Americans have contrasting views on whether or not U. made a decent decision since Iraq is suspected of possessing weapons of mass destruction that might case another startling attack on Iran. And therefore America should take action before Hussein moves. Yet a vast majority of people argue against this scheme. Is the President proposing with the right resolution on this matter? Probably not, because there is no existing evidence of Iraqi" possession of nuclear weapons nor any intention to use such weapons. In fact, Bush and his cabinet's real intention is to assert the U.S. domination and control of Iraqi's oil wealth. .
When being asked why the U.S. is fighting Iraq, President Bush has constantly claimed the U.S. is fighting Iraq to destroy its dictatorial monarchy. However, if we look back on history, we find out the American government has provided material and financial help to countries who both manufacture nuclear weapons and are run by a dictatorial government. Countries like China, England, France, Russia and even the U.S. are all on the list of countries that own nuclear weapons. So why is the U.S. putting its focus solely on Iraq? Considering the U.S. government supports dictatorial monarchies like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait? They sends $15 million a day to Israel while that government has invaded Lebanon, occupied the Palestinian territories and created a large, illegal arsenal of nuclear weapons. (http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1967to1991_lebanon_198x_backgd.php) In addition, everywhere in the world has those nuclear weapons, for instance, China, England, France, Russia; even the United States owns them. Not only did U.S. and United Nations possess huge numbers of nuclear weapons, they also both signed first strike policies against terrorism and abuse of power. When we hear our U.S. government insisting that Iraq must comply with international agreements, we should also remind ourselves that the same agreement applies to the United States and those countries which own the weapons.