Bush and Iraq
According to the original reasoning behind Bush's war on Iraq, Saddam Hussein's regime posed a terrorist threat to the free world, however (subsequent to evidence emerging in the press that this threat was exaggerated, if not fabricated) in more recent statements the Bush administration has strongly implied that the war was justified not on the basis of freeing the world of terrorists but because Hussein was a brutal dictator and Iraq needed to be freed from his rule. The idea that the war on terror is actually a war to bring democracy to the world is one which may coincide somewhat with the controversial ideas espoused by Fukuyama, who taught that History (which is to say the evolution of society, not the happening of events) would end when all nations were converted to western liberal democracies and engaged in the global consumerist culture. Perhaps, some might argue, the Bush doctrine goes well beyond making the world safe from terrorism, and seeks to fulfill Fukuyama's vision of 'the last man' by bringing western liberal democracy to all the continents of the world. There is certainly evidence that Bush wishes his aggressive war-making to be perceived in this way, however, such there is no evidence that his actions actually support the bringing of democracy to Iraq, or any other nation. In fact, the actions of the Bush administration seem more contrary to democratic sentiment than supportive.
Originally, it will be remembered, Bush did not speak consistently of bringing democracy as the primary goal. The invasion of Iraq was justified by the theory, to which the Bush administration attributed absolute surety, that Hussein was stocking weapons of mass destruction, and that he was in league with the terrorists who had perpetrated the September 11th terrorist attacks. Even after it became evident that weapon of mass destruction did not exist on the ground, Bush originally seemed prepared to continue the charade of their existence....
Post War Iraq: A Paradox in the Making: Legitimacy vs. legality The regulations pertaining to the application of force in International Law has transformed greatly from the culmination of the Second World War, and again in the new circumstances confronting the world in the aftermath of the end of the Cold War. Novel establishments have been formed, old ones have withered away and an equally enormous quantity of intellectual writing has
This is the risk countries take by entering the world economy. China is an emerging economic power in the world. This has come about due to the enormous market there -- almost two billion people -- and their gradual movement into the global economy. China, Malaysia, and Singapore are all entering the last stage of economic development and much of their success has been a result of foreign direct investment.
This is to note that "Trinidad and Tobago alone account for 80% (1st quarter 2004) of all U.S. LNG imports, up from 68% in 2002. Therefore, any incident involving an LNG tanker along the Caribbean routes could harm not only U.S. energy security but also the economies of the Caribbean islands, affecting tourism and other industries." (Kelshell, 1) Such a trajectory has all the markings of an Al-Qaeda styled
Anarchy is but one aspect of the Realist paradigm. Anarchy is the impetus for all other components of the Realist theory to come into play. Elements such as power, security dilemma's, balance of power, polarity and alliances and ultimately war are all outcrops of the existence of any real centralized power and an absence of true legitimacy in the form of a well established, respected, influential central government. Each
Immigration and the Muslim Population 9/11 changed the world -- especially in the U.S. in terms of Muslim-American relations and the way the word "terror" and "terrorist" is used to identify or refer to a group of people.[footnoteRef:1] The issue of Islamaphobia became more pronounced and anti-Muslim immigration policies began to be discussed as a matter of national security.[footnoteRef:2] As -- has shown, the media has been complicit in both demonizing
The House rejected an effort to require the withdrawal of the Marines by early 1984, on November 2nd, 1983. And, Senate "Democrats were unable to force a vote on a proposal, introduced on Oct. 26 as SRes253, to replace the Marines with a United Nations, or some other "neutral," force." The primary short-term threat was that Marines had become targets in Lebanon. They were no longer the neutral forces that had
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now