Should Bush Attack Iraq?Join now to read essay Should Bush Attack Iraq?Should Bush Attack Iraq?Nuclear weapons, terrorist bombings, these terms might be heard on our home front of us the United States of something isn’t done. By done I mean attacking Saddam Hussein, his armies in Iraq, and any other country harboring terrorist.
This is why a military plan, released this past Friday, is just what this country needs for fending off terrorism and stopping the production of weapons of mass destruction, especially in Iraq. Eliminating the former strategies, by means of inspections and the passing of new UN rules must be changed. Using military and also diplomatic techniques, as outlined in the United States new strategy, is the new means of dealing with Iraq. There are still some politics and new war strategies to be developed and perfected before the new, more aggressive, plan should take place. President Bush is doing exactly what he should. He is taking time to overlook the idea and make sure that more forceful action against Iraq is what is needed and that the new ideas won’t upset our allies or unfairly target innocent Iraqi citizens.
Under the Leadership of Bill Clinton, the United States has faced Iraq and Suddam Hussein. This encounter was called the Gulf War. In the war, our goal was to drive out Iraqi military from Kuwait rather than to go directly after the power that Saddam had. The United States was successful in driving out Iraqi military from Kuwait, but didn’t continue to pursue Saddam militarily. Instead, laws were created through the United Nations that would require weapons inspections to occur frequently. These inspections would be carried out by U.N. officials throughout Iraq. Over the last 11 years, Saddam has continued to defy resolutions made to contain his military. Since then Saddam’s military has increased in both troops, and weapons. It was a mistake to let Saddam go the first time and only pursue him with weapons checks and restrictions. If Bush’s new strategy is put into action Saddam will be under control.
Bush’s 33 page report, which is titled “The National Security Strategy for the United States of America,” outlines a contemplation of a military strike against Iraq, And plans to target Saddam. Along with the National Security report, Bush received a detailed plan put together by Gen. Tommy Franks, head of the U.S. Central Command. The plan is a battle scenario, but has variables not yet disclosed, that the president can look further into and possibly change. Franks is quick to say that the plan is not a declaration of war but is a formal proposal. Franks also wants to make clear that just because of Bush has looked over and agreed with the overall workings of it, he is not at the point where he has to make a decision. This gives President Bush an advantage to take the time to perfect the strike and think of any other means of dealing with Saddam Hussein and Iraq.
The Pentagon is not giving up. In a statement, Pentagon spokesman George Little says that the Pentagon “follows all relevant U.S. and international law and legal restrictions and actions and is committed to preserving the U.S.-Iraqi relationship.” And he goes on:
President Bush’s desire to make Iraq a “true partner” in the fight against terror has never been one of his priorities while he was President.
As this was coming up in a press briefing at 11, Bush gave a tour of the National Security Information System, which helps maintain and analyze the Pentagon’s intelligence information about Iraq, and the information he received after getting this information to give to Americans. It is to this sort of thing that Bush used his first year in office, starting in January 2004, to discuss the possible U.S.-Iraqi conflict. He said that, like this time during his first term at the White House, the “federal government is going to continue to provide the intelligence that the government wishes all the members of the Bush administration to understand about the true and ongoing nature of this threat by Iraq.” And he said that even then, because there was no time to be wasted on the president of the United States, his desire to make the war in Iraq inevitable led him to express his desire for a resolution. He described the desire for the war and it as “clear and in effect there are some very hard choices that need to be made and we need to take seriously.”
Bush said some of the U.S. military’s capabilities did not match his own, and he said, “I will tell you one thing with this. The United States has not invaded Iraq for seven years. The only time we have invaded Iraq is once every four years. There is no way these things can break out in one go so that we can build a coalition or even create an independent military force. So we need to take seriously our military and the need for our military to help build a credible and reliable coalition. It is time to make fundamental changes in our current policies and our behavior and it will be done very quickly under President Bush.”
Bush was right. The first step he took in this regard was to move the U.S. army to Baghdad in the spring of 2004.
When the first U.S. troops left Iraq in April 2004, the National Guards and other Iraqi forces had little or no presence in the country. They were not supposed to stay in the country, because Iraq was a strategic military base for the United States and Iraq had no way for an American army to enter the country without a deal with the Iraqis. Iraqi forces were supposed to remain there at all times to protect Iraqis from attack. However, on September 26, 2004, the first American troop left the country because of problems in logistics and operations by Iraqi forces. The first few U.S. soldiers left the country without getting on aircraft. So there was talk of leaving the country after the Americans left. The next three days, the second American troops went home from Iraq and Iraq was not a stable country after all. At first, the U.S. government wanted Iraq disbanded under the leadership of General Allen by the United States, but that was not the case. Iraqi government officials kept trying to recruit American soldiers, but there were no Americans left there to join the U.S. military forces and keep the insurgency in this country
The Pentagon is not giving up. In a statement, Pentagon spokesman George Little says that the Pentagon “follows all relevant U.S. and international law and legal restrictions and actions and is committed to preserving the U.S.-Iraqi relationship.” And he goes on:
President Bush’s desire to make Iraq a “true partner” in the fight against terror has never been one of his priorities while he was President.
As this was coming up in a press briefing at 11, Bush gave a tour of the National Security Information System, which helps maintain and analyze the Pentagon’s intelligence information about Iraq, and the information he received after getting this information to give to Americans. It is to this sort of thing that Bush used his first year in office, starting in January 2004, to discuss the possible U.S.-Iraqi conflict. He said that, like this time during his first term at the White House, the “federal government is going to continue to provide the intelligence that the government wishes all the members of the Bush administration to understand about the true and ongoing nature of this threat by Iraq.” And he said that even then, because there was no time to be wasted on the president of the United States, his desire to make the war in Iraq inevitable led him to express his desire for a resolution. He described the desire for the war and it as “clear and in effect there are some very hard choices that need to be made and we need to take seriously.”
Bush said some of the U.S. military’s capabilities did not match his own, and he said, “I will tell you one thing with this. The United States has not invaded Iraq for seven years. The only time we have invaded Iraq is once every four years. There is no way these things can break out in one go so that we can build a coalition or even create an independent military force. So we need to take seriously our military and the need for our military to help build a credible and reliable coalition. It is time to make fundamental changes in our current policies and our behavior and it will be done very quickly under President Bush.”
Bush was right. The first step he took in this regard was to move the U.S. army to Baghdad in the spring of 2004.
When the first U.S. troops left Iraq in April 2004, the National Guards and other Iraqi forces had little or no presence in the country. They were not supposed to stay in the country, because Iraq was a strategic military base for the United States and Iraq had no way for an American army to enter the country without a deal with the Iraqis. Iraqi forces were supposed to remain there at all times to protect Iraqis from attack. However, on September 26, 2004, the first American troop left the country because of problems in logistics and operations by Iraqi forces. The first few U.S. soldiers left the country without getting on aircraft. So there was talk of leaving the country after the Americans left. The next three days, the second American troops went home from Iraq and Iraq was not a stable country after all. At first, the U.S. government wanted Iraq disbanded under the leadership of General Allen by the United States, but that was not the case. Iraqi government officials kept trying to recruit American soldiers, but there were no Americans left there to join the U.S. military forces and keep the insurgency in this country
Though there isn’t much information released about the exact details of the plan some details were given. There are three main goals. One is to cut command and communication structures throughout Iraq. Second, with using special and covert operations, the U.S. plans to neutralize Iraqi missile launchers. Finally, the third goal is to destroy areas where weapons of mass destruction are found. To accomplish these early goals the United States plans to use an array of Air attack units, mostly comprised of bombing capable aircraft. Special Forces, including navy seals, green berets, and army rangers