There are a plethora of reasons that we may enter into a war with Iraq none of which include moral obligation, the war on terror, or national security.
This so called ?war on terror? is nothing more than our governments? mostly George W. Bush?s own hypocritical attempt to force his ideals onto what should be considered sovereign states as well as some within our own government with McCarthy-like tactics. We attempt to reinforce this with ?Iraq?s violations of the United Nations Resolutions?, and their ?involvement in the terrorist attacks that took place on September 11, 2001?. It will be my goal to show the complete lack of validity within these arguments.
The United Nations
The argument for going to war based on Iraq?s violations of the United Nations resolution is not valid. In this venture they are only following the lead of the United States who has repeatedly thumbed its nose at the United Nations by stating that we will move unilaterally if we do not gain United Nations.
English: The United Nations Security Council Chamb...
English: At the UN, Colin Powell holds a model via...
English: Official photograph portrait of former U....approval. So correct me if I?m wrong, the basis for this argument would be that we are going to war because Iraq is violating the resolutions of an agency the United States itself does not have enough respect for to abide by its resolutions? The United Nations can't function if countries don't observe its sanctions, and as one of the founding members we should be setting an example rather than pretending that they don't apply to us.
Weapons of Mass Destruction
The threat of nuclear or biological warfare is a scare tactic used by our very own George W. Bush to attempt to rationalize a war against Iraq. Maybe the United States should examine itself a bit more closely since it is the nation that holds the most nuclear, chemical,