On March 19, 2003, after much debate and protest, the United States began Operation Iraqi Freedom. What was originally intended to be a swift, effective liberation of the Iraqi people has become a drawn-out, controversial conflict. Now, the coalition is faced with many new and pressing decisions. As the hostility intensifies in the Middle East, people in many nations are asking why the United States is still in Iraq. The thin line between assisting and acquiring Iraq is being scrutinized. While days turned into months for the coalition soldiers in conflict, the focus of the conflict seemed to change from disabling the Iraqi regime to maintaining peace until now maintaining peace until the country can be stabilized. However, in order to achieve success in Iraq, the United States needs to concentrate on satisfying the initial goals of the conflict.
When President George W. Bush addressed the public on the war taking place in Iraq, he noted three main goals.
The first goal was to liberate the Iraqi people. Next, the United States was to eliminate Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WOMD.) The last goal was to end the regime of Saddam Hussein. By achieving these goals, Bush assured the public that a free Iraq would more likely turn against terrorism and cruelty and begin reconciliation and reform. These three goals were his verbal agreement for the public's approval of intervention. Now that the country has been seized by the United States, it is important to question the fulfillment of these goals and implement plans for resolutions.
First, the Iraqi people must be liberated. Although major steps towards improvement have taken place, the people of Iraq have not yet been given freedom to rule themselves. Also, one in five Iraqis, or 4.6 million people, suffers from chronic poverty. Despite...