Guided by Necessity or Driven by Greed? .
Thousands of people are dead, missing, or injured. Bombs are still lighting the dark night sky and shots are still being fired from machine guns. We are talking about the war in Iraq. It is slowly but surely coming to an end, yet there are still many people debating whether the key issues for this invasion are acceptable and true. The United States president, George Bush, and British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, have clearly stated their objectives for invading this middle-eastern country. The two invading countries aim to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction, which will result in freeing the Iraqi people and lessen the worldwide threat of terrorism. Still, there are many people and countries that protest the invasion of Iraq. There were no weapons of mass destruction found and a U.S. led attack on this country violates the U.N. Charter. The protestors claim that the Bush Administration is going after Iraq's oil sanctions in hopes for a better economy. Is this war truly necessary or is an act of aggression from a greedy country?.
The United States and United Kingdom are the only two countries that are actively participating in the attack on Saddam Hussein and his country. President Bush and Prime Minister Blair have clearly stated the goals of their mission. Although this war lacks support from other countries, most importantly from the United Nations, these two leaders continue to believe that the war on this country was inevitable.
Necessity is what led U.S. and British forces to deserts of the middle-eastern country of Iraq. There is one major reason for the United States and United Kingdom to pursue the invasion of this country: weapons of mass destruction. In the process of ridding Iraq of its possession of these weapons, Bush and Blair also aim to "end the regime of Saddam Hussein" (Defend America: Operation Iraqi Freedom, 1) and "capture or drive out terrorists sheltered in Iraq" (Defend America: Operation Iraqi Freedom, 1).
