The accusation was brought to the attention of the United Nations (UN) and after months of discussions, the UN finally succumbed to the pressure and agreed with the argument put froth by the most powerful nation on the globe. Messrs Bush and Bliar sent a bold ultimatum in the way of Mr Huessain (who denied having these weapons). This technically stated that Sadaam allows weapons Inspectors into Iraq Immediately or the British and Americans will force their way in. Inspectors were granted access and the search began.
For the first few weeks, the UN complained that the Iraqi’s were not allowing the weapons inspectors complete access prompting thoughts that they had something to disguise. Though this would later change, it seemed to me that the Americans had a hidden agenda and were eager to have the war. World opinion was firmly against war as evidenced by world wide protests across the globe and proof of biological weapons had yet to be retrieved. To say that the “war was just” would be a joke.
A week before the actual war began, Hanz Blix and his team had reported that the Iraqi’s were co-operating fully with the wishes of the inspectors and that more time was required for further inspection. This is news that the American and British leaders had been supposedly awaiting for months and when it finally arrived, Bush claimed that “it was to little, to late”. This baffling statement confirmed my suspicions that Mr Bush had no real intention of preventing the war. He wanted this war regardless. But the new question is, why would you want to intentionally want to start a war? I’m not exactly sure, but I have my ideas. My main belief is that American and British troops would go into Iraq and take control of the
premises and Iraq’s precious oil supply. The UN was against declaring war on Iraq and therefore troops were not obliged to enter Iraq. In doing so, America was defying the law.
By this time, Mr Bush and his chronies had realised that they would need to figure out a way on selling the war to the public. With no weapons of mass destruction discovered, that arguement alone was never going to be enough to swing the views of the American and British people, or any people for that matter. With nationalist feelings still sky-high after the events of the world trade centre, the American government thought that their best chance was to try and establish links between Sadaam and Al Queda. Though there was clearly no association, this claim managed to change a few opinions. But it still wasn’t enough, more than half the people in the world were against any form of military action.
I think the Americans have been unbelievably hypocritical in their arguement for war. They claim that Sadaam is a threat to world safety and is capable of dropping a nuclear bomb in less than twenty minutes and should be disarmed immediately. If I am correct, the only nation in history to drop a nuclear bomb was America. Not only did they drop one, but two of these destructive bombs which in total wiped out a staggering 140,000 people instantly. Many died later for the effects of radiation caused by the bomb. Though America have destroyed many of these weapons since, I can only assume that the most powerful nation in the world still possesses these chemical bombs. Therefore, aren’t America a threat to the world. Having done it once, they could easily do it again. I suggest that the world immediately unites and disarms America of the deadly weapons. But this is not possible. The United States is the untouchable big boy on the block who bullies other nations for it’s own benefits and everyone is forced to obey them.
Bush claims to be a strict Christian, but this is not a war the Christian religion would support as evidenced by countless anti-war protests. According to the just war theory, you can only retaliate if you are attacked. In this case, America attacked Iraq even though they weren’t attacked so they are in the wrong. It also states that war must be the last resort. In this case, it was far from the last resort. This war could have so easily been prevented. Lives could have been saved but selfishness and greed have taken over common sense. Therefore, in my opinion, Mr Bush is also a terrorist. Lives have been terrorised and innocent people have died as a result of his actions. I am not denying that Sadaam Huessain is an evil man who needed to be ousted, but it could have done a different way without causing any pain and death. To conclude, I feel that this is a war with no real cause bought on by selfishness and greed. Mr Bush has until November 2004 to redeem himself before the next election. Mr Blair is slightly luckier, the next election is 2005. Both leaders need to use this time to figure out a way of restoring their credibility but I already fear that it is “too little, too late”.
