The world has experienced two major wars that are studied in history-the 1st and 2nd World Wars. These wars were between nations that had conflicting interests and were seeking to have power and dominion over the other. After 1945, not much was heard of any conflicting countries until the early 2000s when the Iraq war started. The war involved the Bush-led U.S.A. and Iraq in a twist of events that were both criticized and supported by other world governments. The Iraq War was not just a war led by motives similar to previous wars but rather a war based on some personal intrigues. This paper looks at some of the key elements that characterized the Iraq War and how it all transpired.
The Core of the Issue
The main core of the issue that sparked this war is one that has been speculated by most people from both the international media and other political divides. Everyone came up with a reason that they thought gave the best explanation of the situation. However, the Bush-led government had its reasons why it was getting into a war with Iraq. Former President Bush argued that Iraq posed a threat to the security of America and they had to engage in war to create an insurgency of the overly popularized terrorist groups in the country (Bush, 2010). It was rumored that Iraq had plans to invade the U.S.A and it was highly armed, and such an attack could cause a lot of damage to valuable assets and loss of lives (Bush, 2010). Moreover, Bush and his government wanted to remove Saddam Hussein from power (Bush, 2010). To counter this, Bush and his Republican government found it a much wiser attempt to attack first before being attacked. They explained that they were getting to war with Iraq first to prevent war from coming to the states.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
According to Woodward (2004), the war started to be envisioned and planned at quite an early stage before the public came to realize it. Bush and his war cabinet had already begun engaging in talks with the Army General on the probability of waging war against Iraq. However, this was kept from the public ear for some time, a reason for which Bush explained as the need to avoid international tension. There was a lot of pressure put on him by his administration officials to remove Saddam Hussein from office with claims that his presidency was the real threat.
However, this claim came under a lot of criticism both locally and internationally. The Democrats did not support the actions of President Bush and thus opposed it a lot (Bush, 2010). On the international political scene, it was viewed that the U.S. was after the rich oil minerals in the region and this made most countries not to support its quest. The public in the U.S.A was duly afraid and did not want to take chances risking their lives on what side to take, and this saw most of them join to support the Republican Government’s attempt (Bush, 2010). Within no time, the American troops, ordered by President Bush set course for Iraq where they invaded the country and occupied it. It was the beginning of war.
The Parameters of Presidential Power
This war as is seen seemed to be orchestrated by the then President-Bush. The question on whether it was right for him to declare war on Iraq has been yet another area of interest for most political divides, and this has transitionally brought about the issue of presidential power. As a president, however, it is largely known that there is power bestowed upon them to protect their nation whatsoever. They can declare war on a country if at all the said country engages in activities that threaten the well-being of the people in their jurisdiction. Bush, though viewed as an opportunist at that moment, was all right to take action to safeguard the people of the U.S. It was within his power to declare war and even commission the troops to occupy Iraq and put an end to what was said to pose a threat to the security of the American people.
The main actors in the White House, Congress, and Outside the Government
The successful undertaking and onset of the war were greatly fuelled by its support from very influential persons within the White House, Congress, and also from outside. The President, for instance, was one of the key actors from the White House. He publicly defended his course as a President claiming that he was doing it for the good of all Americans (Woodward, 2004). The White House staff, which consisted of the Vice President and other key policy makers was in full support of the Vice President, and they rallied it on. The then Vice President, Cheney, was a very influential person in the waging of war against Iraq (Woodward, 2004). He and his chief aide, I. Lewis Libby are the ones who put pressure on Bush to begin the war with claims of huge amassment of weapons by Iraq and threatening leadership as earlier on discussed (Woodward, 2004). Cheney linked Iraq to the arising Al Qaeda terrorist group citing it as a benefactor to the group. Later on, President Bush bought in Support from the State Secretary who had previously opposed the war (Woodward, 2004).
In the Congress, it was quite hard to pass the war bill given the relative number of both democrats and republicans that gave each of them an important vote in the counsel. However, some very senior personnel on the Democrats side like Hillary Clinton voted for support in the war (Woodward, 2004). There were also some Republicans who did not support the war with a larger democratic membership going against it (Woodward, 2004).
Outside the America government, significant support also came from Britain. President Bush and the then British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, were very great friends and this saw them always go hand in hand in decision making. Initially, Blair requested Bush to seek the United Nations for a diplomatic way to resolve the issue, a sentiment which Bush took and delayed his originally planned attack (Woodward, 2004). After an unfulfilling attempt, Bush decided to go to war, a decision which was supported by Blair. Blair offered military support to the U.S., and this was a significant boost to the invasion and occupation of the war zone.
President Bush’s Interaction with other Relevant Parties
President Bush was a resourceful person during the onset of the war. He listened to both critics and supporters of the war (Bush, 2010). In the White House, he duly listened to the Vice President and other officials. He also listened to the Secretary of State and the concerns he raised. He did not discriminate anyone who thought it unwise to engage in the war (Bush, 2010). Every person regardless of their stand was in an influential position to the decision he made. He even interacted with other members from the Democratic side to take on their view. Again, as we had earlier seen, he consulted Tony Blair, his closest ally before engaging in the war (Bush, 2010). He sought some advice from him before entering into the war to ensure that whatever decision he made was well thought (Bush, 2010).
Bush’s Decision-making and Influence from his past life
Previously, Bush had been known to be a person less interested in international matters. He rarely involved himself in issues to do with International Security when he was serving as Governor (Woodward, 2004). President Bush was not the micromanaging type of a person. He wanted everyone to take part in the decision-making process. This explains why he valued the opposition's concern for a democratic resolution to the war at first. He went to the United Nations seeking to find another alternative way to the issue (Woodward, 2004). However, from what it seems, a lot of influence that pushed Bush to decide to wage war was from his top government officials. The CIA director and the Vice President topped the list of senior officials who advised him on the need for war. With that kind of pressure, he had no alternative other than to make the decision and go for it.
The Decision Reached
After diplomacy had failed, the issue was taken to the Congress for a vote. With a greater majority in the Congress, the Republicans were highly favoured to win the vote. The Congress consisted of 223 Republican members whereas the Democrats were 209 (Woodward, 2004). President Bush at this time urged to vote ‘yes’ to the decision (Bush, 2010). Of the 223 Republican members, 215 voted in support of the war with only six voting against it, and two not participating in the vote. The Democrats side had 82 voting in support with a larger 126 voting against it, and one not voting. The ‘yes’ won the vote, as earlier stated, with 297 votes against 133 ‘No’ votes. Following the majority rule, President Bush signed the infamous ‘Iraq Resolution’ into law. This new law allowed the American military to invade and occupy Iraq with the use of force (Woodward, 2004).
Reactions to the Decision passed and the President’s Response
The passing of this Act by the Congress brought about a lot of mixed reactions from various sectors. In the Congress, a lot of debate and fire between the Republican and Democratic side began. A battle began with each divide trying to justify their stand on the matter (Woodward, 2004). There was even a call to have the vote redone. The public, on the other hand, was in a frenzy. They supported the war but were exceedingly reserved about it. They raised a lot of concern on whether diplomatic measures had wholly failed to work (Woodward, 2004). They also did not like the idea of the U.S. going into the war as a unilateral. Most of them advocated for it to involve the State allies in the war. In response, Bush informed the public that all that could have been done to resolve the matter peacefully had failed to work and that there was no option left other than war (Woodward, 2004). He openly told the Americans that the only way he would assure them of a haven is by going to war and removing Saddam Hussein from office.
Conclusion
In conclusion, President Bush though looked down at by most people today, was a President with excellent decision-making skills. A lot of pressure and blame is put upon him for waging war against Iraq, but his decision was influenced and supported by the greater majority. Had he not taken the step, perhaps the U.S. could have been victim to much worse damage. Bush was a critical thinker. He analysed all options he had before making the final decisions. He also sought to find less victimizing ways of ending the tussle but in the lack of none he took the one that ensured the safety of the people he governed. President Bush could run down history lane for all the wrong reasons but do we know what the failure of action could have caused the States?
References
Bush, George, W. (2010). Decision Points . New York, NY: Crown Publishing Group.
Woodward, Bob. (2004). Plan of Attack . New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
