Should U.S get war with Iraq Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Should U.S get war with Iraq - Research Paper Example To him, Saddam was developing and stock piling weapons of mass destruction, denied Iraq people democratic space and his administration abused human rights. Furthermore, Saddam was accused of financing and harboring Al-Qaeda. However, facts and evidences refuted the above allegations and revealed that it was Bush’s and his cronies’ decision to attack Iraq in order to secure supply of oil. Statement French and Jason claimed that terrorism and weapons of mass destruction compelled United States of America to lead war against Iraq (61). However, United States of America should not have led war against Iraq. All facts and supplementary evidence failed to link Iraq with any form of violation of both international law and United States security. On the contrary, security, integrity and independence of sovereign Iraq were adversely violated following clever statements and manipulation of facts carried out by former President Bush administration. Bush used clever statements to i nfluence decision of the UN Security Council and allied nations to destroy Saddam’s regime. Bush administration painted Saddam as defiant and deceptive. As compared to Iran, Libya and North Korea, Iraq had less capability of developing WMD. Doherty confirmed that war in Iraq was not driven by bad intelligence but rather it was by Choice of Bush and his cronies. Bush relied on his National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), which were doctored to mislead Americans and the world to back the war against Saddam regime as planned. Justification why Iraq war was acceptable First reason why it was wrong to invade Iraq was that, Iraq did not possess or produced weapons of mass destruction. According to United Nations Security Council and United Nations General Assembly, the United Nations Monitoring Verification and Inspection Commission did not find evidence of weapons of mass destruction (199). Iraq Survey Group led by the United States of America revealed that Iraq ended its biological, chemical and nuclear programs in 1991. In fact in February 2001, Powell and Rumsfeld asserted that Iraq did not pose a nuclear threat. It was even revealed that Saddam did not have the capacity or intention to project conventional weapons against own neighbors leave alone weapons of mass destruction. Furthermore, United States at that time declared that they had Saddam caged. The weapons that were suspected to be contained in Iran were Yellowcake uranium. Furthermore, the French government opined that Iraq had stockpiles of botulism and anthrax toxins and was able to produce VX within short notice. Sabri alleged that Saddam hid poisonous gas among Sunni tribe’s men but revealed that there were no biological weapons stocked piled or produced in Iraq. However, Bush’s administration maintained that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction even after facts presented by various investigators such as Wilson Joseph and Subri revealed otherwise. In 1995, according to report provi ded by defector General Hussein Kamel to the United Nation’s Security Council all chemical, biological, missiles and nuclear arsenals had been destroyed. Following repeated assessment that was done in May 2001, Iraq’s military was said to be fairly weak. In July 2001, Rice claimed that Saddam was not in control of North of Iraq and his military forces were not rebuilt or regroup. In September 2002, International Institute for Strategic Studies revealed