What are the arguments for and against military intervention
One of the most important issues today in world politics is the position of Iraq. Presently the world is engaged in a debate about whether to launch a war against Iraq. Various strategies appear on the invasion of Iraq with regularity. The question is whether the US will attack Iraq or not. The whole world is eagerly interested in this question since an invasion can lead to serious consequences for the US and global economy as well as the position of the neighboring countries -Turkey, Iran, Syria. But the most serious concern is that a war with Iraq can lead to a Third World War. There are several argument for military intervention in Iraq. It is said that for the last couple of years Iraq devoted enormous effort to rebuild its military forces and equip them with weapons of mass destruction. However with using weapons of mass destruction he might succeed provoking Israel to respond, perhaps with nuclear weapons unleashing an Armageddon in the Middle East. This could be a serious threat to the world peace. Saddam Hussein is the absolute dictator in Iraq. He won 100% of the votes on the last elections, which is completely impossible in a democratic society where an opposition exists. The Iraqi people live under his dic
America might want to gain power over Iraq because of its rich oil resources. The Earth is already lacking in energy resources . I think there should not be military intervention by any of the countries but in case there are steps which are need to be taken then the only one who has the right for that is the United Nations. He has launched war on two of his neighbors. The most commonly heard reason in the media for a future attack on Iraq is that Iraq might possess weapons of mass destruction. I believe that a war is avoidable -even though Saddam Hussein might be hard leader to deal with- if the representatives of the countries sit down and talk about the issue then it is going to be solved without any pointless deaths. This is undesirable by every country in the world. He burned oil fields in Kuwait and released 60 million barrels of oil in the desert, with which he spoiled 1500 km of the Gulf coast. He did not act as an aggressor against the United States . We should also think about the innocent Iraqi people who have already suffered a lot because of the sanctions. But the central point is that any campaign against Iraq, whatever the strategy , cost and risks , is certain to divert the United States from some indefinite time from their war of terrorism Also we have to consider that America might use Saddam's aggression to pull the wool over the fact that she just wants to take revenge on the Arab world because of the terrorist attacks , although Saddam Hussein was not found to be clearly implicated in the event of September 11 . It may at some point be wise to remove him from power. So it is hypocritical to say that Iraq has to be punished for this reason.
Common topics in this essay:
Saddam Hussein,
United America,
World War,
Iraq Various,
North Korea,
Iraq Dec,
Iraq Iraq,
Security Council,
America Saddam's,
Iran Syria,
weapons mass,
mass destruction,
weapons mass destruction,
saddam hussein,
attack iraq,
lead serious consequences,
weapons inspectors,
global economy,
invasion iraq,
consequences global,
serious consequences,
serious consequences global,
consequences global economy,
lead serious,
|
Acceptance Essays
