Why Did the US Invade Iraq in 2003 - Research Paper Example

Why did the US invade Iraq in 2003? The reality of the American invasion of Iraq, can be based on several factors that can be considered to be more theory than the actual establishment of any realism to the factor. The general and broad conclusion was based on oil, and rather not the actual established fallacy of Weapons of Mass Destruction. The decoy may have served as a gullible title given the events of 9/11, but it can be considered to be the smoke screen of the invasion of Iraq (Bellavia, 2007). However, the question truly remains as to why George W. Bush sought to invade Iraq given that there was no evidence to support the notion of ‘Weapons of Mass Destructions’ (WMD). The 9/11 attacks could be considered as the facilitator of the Iraq invasion. It borne in mind; there are suggestions that the terrorist group Al-Qaeda resided in some parts of Iraq. It was also claimed that Iraq in some way was supplying the terrorist group with weaponry. This was the story that was used as the cloaking report that would be used to hide or conceal the true intention of the invasion of Iraq. (Gordon, 2006) The main fact was that Iraq was or still is a country that has a high level of production of oil. This was something that the Bush administration was seeking to gain. It could stem from the fact that Saudi Arabia was not providing the ideal terms for purchase of oil, and the cost seemed to be fairly high at a time when the cost of oil seemed to be increasing. The expenditure of the US government was quite high due to the ‘War on Terror’. It was therefore essential for the US to gain some supply of oil without having to exceed their actual expenditure. The oil companies in the United States were having a production problem especially with the refinement of oil at an all time low at the time. There was an actual shortage of oil and the fact that the oil reserves were drying up, meant that it was important that the US seek cheaper alternatives for the valuable commodity. The invasion of Iraq would serve as the best cover for the US in seeking new means of obtaining oil at a low cost. (Larson, 2010) The actual nature of the Iraq invasion can be considered as a new ground for the United States to test their new weaponry. The war in Afghanistan at the time was progressing as expected, and as a result, it meant that objective in Afghanistan was met. However, this meant that the United States needed further training on their weaponry, as well as gets a better grip of the tactics that can be applied in the desert terrain. Iraq served as the nearest and best alternative (North, 2009). Although the United States did invade part of Pakistan in an attempt to eradicate Al-Qaeda, Iraq served as the better option as it had the desert terrain that was adequate for the United States to fine-tune or harness their tactics and skills in the environment. It was also essential for the US to establish the effectiveness of their weaponry. In the case of tanks, the desert environment served as the prime ground for the US to test their tank that detonates roadside bombs and mines. The success of the testing served to identify and note the potential problems that may arise from the equipment. It also involved the analysis of how effective the military outfits would be in the region. The heaviness of the overalls, which contained several pockets for carrying various tools such as grenades, binoculars, flares among others would be tested to see if the new overalls would be ideal for combat. Another factor was the modernized technology. The updated versions of guns including the infamous m-16 were use in Iraq and the effectiveness of the weapons would serve as the essential location for the analysis of their effectiveness. (O’Connell, 2008) In some cases, it was claimed that it would be most important to safeguard the American citizens; hence it was important for the US to attack the enemy on their own ground. The irony is that the best solution to test new equipment that would cause harm to the citizens, is to relocate the battle and establish the war in an area that would ensure that there is no harm to the Americans; hence the need for the US to test the new equipment first in Afghanistan then Iraq. It served as the perfect area for which the US army could improve its tactics as well as weaponry; therefore, the notion of WMDs was simply a fallacy. Another element that was evident in the invasion of Iraq was based on an image or reputation capacity. This is because the element of the USA intervening in Afghanistan and Iraq served as a means of putting a positive image on the United States. In this case, it was a matter of the US seeming to eradicate terrorism, and it would seem as though they were ensuring that the world is rid of terrorism; therefore, the USA would be considered the hero of the world in ending terrorism (Bellavia, 2009). As the leader in the ‘War against Terror’, in the public eye, the US was carrying out the actual initiative of ending terrorism. They were assisted by the likes of Germany, Britain, Australia, but they were more on a supporting role in the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, hence the illustration of how the US was intent on ensuring that the majority of the credit would be theirs and hence be credited with ending terrorism. Based on the sequence of the events that unfolded in the war in Iraq, it was essential for the assassination of Saddam Hussein. This is because the actual objective was to seek and destroy any WMDs that were in the country, which the US army failed to find. In order to justify their entry into Iraq (to the public and hide the actual fact of seeking oil), they proclaimed that they had to capture Saddam Hussein so as to claim that they had captured a terrorist and brought him to justice (Ricks, 2006). In the manner that they described Saddam Hussein, it was more as if they were considering him to be the modern day Hitler. In actual fact, there is no evidence to support the accusations that were labeled against Saddam Hussein, so it was more of a pathetic tactic for the United States to justify their intrusion into Iraq. In actual fact, Iraq is worse off in comparison to the period in which Saddam Hussein was in power. Therefore, in actual fact the invasion of Iraq may seem to be pointless. However, it is believed that there was a personal agenda behind the invasion of Iraq; it was a case of personal Vendetta. (Downing, 2005) The invasion of Iraq was under the rule of George W Bush. In 1992, there was the Gulf War, which was also known as the Iraq War. The Iraqi troops had invaded Kuwait and the US was not happy about the Iraqi’s actions, and they sent their army to get the Iraqi troops out of Kuwait. At the time, George Bush Senior was president, and coincidentally, Saddam Hussein was the President of Iraq. The result of the war was that the US army was thoroughly beaten, as they were unable to counter the tactics of the Iraqi army in the desert. Now where is the link between the gulf war and the 2003 Iraq War? It is a case of the son doing what his father could not do, triumph over Saddam Hussein. In hindsight, George W. Bush may have been influenced by his father to go after Saddam Hussein as a manner of revenge for the heavy defeat that the US suffered in the Gulf War. (Mankhen, 2007). In actual essence, the true motive behind the invasion of Iraq can be concluded as a revenge mission, and it seemed convenient based on the fact that Saddam’s army was fairly weak. It was an opportune moment for the Bush family could finally triumph over Saddam. To ensure that he never had the chance of revenging, they ensured that he was killed under the pretence that he was a ‘Terrorist’, hence the illustration of vendetta, which can be attributed as the prime reason as to why the US invaded Iraq. In conclusion, there are many theories as to why The US invaded Iraq. Some still believe that it was part of the ‘War on Terror’, but those are simply the ignorant individuals who are too naïve to seek the truth. The most logical reason would be the benefit of cost free oil, and it makes sense on a number of levels of reasoning. However, it goes beyond that and hence it is likely that the true reason behind the invasion on Iraq was for the Bush Family to revenge the heavy loss incurred on George Bush Senior in the Saddam Hussein’s Gulf War. It is a case of true vendetta and the killing of Saddam under the spotlight, may have served to be the crowning moment of the revenge tactic of the Bush Family. References: Bellavia, D. (2007). House to House An Epic of Urban Warfare. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. Gordon, M. , & Trainor, B. (2006). Cobra II: The Inside Story of the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq. New York, NY: Vintage. Larson, L. (2010). Senator's Son: An Iraq War Novel. Washington DC: K.E. Inc North, R. (2009). Ministry of Defeat: the British War in Iraq 2003–2009. London: Continuum. O'Connell, E. (2008). Counterinsurgency in Iraq: 2003–2006. California, CA: Rand Corporation. Ricks, T. (2006). Fiasco, the American Military Adventure in Iraq. London: Penguin Press. Mankhen. T. (2007). War in Iraq: Planning and Execution. New York, NY: T & F Books. Read More