R.J.

LeBrun
Dr. Neagle
5/1/16
Final Exam, Part: Two

The invasion of Iraq has been a hot button topic for many years. Questions of why the

United States ever entered Iraq are very common in younger generations. Some who lived

through it are still wondering why we would get ourselves into such a battle. Though, an eight-

year feud resulting in 4,486 dead Americans costing the U.S. hundreds of millions of dollars,

ought to raise some questions.1 So what justified our actions in Iraq?

George W. Bush is quoted as saying the worst thing that could happen would be to allow a

nation like Iraq, run by Saddam Hussein, to develop weapons of mass destruction, and then team

up with terrorist organizations so they can blackmail the world. 2 In a following sentence, Bush

describes Saddam Hussein He was also a secular nationalist who had spent his life repressing,

and in many cases slaughtering fundamentalists who sympathized with groups like al Qaeda. 3

Hussein had said for a while that he had weapons and that he was not afraid to use them. He had

already used chemical weapons on his own people, therefore we had no reason to doubt him.

Bush and his administration thought that with the given information, action in Iraq was justified.

The administration also thought that the United States needed to promote democracy in the

middle east because it was the lack of representative institutions within these states that drove

1 Huffington Post, 4,484 American Soldiers Have Died in Iraq

2 Kinzer, Overthrow, 289

3 Kinzer, Overthrow, 290

terrorists to desperate measures. 4 It was because terrorists did not have a voice in their home

states that they turned to violent acts in order to send a message. Rather than utilize a

government to put laws, motions and acts in place, terrorists would fight and take part in

terrorism in order to promote, in most cases, religion. Democracy in the middle east was key to

Bush and his administration in the fight against terrorism, especially in Iraq. If democracy could

be instilled in Iraq, it would be much easier to spread to surrounding areas. The administration

laid their course of action heavily on the correlation relating the rise in democracy to the fall of

terrorism.

After much consideration and mulling over, the United States decided to go into Iraq. They must

have taking into consideration the potential interest at stake such as the amount of troops and the

potential to loss of life. Another interest put into danger was money. Having the fighting

experience that the United States does, they knew that this potential fight was not going to be

cheap. Maintaining American lives in a foreign country while they fight is not an inexpensive

feat. An additional item the United States failed to consider while their concentrations were on

Iraq was terrorism. While America was busy with the occupation of Iraq, the focus was shifted

off of terrorism allowing terrorist organizations to roam free and do as they pleased.

As the war in Iraq progressed, Americas support of the war began to diminish. President

Bush realized this and also that their goals were not being met. Americas effort was just not

enough. In 2006, Bush said the situation in Iraq is unacceptable to the American people and it is

unacceptable to me. Our troops in Iraq have fought bravely. They have done everything we have

asked them to do. Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me 5 This being

4 Brigham, Lessons and Legacies of the War in Iraq, 286

5 Brigham, Lessons and Legacies of the War in Iraq, 292

said, the president then goes on to state his administrations new priorities in Iraq 5 This begs

attention and investigation. The question that comes immediately to mind is, why, if we have

been in Iraq for so long with such little result, would we reconsider our efforts and build a new

plan? We have been in Iraq for close to four years and have little to show for it so why spend

more money and send in more troops.

The surge of 2006 brought new troops (more than twenty-thousand) and new priorities. The

United States wanted to put these in place because their democratic efforts were not catching on.

Though securing Iraq and making the Iraqi people feel safe was their main intention, the most

intended benefit of the surge was democracy. With the surge, Iraq committed to rebuild the

nation through democracy and federalism. 5 The surge was considered mostly successful. In

2007, the surge put a pause on, if not totally halted the civil war in Iraq. Additional troops were

all that was necessary in order to secure key areas of Iraq. Later, Ambassador Crocker stated that

a secure, stable, democratic Iraq at peace with its neighbors is attainable. 6 Even though it was

on the second leg, the war in Iraq had been somewhat of a success. It was a long time coming

and doubled in time from the surge on, however, the United States eventually got what they came

for.

The surge helped to change the success of the United States on the battlefield, however it did

very little to change the structure of the Baghdad government. As a result of the United States not

being able to re-structure the government, they would isolate enemies. There was also no

judgement of the governments power. 7 It is very unfortunate to see that not all of the United

States plans went the way they wanted them too, however, rarely will a war go completely in

6 Brigham, Lessons and Legacies of the War in Iraq, 296

7 Brigham, Lessons and Legacies of the War in Iraq, 298

one direction. Some accomplishments made by the United States include making sure that there

were no weapons of mass destruction as well as making the Iraqi people feel more safe. These

two accomplishments were the core of the U.S. reasoning behind going into Iraq. Anything after

that was an added bonus.