Reason for the iraq warDisarming Iraq of weapons of mass destruction he problem which led to the attacks of the Iraq government was articulated to the view that Iraq had continued developing weapons of mass destruction. During the year 2001, the United States thought the Iraq possessed weapons that were of high destruction.
The presumption by other nations of Iraq being developing weapons of high risky arose from their tradition. Several decades before the war of 2003, the state of Iraq is alleged to have been known for its possession of dangerous weapons.[1]This led to the interventions which were led by the United Nations in encountering the Iraq weapon development programs. The United Nations diligently intervened in the development and use of these weapons of massive destruction thereby destroying substantial weaponry manufacturing plants in Iraq by 1990s. Although the United States withdrew its weapon inspectors by 1998, they were suspicious of the Iraq, hence, they still stressed that the country was not fully disarmed. This meant that Iraq was a world threat by being in possession of piles of weapons of mass destructions.
Before the war attack in 2003, the process of disarming Iraq of their military weapons was stills going on through diplomacy means. The previous year launch of war in 2003, the United Nations had negotiated with the Iraq for disbarment. The Iraq inspection groups took over their process to investigate the state of Iraq on the kind of weapons which were at their disposal.
The outcomes were plainly that Iraq claims of reviving their nuclear weapons programs was false allegation. The UN being the authorization body of the resolution, united state and their allies went ahead sparking war against the Iraq’s in condition of controversy. The united state upheaval against the Iraq was also purposed to combat the problems of terror. The United States had previously suffered much loses from terror attacks. For instance, the United States had lost their citizens and property under terror connection situation in foreign countries.
The attack of the U.S ambassador offices in the bomb blast that occurred in Kenya state and the simultaneous attacks in the Tanzanian state caused a lot fear to the citizens of united state. Furthermore, the terror issue was aggravated by the September- 11 attack in the United States.The U.S leaders and other noble men of the world have linked Iraq with the most feared group of the world. The al Qaeda sect group is said have entrenched base in the Iraq ground.
Due to this perception of the people both from the United States and other nations, Iraq has been seen as the source of the world calamities of destruction through the application of weapon of high destruction. Apart from just using these weapons of massive destruction, Iraq was attacked under the claims that it housed the cruelest persons in the world. The ring leaders of the terror attack of the September 11 are speculated to have been trained and lived in Iraq. President of Iraq was linked to the al Qaeda and major terrorists.In order to save the people from future attacks of terror, the leaders of united state vowed not to let dangerous regimes to bring threats to the states. The invaders had claimed that the Iraq had the capability and was willing to employ weapons of mass destruction to attack their enemies. Liberating the people of Iraq for better relation internationallyThe lack of clear evidence on the Iraq’s possessions of the weapons of mass destruction led the U.S to incline to the idea that the leadership of Iraq had misused its powers.
During the past period of ruling, the Iraq government broke a war with the community of Kurdish who lived in the northern parts. The U.S government was in sheer supports of the Iraq government of the 1980s, a period which saw high rates of human rights violation in Iraq. The problem of Iraq is also thought to emerge from the control of the resources in Iraq. Iraq is considered as one of the countries with the vast oil fields of major contribution to oil production worldwide.
Even today, it is alleged that United States maintains their troops in Iraq purposely for ensuring that the oil fields are operated under save conditions.Offensive and defensive realism: competing approaches to powerIn the 1990s, it was suggested that the useful way of understanding the critical differences within the realism is through the distinguishing the difference between the offensive and defensive realism. Though they are identified as the same basic security problem that stem from the international anarchy, the realists from the defensive and offensive sides propose diametrically opposed solutions to deal with it.The offensive realists have a direct connection between the power and security maximization. In this regard, they advocate that for the country to ensure that the country has more security is through enhancing maximization of its power and on the other hand maximize its superiority towards it opponents. In this regard, its evident that the more power the country has, the greater the chances of enjoying security.
The security and peace is always reached through the strength and the level of superiority rather that the balance between the powers and restrain as it is advocated by the defensive realists. The harmony is achieved through having international powers in hand or regional powers.The offensive realists believe that the weaker states have to work as bandwagon for the stronger countries out of fear or for the benefit of lessening the threaten powers. The offensive realism claims that most strong countries humiliate weaker countries to realize their powers and to increase their chances of superiority. It would be best done if the superiority and the mode of achieving harmony are balanced. The fact the Iraq investigations by the authorized bodies from different nations and organization failed to produce any significant evidence on the allegations of weapons of mass destruction, then the United States and other supporting nation were still under the fear of Iraq of the powers. Instead is exercising liberalism approaches which advocates for diplomatic attainment of peace, harmony and the general good relation through negotiation, the United States with their supporters opted to use the realism approach.
They had no enough evidence over the allegation of the powerful weapons being under the custody of Iraq, but with horror and the need for ensuring strengthening the security the launched the attack on Iraq.While the United States belief that the Iraq nation hard Developed military equipments of mass destruction, they were apprehended with fear over the safety of their nation. The federal government which is thus obliged to provide the full security over the citizens was pressurized on the safety of their nation. The federal together with other nations of great and weak power joined together in one accord to bring the massive technological revolution of weapon manufacture in Iraq to dust and ashes under dilemmatic circumstances. The United States with it allies collaborated to increase the security level merely not Iraq but most within their Home grounds. Generally, the weaker and the super power nations like the U.S were maximizing the security.
While the weak developing nations which voted the compromising deal of attacks over the Iraq wanted the shielding for their security from those developed nations so as to increase their security, the developed powerful militia nations envisioned the gaining of fame of super power. The United States being among the recognized super power nations was very influential to the weak nations. This is because the nations which went against the speculations were highly suspected of collaborator of the terrorists groups whose roots were eminently thought to be entrenched in Iraq. The encamping of the weak nations together with the superpower nations can be termed as signed because of fear and threatening power from such superpower states renders such countries to remain under the bondages of the super nations in decision making. The nation’s decision making concerning creation of good and bad leadership in the feasible countries are fundamentally manipulated by such superpower nations.
This implies that the weaker the nation, the more the manipulations by other superpower nations, and the least the possibility of causing an intimidation to the superpower nations. In this sense, most countries especially the developing and the underdeveloped were supportive to the United States to have harmonious relations with both the U.S and the Iraq.
In the general insight analysis of the Iraq attack that occurred in 2003, the United State was creating some influence through the international systems whose doctrines and policies are much attributed to the philosophical approaches of liberalism. This was evident with the United Nations refusal to assent to the proposal of attack by the United States. They not only withheld to assent to the U.S grievances and approaches but they also relentlessly withdrew their supportive effort during the days of war.The American attacks of the Iraq people under the controversial states of unclear evidence was away of weakening the country ability so that it may remain in the under the authorities of the United States. The United States which was in the forefront to the launch of war attack in the Iraq people was taking this opportunity to prove their supremacy to the other nations of their.
This dismantling of the alleged nuclear plants and other weaponry set up in the Iraq was going to offer the American a new fame which not would prove their super ability to war activities, but this was also a strategy of increasing its security base by making other nations to ceased from developing weapons.[2]Despites the 2003 attack on Iraq, the nation of Iraq has continued to be a place full of Jargon. Although the country was attacked and suffered huge losses, the aimed of maintaining peace within the nation and the surrounding neighbors has remained as challenge at the highest peak in the region. While the attack of Iraq is well interpreted, there was the idea of defending themselves which undoubtedly was borne from the maximization of security and power. However, the process of this war attacks negatively affected the Americans making their economic base destabilizes in the rebuilding of the nation. In addition, the attacks did not end the enmity between the nations within the regions nor the U.
S safety of their citizens is not even alleviated. Threats are aggravated by terrorists and collaborators of the past regime, a show that is in accordance with defensive realists.The reasons which are revealed above I believe they can be absorbed in the second or third image analysis.
The fact that the Iraq state had previously engaged itself in war with the neighboring states such as Iran, the structure of state was destroyed and thus there was little protection on the Iraq. At the third image, the international relations were destroyed from the threatening of terror and world peace. Due to this, most nations went against the Iraq.Reference:Waltz, K. (1965): Man, the State, and War: Columbia University Press[1] Waltz, K. (1965): Man, the State, and War: Columbia University Press[2] Waltz, K. (1965): Man, the State, and War: Columbia University Press
