Abstract
This paper looks at how, thus far, the UK and the US have worked together fairly smoothly on the war on terror, but that the war on Iraq has placed severe strain on the special relationship developed between these two countries.

From the Paper
"This research paper discusses the current state of the special relationship' between the United Kingdom and the United States in the light of the war on terror and the current Iraq war. The special relationship' refers to the close military and diplomatic cooperation that has characterized Anglo-American relations since..."

Tags:United Kingdom, United States, terrorism, Iraq, War on Terror

Abstract
In this paper the author argues that the war in Iraq was utilized as a persuasive tool to win an election, in which the war was linked to the more global and less definable "war on terrorism." The author further contends that in the 2004 presidential elections the voters were seeking security, and therefore they linked the two issues. This paper demonstrates that the war on terror and the war in Iraq are not connected and in fact contraindicated for the long term safety of the US, specifically with regard to future acts of terrorism. Salient quotes from primary and secondary sources are used to support the author's thesis.

From the Paper
"The importance and reality of this link are now being questioned at every level. People, in both high and low places are questioning the validity of the connection and asking if this aggressive move, on the part of the US, even in the face of much international opposition was in fact appropriate to improve security in the US and her interests all over the world. The political positioning that has become increasingly obvious has undermined the faith of individuals in the nature and necessity of the War in Iraq, as people feel they were sold a bill of goods, rather than leveled with in regards to the strategic importance of the Iraq in the global war on terrorism in both the short and log term. In fact this work argues that the only connection between the war on terrorism and the War on Iraq is that the later has and will continue to serve to increase terrorist activities and actions against the US, no matter how the government spins it."

Tags:war, in, Iraq, War, on, Terror, George, W., Bush

Abstract
The paper explores how the War on Terror and continued American occupation has affected the fiscal strength of Iraq and Afghanistan and their growth prospects. The paper focuses on the gross domestic product (GDP) of both countries, their external debt and the unemployment rate. The paper highlights how it is longer-term symptoms such as poverty and unemployment that may indeed lead to economic struggles. The paper therefore reaches the conclusion that the World Bank should not invest in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

From the Paper
"Similarly, in Afghanistan, the removal of the Taliban, and tactical goals such as overtaking and demolishing opium fields, which fund much of the country, have really not affected the overall economic picture. Instead, an 8% GDP growth rate was viewable in 2005, at a level of $21.5B. Given the fact that attention has been on both Iraq and Afghanistan during 2001-present, it should be noted that each country receives overwhelming support from many external sources. During the 2004-2009 timeframe, for example, one conference in Berlin yielded an astounding $8.9B to the aid of Afghanistan."

Tags:gross, domestic, product, debt, unemployment, poverty

Abstract
The paper relates that after the events of 9/11, the US was able to further the idea that state sponsorship of terrorist activities was evident and therefore it was necessary to wage war with Iraq. The paper discusses if the aggressive invasion of Iraq was in fact appropriate to improve security in the US, or if it served to increase the threat to the US. The paper comes to the conclusion that there was absolutely no connection between Iraq and the terrorism of 9/11, and in fact, the war in Iraq is now likely to worsen rather than diffuse the situation. The paper asserts that aggressive actions of the US and the perception by the world of those actions and their source will likely create a greater international hatred for the US than what already exists.

From the Paper
"There is little doubt that the actions of the US in its invasion and subsequent war on Iraq will in retrospect be billed as similar in coarse to the Clinton bombing of the pharmaceutical factory but clearly much greater in scale. The war was engaged in regardless of the fact that the truths with regard to Iraq, Saddam Hussein and his actions as well as many other issues were convoluted and often built on myth rather than factual evidence. Myths range in severity from, Hussein's utilization of WMDs to kill his own people, an exaggeration to say the least and that Hussein had been actively attempting to build WMD, since "he" expelled inspectors from Iraq in 1998, again a falsehood. The development of this myth was pervasive though false, as Reece Kilgoe & Ritter point ou tit was actually President Clinton who expelled the UNSCOM weapons inspectors from Iraq, on the eve of the small scale attack of Iraq in December 1998, Operation Desert Fox, a 72 hour aerial bombardment of Iraq."

Tags:terrorism, Bush, administration, aggression, violence, Islam, Al-Qaeda

Abstract
This paper argues that the allegation that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, which were never discovered, was a deliberate deception by the Bush administration to justify their aggression in terms of containing terrorism by maintaining the international balance of power. The paper further asserts that Bush ignored the truth that he heard from his advisers and deliberately misled the American people to make an excuse to go to war with Iraq. The paper contends that Bush wanted to secure America's position of dominance, power and access to oil resources in the Middle East and tricked the American people into thinking that going to war with Iraq was a way of waging war on terrorism.

From the Paper
"The primary thrust of Bush's argument for the invasion of Iraq was that Iraq was a serious threat to the rest of the world because it was building WMD. This is an interesting allegation, given that the only country that really has a large supply of WMD is the USA. However, it must be borne in mind that those countries who seek to justify owning WMD - such as the USA - seek to do so in terms of deterrence theory. The idea is that if rational countries such as the USA and Russia possess nuclear weapons, their mutual knowledge that the other country has WMD will deter either country from ever deploying the WMD."

Tags:lies, balance of power, terrorism, aluminum tubes, imbalance

Abstract
Over the course of the last five decades, the world has looked to the United States of America to stand up and provide a model of international leadership and stability in order to help manage international and internal military, political, and economic problems. Until now, we have acted as the world's protector, taking down bullies after they have hurt and harmed others. This year, however, or early into next, our position, to never take the first shot that will start a war will change, if George W. Bush has his way. We, as a nation, have played a direct role in the improvement of the world condition by quelling conflict wherever we could. But, Iraq, the target of our renewed aggression, will prove to be a much different animal than the others we have captured and tamed since 1945. Iraq's power is not really in its arsenal or in its military (both of which are small, primitive by comparison to the U.S., and ineffective), it is in its ability to motivate thousands if not millions of individuals to act without coordination in a violent and unpredictable manner against the United States and the rest of the western world. It is the purpose of this paper to demonstrate the extreme danger and relative uselessness in attacking Iraq, to show that to do so is an exercise in futility, and that we can pursue much more effective means of preventing terrorism than to stir up the hornets' nest.

Tags:us, invade, iraq

Abstract
This paper looks at the recent historical relations between the United States and Iraq and discusses the reasons the Bush Administration cited for launching an attack on Iraq. The justifications for U.S. policy in Iraq and the ineffectiveness of this policy are discussed, and arguments are presented that maintain that the Bush Administration's unilateral decision to attack Iraq has resulted in more hostility toward the U.S. and will cause more problems and terrorism later.

From the Paper
"When the U.S. was attacked by terrorists, American leaders suspected that Iraq may have ties to international terrorists and was actively trying to make nuclear and biological weapons (Sheldon, 2003). Under Resolution 1441, Iraq is obliged to declare all of its weapons programs. Any false statements in Iraq's weapons declaration, combined with a failure to comply with and cooperate with the resolution, puts Iraq in "material breach" of its obligations which is cause for war. For this reason, and for reasons linked to Iraq's past history, President Bush decided to attack Iraq and get rid of Hussein permanently."

Tags:september, 11, world, trade, center, pentagon, pennsylvania, george, war, on, terrorism, taliban, al, queda, saddam, hussein, osama, bin, laden

Abstract
The paper contends that the U.S. occupation of Iraq has contributed to a deeper sense of insecurity at home on the part of Americans and has not helped reduce the magnitude of worldwide terrorism. The paper examines the main arguments in favor of military withdrawal from Iraq and shows how the American intervention in Iraq has profoundly influenced the level of hatred for the United States around the world.

From the Paper
"The war in Iraq is an ongoing conflict which started with the American and British allied forces' invasion of Iraq in March, 2003. The invasion was launched by a coalition of army forces from the United States, United Kingdom and Spain, at the command of President George W. Bush, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar. Their common reason behind the invasion of Iraq was that Iraq was actively developing weapons of mass destruction, and they invoked the Iraqi refusal to surrender these weapons and to cease all activities in this field."

Tags:terrorism, casualties, al, Qaeda, weapons, democracy

Abstract
This paper explains that the unprecedented impact of 9/11 on the consciousness of America and the international community is a new kind of globalized fear surrounding security, which is the product of shared cultural, political and technological factors characterizing the globalized world against another distinct culture, which aims to destroy rather than build or maintain life. The author points out the interrelationship of countries by relating that Arafat's Palestinian Authority documents unmistakably showed that the PA received money from Saudi Arabia, Iran and Iraq, which then was given to terrorist commanders for acts of terrorism against Israelis. The paper relates that the FBI categorizes international terrorism in the U.S. into three categories: (1) Activities of foreign sponsors, such as Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Cuba and North Korea, which used terrorism as an operational tool of foreign policy in the past; (2) formalized terrorist groups, such as the Lebanese Hezbollah, Al-Gama'a Al-Islamiyya of Egypt and the HAMAS of Palestine and (3) loosely affiliated international radical extremists who do not represent a particular country, such as those behind the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993 in New York City.

From the Paper
"Developments in the international scene have enabled mass-casualty terrorism. Perceived and gross inequalities in economic resources and standards of living among nations in the world have motivated international terrorism and determined the level of ferocity and viciousness of attacks. Poverty was often blamed as the main cause of domestic terrorism, although there appears no "comprehensive correlation between" poverty and terrorism. But it is different in the international scenario. Free-market globalization gave the Islamic world access to Western values and institutions and this offers explanation for the growth of international terrorism, which is the weaker party's occasion to hit back."

Tags:funding, cyber-terrorism, inter-relationship, groups, fbi

Abstract
This paper describes the Reconstruction era with its racial propositions, the New Deal with its economic repercussions and the War on Terror with its military implications. The author points out that these important historical aspects of racial, economic, and military developments helped to preserve the stability and homogeneity of the American ideology of prosperity and racial integrity after the Civil War. The paper concludes that the events play three distinct roles in why America became a more powerful country in relation to its supremacy in the world.

From the Paper
"The Emergency Banking Act helped to create a stable banking system that would retrieve (through federal loans and insurance regulations) much of the "hoarded" monies that were taken out of banks after the crash of 1929. The act forced banks to be supervised by the United States Treasury, which had immediately allowed them to reopen under the Federal Reserve System. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) helped to ensure banking depositors that monies would be insured in the case of the banking institutions demise."

Tags:banking emancipation terrorism iraq, bin laden