The US Invasion Of Iraq Was Not Justified Summary

Summary/ Strong Response In the piece, " The U.S. Invasion of Iraq Was Not Justified," Mr. Michael T. Klare argues that there is no possible way to justify the invasion of Iraq by the United States government. He objects nearly every conceivable justification for the invasion; namely, the argument that the Bush Administration never had evidence of Weapons of Mass Destruction. He objectively blames the Bush Administration for the deaths of American soldiers, only to be followed almost mimicking the statistic that tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians have lost their lives as well. He blames it all on Bush. During the piece, I had to force myself to wrap my brain around the stretches Mr. Klare was willing to take to disband the notion that the
invasion of Iraq has done any good, whatsoever. He even goes so far as to say that Iraq has never been in any kind of situation in which it could have done America harm. He says, "the Iraqi army of 2003 was but a pale shadow of its former strength." Not only is this irrelevant, but it is flowery and poetic when it needs not be. It's not conducive to the effect it's trying to get across. However, this is not the point of the reading. The point remains: to get the American public to follow the beliefs of someone looking for a way to describe and cause some kind of ruckus for our society. Since, after all, there was not enough ruckus on September 11, 2001. Yet, Americans tend to forget how we came together then in support of our nation and quickly fell apart merely to the grips of controversial issues separating our society.
He goes on furthermore to say that the attempts the government has made to obtain information of WMD or even evidence of such has gone completely without reward. The generalizations made are so great that it does not even encompass what has actually been accomplished. Thanks to the many efforts of the government, not only have we found evidence of WMD but we have taken care of them extremely efficiently. Thanks to the Bush Administration we can now sleep peacefully knowing that we will not be the target of Saddam's dictatorship and the terror that ensues. Mr. Klare failed to recognize major keys of the invasion. Such as the fall of Saddam's regime. Or the fact that Iraq and the U.S made a pact nearly a century ago describing within the backing of Iraq's terroristic opposition. So how then are we supposed to deny Iraq their rights as an International power? As the Bush Administration has clearly been doing, we must go forward in an effort to stop terrorists and their dealings to the best of our abilities. According to President Bush, "Saddam Hussein's regime has proven itself a grave and gather danger....To assume this regime's good faith is to bet the lives of millions and the peace of the world in a reckless gamble. And this is a risk that we must not take." Hussein's regime has, in fact, ended and the world is now a safer place for our lives and lives to come. Yet, Mr. Klare only mentions the fact that the tyrannical regime of Hussein's has ended thanks to President Bush.
Michael Klare even promotes a sense of distrust and abuse of the founding fathers noble ideals. He describes how, "The original founders of the this nation-leaders such as George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson-believed that freedom and democracy were noble ideals that had to be nurtured in the minds of people....(and) persons inspired by the ideals..would be horrified at the thought of using force first and then seeking to inspire a blelivf in democracy." He desires to make it seem as though our government is going to far, and being so bold, as to completely go against and of the ideals the founding fathers had. I cannot think of a more inconclusive, utterly irresponsible attack against America this is. Mr.
Klare's address to the American public has a view valid points. But as with any other persuasive essay, he recognizes only the parts that he wants to which, in turn, skews the readers view of all the reality. Some believe that President Bush decided to invade Iraq for oil money, or as a sort of vengeance, but I believe otherwise. I believe that he has done so much good for the nation that virtually no more Americans comprehend. Take for example, the lives of the Iraqi's whom live there today, the nation is being rebuilt, and not on the tyrannical basis it once was. Iraq is becoming more and more democratic as long as the American Armed Forces remain there. Not only have we succeeded in unconditionally ending what once was, but we have succeeded in causing a reform. How many Americans today believe that the War in Iraq is an unjust cause? How many times have we turned on the television and seen the torment and destruction that ensues there? But can we see all the good we are actually doing? The Iraqi people are so incredibly happy to have the Americans there. It is not just the Iraqi people or at all their Militia, but the insurgents whom come to fight the Americans for their own glory. Whether or not the "realists" of America desire to see, the truth and facts behind all of the this is that Americans have done so much for the Iraqi people and those who have been affected by
Hussein. In conclusion, The War in Iraq or the invasion thereof, has done far more good for America then some decide to see. Many people just see the War in Iraq as a way for President Bush to seek revenge on those who have done the people of this country wrong, but with great trials comes great rewards and if any of us were to look into the eyes of the men and women of Iraq that can now enjoy the marvelous freedom we all so greatly take for granted, we would understand the great work that is going on right now, in Iraq. Saving the lives of millions is worth risking the lives of thousands. Although many have died in Iraq, many will prosper thanks to the sacrifices our great country is willing to make.