| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "WAR IRAQ CHANGING ATTITUDES": |
|
|
The US War In Iraq: Changing Attitudes, 2006.
Examines what is leading the international community to change its opinion about the U.S.-led war in Iraq.
2,082 words (approx. 8.3 pages), 17 sources, APA, $ 65.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The central point of the paper is the assumption that, after the war in Afghanistan, the U.S. motivated its military actions in Iraq by the existing breach of human rights conventions. Although there was a general belief that the people of Iraq were living under severe state oppression, there are arguments that the salvation of the Iraqi people was used as a mere pretext for the U.S.'s secret motives. The paper argues that the violent air attacks over Baghdad and the loss of civilian lives, the Abu Ghraib scandal and the results of the Commission for WMD revealing the lack of information regarding Iraqi weapons, all forced the international community to slowly withdraw military forces and political support.
From the Paper
"On the other side of the Atlantic, the EU wants to become a leading force on the international arena, and therefore it is working on improving the coherence of policies within the communitarian members by agreeing on a European Security Strategy. This achievement represents in fact the first steps towards speaking in one voice in matters such as conflict intervention. According to Carl Bildt - former prime minister of Sweden- "we have started to demonstrate an element of capability when it comes to European crisis management operations" ; he supports his affirmation with examples such as the Concordia Mission in Macedonia and the Artemis Operation in Congo."
| |
|
Comparing the War in Iraq with the Vietnam War, 2006.
This study examines the similarities of United States policy in regards to the war in Iraq and the Vietnam war.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 3 sources, $ 26.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article, the writer maintains that the war in Iraq and the Vietnam war hold very similar foreign policy agendas, which rely on falsified intelligence information to enact pre-emptive war. The writer explains that the lack of presidential action to halt the War in Iraq further reveals the growing problems of war powers that allow nations, such as the United States, to attack smaller countries without reliable proofs of a threat. Further the writer notes that both president Bush and President Johnson invoke similarities in how war is created and enacted through poor intelligence and aggressive policies toward lesser nations.
From the Paper
"In many ways, the instigation of war through fabricated intelligence was seen in the Gulf of Tonkin incident, which can also be seen in the false intelligence the United States used to launch a War in Iraq. In this manner, both of these wars offer examples of similar wars in that they were based on false intelligence and were preemptive in design. The historical background to the Vietnam conflict was brought on by the rise in anti-communist campaigns, such as those made by McCarthyism in the 50s."
| |
|
War in Iraq War on Terror, 2007.
A discussion of how the war in Iraq and war on terror became linked as election issues.
2,646 words (approx. 10.6 pages), 13 sources, MLA, $ 79.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
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."
| |
|
War with Iraq, 2002.
This paper discusses the risks of a U.S. war with Iraq
950 words (approx. 3.8 pages), 8 sources, MLA, $ 33.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In looking at the risks of a U.S. war with Iraq, this paper discusses the increase in the threat to national security, the destabilizatiuon of world peace and the violation of democratic principles. The author draws the conclusion that America would be violating each and every principle that it claims to uphold if it chooses to go to war with Iraq.
Outline
1. An increase in the threat to national security.
a. Mercenary and fundamentalist factions in Afghanistan that once followed U.S. wishes turned against the U.S. post the Gulf War against Iraq, ultimately leading to September 11, 2001.
b. Rise in anti-American sentiment
i. Questions over U.S. rhetoric and double standards such as categorizing Iraq and Iran as belonging to the ?axis of evil,? but continuing to turn a blind eye to terrorist activity in Pakistan within its own borders and in Kashmir.
2. Destabilization of world peace
a. U.S. action against Iraq could lead to further destabilization of the entire Middle East region, as opined by many leading experts.
b. Breakdown of international arms non-proliferation and disarmament efforts since U.S. preemptive action will lend further justification to countries of different ideological leanings to arm themselves in the interests of national self-defense.
3. Violation of democratic principles
a. The right of the people of each country to choose their preferred course of action and if so desired overthrow their own government, which has been exercised time and again in world history
i. Our own struggle to break away from British Imperialism
ii. India?s freedom of struggle against the British using non-violent principles and forms of rebellion.
iii. The increasing fall in U.S. public opinion
b. A war against an already deprived and suffering nation raises questions about humanitarian principles.
4. In conclusion, we will be violating each and every principle that we claim to uphold if we choose to go to war with Iraq.
From the Paper
"I don?t think anyone in the free world doubts that Saddam Hussein is a ?threat? to international peace. However, any military action is likely to be risky and self-defeating at this point in time. To start with, any U.S. action against Iraq and that too, without support from the UN and the international community is likely to endanger and not protect national security. For after all, let?s not forget and let?s face upto the fact that Osama was, in many ways, a creation of the U.S., who brought together a combination of communal factions and mercenaries in Afghanistan during the years of the Cold War, on the platform of anti-communism and ?jehad.? Post the end of the Cold War, however, various interested factions in the Islamic world continued to use Afghanistan and the very same U.S. creations of jehadis to spread Islamic fundamentalism."
| |
|
The War with Iraq, 2004.
An analysis of the micro-economic implications of the war with Iraq.
1,118 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 38.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how the war with Iraq has had many profound effects on the operating components of the national economy within the United States. It looks at how individual firms, households, and consumers have been affected by a variety of factors resulting from war. It discusses, in particular, how one of the most profound effects of the war with Iraq has been increasing oil prices and decreased consumer spending in response to such increases and the rise in unemployment. It also shows how, although the demand curve for gasoline despite increasing prices has always remained relatively static, the micro-economic impact of war with Iraq can be evidenced in consumer spending on other retail items.
From the Paper
"The War with Iraq may be considered a partial cause for the growing rate of private debt or debt held by individual households (Culler, 1). Many households, facing increased layoffs and increased spending on items such as fuel, have fallen to excessive borrowing as a solution (Culler, 1). Many individual companies have also followed suit, borrowing more money to pay off debts than they can foreseeable manage. When individual households do not have the money they perceive necessary to spend, they often fall to borrowing, under the assumption that they will in the near future have the money necessary to pay back any loans incurred. However, the War with Iraq has negatively impacted many households, causing many private persons and consumers to realize they may not have the money necessary to pay back loans in the short term."
| |
|
The U.S. War on Iraq, 2004.
Analysis of U.S. policies toward Iraq, especially with regard to the U.S. war against Iraq.
2,749 words (approx. 11.0 pages), 14 sources, APA, $ 82.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at the war on Iraq and considers whether U.S. policy towards Iraq can prevail through an analysis of eight facets of this policy: international trade; weapons of mass destruction; democratization; the war against tyranny vs. the grab for oil; the ?shock and awe? tactics used at the beginning of the war; the U.S. occupation vs. liberation; whether the new government of Iraq will be Iraqi run or whether Iraq will become a puppet state; and Operation Iraqi Freedom. The analysis is performed by means of an in-depth literature review, with relevant statistical support where necessary. It is found that the war on Iraq was founded on false premises and that the current U.S. policy towards Iraq is not sustainable for the Iraqi people nor for the honor of the U.S. government.
Introduction
Methodology and Methods
Literature Review
Results and Findings
Conclusions/Discussion
From the Paper
"The war on Iraq (which some people would argue was an illegal invasion on Iraq, as it happened without regard for international law and also pre-emptively) began almost one year ago, and despite the fact that the U.S. government is trying to persuade its populace that the war is over, by making a show of handing power back to the people of Iraq (although it is not yet known who those people will be, or if those people will agree enough in the meantime to form a democratic governing body), the war is far from over. Day by day, the number of dead and the number of casualties increase in Iraq, with bombings and disagreements amongst rival Iraqi groups, most obviously the different factions of Muslims, the Shi?as and the Sunnis."
| |
|
The War Against Iraq, 2006.
This paper discusses the war in Iraq and presents a very anti-war stance.
2,651 words (approx. 10.6 pages), 10 sources, MLA, $ 79.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper contends that the US-led coalition power has failed to achieve its mission in Iraq. The paper begins by explaining that when George W. Bush and Tony Blair declared war on Iraq, they proclaimed that they had solid evidence that Iraq had been trying to acquire weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear weapons. The paper continues that they never found these weapons and so now they have severe problems in upholding justification for the war. The paper describes the worsening situation in Iraq and includes a diary excerpt of a young Iraqi woman's suffering. The paper concludes that the war in Iraq should not have occurred because the invasion was no more than a punishment for Iraq, encouraged by American victims of 9.11 thinking, "We should do something about terrorism."
From the Paper
"The US-led coalition power has failed to achieve its mission in Iraq. From the very start, there were no persuasive reasons that justified invading Iraq. Not only did the coalition make unreasonable demands on a sovereign country, the coalition never found menacing weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and never proved its allegation that the Iraqi government was connected with Al-Qaeda. Failing to provide evidence for these charges, the leaders of the coalition power and some pro-war scholars have begun positioning the war in another way. Instead of admitting failure, they insist that the war was necessary to promote democracy in Iraq. Also, the US and the UK have not been successful in securing public order and peace in Iraq for the last three years after major combat ended because of their poor planning. Last, but not least, the war has not produced better results. Iraq has been brutally destroyed based on false accusations. And, Americans are not any more secure from terrorism. Because the attack on Iraq by the US-led coalition power has not met its objectives, it has been a wasted effort that should not have occurred."
| |
|
The Military-Industrial Complex and the War in Iraq, 2008.
An argument that President Eisenhower's military-industrial complex warning is connected to the War in Iraq.
938 words (approx. 3.8 pages), 3 sources, APA, $ 33.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper compares and contrasts the war in Iraq with President Eisenhower's warning about the military-industrial complex. The paper argues that because President Eisenhower's warning in 1961 of the growing power and influence of the military-industrial complex has been largely forgotten, we are now burdened with the consequences of a war in Iraq. The paper claims that the Iraq war is reaping massive profits for the defense industry, but is bankrupting the American Treasury and bitterly dividing the country.
From the Paper
"Unfortunately, neither the American people nor their leaders have sufficiently heeded President Eisenhower's warnings over the past forty-five years, for the military-industrial complex exists today and has power and influence on a far vaster scale than existed in 1961. The interlocking associations between government leaders and institutions, powerful defense industry corporations, and the Pentagon have produced skyrocketing budget deficits, immense profits for weapons manufacturers, rampant political corruption in Washington D.C., and a bloody fiasco in Iraq."
| |
|
War in Iraq, 2007.
This paper presents an anti-war stance on the current war in Iraq.
1,898 words (approx. 7.6 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 60.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper relates that the war against Iraq is beginning to acquire the reputation of the Vietnam War. The paper discusses how the nation's opposition to the Vietnam war ultimately led to the withdrawal of the American forces from the country without achieving their objective of defeating the Communists and it is often considered a political defeat for the country. The paper explores the economic effects of the war in Iraq and how American soldiers are losing their will to fight. The paper examines the differences of opinion between the military and the political government. The paper also shows how the reasons for having started the war have been found to be baseless.
Outline:
Introduction
Analysis
Conclusion
From the Paper
"One of the major effects of the war in Iraq is economic. While it is true that the effect on the economy of the war is not as large as the effects of the Korean and Vietnam wars, or even of World War II which accounted for forty percent of GDP, yet the effects of the war are not known. The first estimate from Alan Greenspan was that the effect would be of an expense around $100 billion; this was raised to an estimate of $200 billion shortly. The effect according to him was of a soft patch in the economy. At the same time, Lawrence Lindsey, who was the economic advisor to the White House at about that period, said that the economic prospects were not clear."
| |
|
The War in Iraq, 2007.
An analysis of whether the lack of terrorist activity in the US since the beginning of the war in Iraq, is due to the war or due to the improvement of the internal security of the US.
1,151 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 10 sources, MLA, $ 39.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses whether the invasion of Iraq was justified and whether the war in Iraq has led to a decline in the threat of terrorism in America. It analyzes whether the lack of terrorist activity in the US since the beginning of the war is due to the war or due to the improvement of the internal security of the US. The paper discusses both sides of this debate.
From the Paper
"I conclude that the war in Iraq has little to do with the safety of America. According to US intelligence agencies, terrorist attacks can occur at any moment since the hatred against US is fueled by the war in Iraq. So, in fact, the war in Iraq might be the reason for another terrorist attack in America. Al Qaeda benefits greatly from the war in Iraq, as many Muslim opponents of the war might fall for the terrorist group's propaganda and support al Qaeda only because it fights against the "oppressive" United States (Benjamin, 2003). As I now see it, the war in Iraq might be a reason for the safety of US at home only due to the fact that it represents a battle field between terrorists and US - a preferred battle field for America."
| |
|
Doing Business in Post-War Iraq, 2003.
An overview of issues the confronting international businesses operating in post-war Iraq.
6,900 words (approx. 27.6 pages), 21 sources, APA, $ 135.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper provides an overview of the various political and economic risk issues confronting international businesses operating in post-war Iraq. The paper examines a plan for building a Web design company in the UAE, which would do business in the Middle East and post-war Iraq. The paper uses this company as a case study, exploring what factors the company should consider and aspects of international marketing.
From the Paper
"Today's business world stretches well beyond national borders. Multinational and global companies have been existence for hundreds of years, but on a limited basis until the twentieth century. During the twentieth..."
| |
|
War in Iraq, 2007.
An argument against the war in Iraq.
3,725 words (approx. 14.9 pages), 14 sources, APA, $ 102.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the reasons behind the war in Iraq and how subsequent developments such as the failure of the U.S. forces to find any weapons of mass destruction (WMD), a determined Iraqi insurgency against the U.S. occupation and the Abu Gharib scandal have further put grave doubts on the wisdom and legitimacy of the U.S. action. It argues that the U.S. invasion of Iraq violates the international law and is a war of aggression and also examines the justifications given by the U.S. administration for the war.
Outline:
Background of the War
The United States' Arguments about the Legality of the Iraq War and their Rebuttal
The United Nations' View on the Iraq Invasion
Status of the International Criminal Court
Conclusion
From the Paper
"The 1991 Gulf War ended in a cease-fire as per the UN Resolution # 686, which required Iraq to accept and abide by all previous Security Council resolutions - including Resolution # 678. The cease-fire resolution also authorized UN inspection teams to enter Iraq and ensure that its regime complied with UN arms limitation treaties such as the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). When UN inspectors discovered that Saddam Hussein was in not complying with such treaties, the United Nations passed another resolution (No. 687) imposing economic sanctions that were not to be lifted until Iraq was once again in substantial compliance with all UN arms conventions, including the NPT. (Ibid.) "
| |
|
Economic Impact of the War in Iraq, 2007.
This paper analyzes the economic impact on the United States of the war in Iraq.
920 words (approx. 3.7 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article, the writer notes that as the war in Iraq continues, determining the effect of the war on the United States economy is somewhat difficult. In addition, the writer points out that there are several complicating factors, such as the war in Afghanistan, domestic unease with the President that is not solely linked to war-time issues and the fact that the U.S. is still struggling to recover financially and emotionally from a devastating terrorist attack, which make it difficult to isolate the war's impact on the economy. However, while long-term economic consequences cannot yet be determined, there are many short-term economic consequences that appear linked to the Iraq war. The writer concludes that the only real question left unresolved is whether an eventual total victory for the United States in Iraq would place the U.S. in the position to recoup some of the economic losses it incurred during the war.
From the Paper
"Furthermore, Byczkowski pointed to some significant differences between the war in Iraq and previous wars that might keep Iraq from having a stimulating effect on the American economy. First, he pointed out that military spending was much higher in previous wars than in the Iraq war. Therefore, the full employment enjoyed during World War I, World War II, the Korean war, and the Vietnam War, would probably not be duplicated unless the Federal government was willing to commit the same percentage of resources to wartime spending. Instead, as of 2003, many economists believed that it would be better to compare the economic effect of the war in Iraq to the experience of the Gulf War of 1990, which led to a temporary increase in oil prices and a temporary decrease in consumer spending. However, there are significant differences between the Gulf War and the war in Iraq, primarily in duration and chances of success, which make this comparison dubious, at best."
| |
|
The War in Iraq, 2007.
This paper examines the dollar cost of the war in Iraq.
955 words (approx. 3.8 pages), 8 sources, MLA, $ 33.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper reports that the National Priorities Project (NPP) estimates that, as of March 2007, based on congressional appropriations, the cost of the war in Iraq is over 410 billion dollars. The author points out that there has been a waste of billions on "reconstruction" because of a lack of strategy and unclear lines of authority between the Defense and State Departments, which has led to confusion and disarray. The paper reports that Nobel Prize winner Joseph E. Stiglitz indicates that the total costs of the Iraq war could top the $2 trillion mark assuming that the troops will remain in Iraq until 2010 and including the health care costs of injured returning soldiers.
From the Paper
"The NPP indicates that with the money spent so far on the war in Iraq, the United States could have paid for 54,369,196 children to attend Head Start for one years. With those $410 billion, Americans could have built 3,696,054 affordable housing units. With that money the U.S. could have hired 7,113,800 teachers to work in public schools for one year. And the NPP data shows that the money spend so far on the Iraq war could have provided major medical health coverage for 245,801,075 children for a year."
| |
|
Civil War in Iraq, 2008.
An argument that the civil war in Iraq is due to deceit on the part of the Bush administration.
2,129 words (approx. 8.5 pages), 8 sources, MLA, $ 66.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the civil war in Iraq and the role that the United States played in beginning it. The paper argues that terrorist attacks of 9/11 were ruthlessly exploited by President Bush and his advisors, who falsely accused Iraq of plotting to attack the United States with weapons of mass destruction. The paper concludes that Iraq's civil war was a consequence of that deceit.
From the Paper
"As this debate intensifies in the United States, hundreds of innocent Iraqis are being killed every week as sectarian violence escalates and civil war rages. The fragile authority, limited influence, and entrenched corruption of the Iraqi government has prevented it thus far from establishing control, reducing the violence, and forging any semblance of unity between the Shi'ites, Sunnis, and Kurds. Much of its impotence is due to the perceptions of millions of Iraqis that it is little more than a puppet government controlled by the Bush Administration. This widespread perception fuels the insurgency, which doesn't appear likely to abate unless the United States begins withdrawing troops in significant numbers."
|
|
|
