Leadership Under Attack: Iraq as an Unnecessary War
How would you feel if you were told that the Iraq War was unnecessary? Would you be shocked if the person making this statement was President Bush’s own press secretary? The following paper analyzes whether the Iraq war could have been avoided. Previous studies have examined the success of the war; however, little research was conducted in regard to the necessity of this military intervention. To tackle this question, the leadership of presidents Roosevelt and Bush in the aftermath of two attacks on US soil, respectively Pearl Harbor and 9/11, is scrutinized. Using information from both academic journals and governmental documents, this paper investigates if the decision of going to war was justified in these two different occasions. Three main factors were used in coming to a conclusion: the attack on US soil, the threat that the country was posing, and the public opinion. The findings uncovered by this research reveal that the Iraq war was unnecessary. We conclude that this military intervention could have been avoided and more than four thousand lives saved.
HIST 430, History of American International Relations
Melisa Ortiz Berry
Bushnell History Symposium, P103
10 AM – 1 PM