*This was my final exam for AP American Government last June of 2003. Have a good time reading it! ^^*
The article that the diplomat, Timothy Carney, from the Pentagon's Office of Reconstruction and Humanitation Assistance (ORHA) on the Washington Post's Sunday (June 22, 2003 - Section B) painted a vivid picture of what the current situation is in Iraq. After the war in Iraq ended in May, the United States have been searching for Saddam Hussein and "his Weapons of Mass Destruction" while trying to reconstruct Iraq. I say that the United States should occupy Iraq until the government of Iraq is steady enought to support itself. Is the presence of US in Iraq justified? I say no. But I personally think that the US have no choice.
I believe that the United States should occupy Iraq until the Iraqi government is stable enought to support itself economically and socially.
Currently, the economy of Iraq is on a stand still. Before the war in Iraq broke out, there were 96,000 workers in 52 state-owned enterprises. After the war, in May, only the dairy enterprise was operating. The Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assustance (ORHA) arrived in Baghdad on April 24, just before President Bush declared the war ended in Iraq on May 1st. Upon arrival, the diplomats and other members of the ORHA found no food or water readily available. And there was also a lack of other nexessities such as electricity and communication for some time. If US left Iraq, under the current Iraqi government where there really isn't any governing authorities, the Iraq nation stand no chance on the global world economically.
That brings us to the question of whethr the Iraqi government can rule Iraq. Currently, there are no civil authoritis capable of governing as...