attacked but a terrorist group concealment and spread out across several states. Who could the United States incrimination and clasp responsible for the onslaughts? President George Bush instantly blamed Afghanistan and subsequently Iraq for allowing terrorists use their states to develop and run. He felt these states should be attacked so terrorists could be stopped. The President sent our military personnels to Afghanistan and the military personnels were successful in that country and so President Bush decided the US needed to occupy Iraq.

This is when the statement about traveling to war in another state was the United States concern. A batch of people had heard that. Saddam Hussein. the leader of Iraq was a protagonist of terrorists and besides a menace to the universe. The statement about assailing Iraq was large. If you look back to 2003 when people were reasoning this you can see that their was adequate people who wanted to travel to war.Nicholas Lemann wrote in an article in the New Yorker magazine that “Everyone agrees that Saddam Hussein is genuinely evil. everyone agrees he has arms of mass destruction” .

On the other side of the statement many states and people disagreed with assailing Iraq. Many reviews done by the United Nations could non happen arms of mass devastation. President Bush finally convinced the United States Congress that Iraq was unsafe and the US ground forces attacked Iraq. It turned out after a tough battle.

the United States armed forces could non happen any arms of mass devastation. A study in the Washington Post said “The new study from the Iraq Survey Group has confirmed beyond any sensible uncertainty what most people have assumed for the past twelvemonth: At the clip of the 2003 U. S. invasion. Iraq did non possess arms of mass devastation.

and most of its plans to bring forth them were hibernating. ”The United States was incorrect about the arms. Even though the pro- war people were incorrect about the arms of mass devastation they felt that they were halting a atrocious dictator who could hold been a large menace in the hereafter.

At least the ground forces fought terrorists because as the war dragged on the United States did finally happen itself contending terrorists because many terrorists came to Iraq to confront the United States ground forces. Lionel Beehner reported in the Backgrounder magazine that “Large-scale self-destruction onslaughts in Iraq are up in recent months. showing that al-Qa’ida in Iraq and its homegrown affiliates remain a powerful force. ” In both of these instances the United States went to war to supply safety for United States citizens. In both these instances the United States was attacked.

In both these instance people debated and argued about traveling to war. Yes many people were killed and injured but these illustrations show that there is definitely state of affairss when a state is obligated to travel to war.Plants CitedJohn Bridgman “Lessons learned from two yearss of infamy” Seattle Post -Intelligencer Sunday December 2.

2001Nicholas Lemann “ How It Came To War” The New Yorker March 31. 2003 Editorial “Weapons That Weren’t There” The Washington Post October 7. 2004 Lionel Beehner “Al-Qaeda in Iraq: Resurging or Seceding? Backgrounder

x

Hi!
I'm Tamara!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out