The debate on the rationality behind the justification of the United States war against Iraq in 2003 calls various levels of analysis. The same debate has been viewed by various human activists at different scopes of understanding. At one level, a portion of them argues that it was unjustified when arguing under the autonomy of the civilian population and other members of the armed forces who were killed and injured in the process. As a requirement of any war attack, the human rights commission requires that the civilian population should be separated from the armed forces.
They and their property should not be an object of attack. On the other point of view of human activists, the U. S attack in Iraq was a fundamental step towards liberating the country and the world in general from the dictatorship rule of Saddam Hussein. However, the debate implication would only be valid on weighing out the strengths of the two opposing sides. (http://www. globalpolicy. org/security/issues/iraq/attackindex. htm) Broadly, the justification of the war is cordial towards parameters of safeguarding humanity when our argument is based on essence and intention of the war.
Unlike how many people, states and organizations percept, this was not an exercise towards elaborating to the global community the powers that were held by U. S over the global community. However, a counteractive and an opposing argument to what is conceived in the minds of such persons would be used to describe analyze who Saddam was under the context of global peace and harmony. Generally, the historical background of Saddam’s dictatorship has its roots since many years ago.
Through the historical background of his dictatorial leadership, it would be logical to relate adequately and strike a balance between the effects of the U. S attack and the relative effects of Saddam to the world at large. On grounds of human rationality however, it could be argued that the invasion was a crucial modality towards restituting the Iraq state and the contemporary world of their democracy and liberty that had been intercepted by Saddam. He could have been argued as an icon behind the compromise of the global peace.
Though the basic intention behind the invasion was to get Saddam out of power, the same scenario went ahead to compromising the civilian population rights through death and mass destruction of both private and public property. However, every threshold of such destruction and the relative destruction that had been done by Saddam should be weighed on a balance of which was more effecting. Generally, the mass killing by Saddam since his invasion on Kuwait coupled with other dictatorial killings in Iraq however out weighs the impact of the U. S invasion on Iraq in 2003.
Few worlds and descriptions can be made on Saddam. Perhaps, we could say that he was brutal, dictatorial and a murderer who required any method of forcing him out of his power. However, since he had denied stepping down of his leadership, the only rational implement that could have restituted the contemporary world against Saddam’s dictatorial power was through invasion by United States. (http://www. globalpolicy. org/security/issues/iraq/attackindex. htm) It goes without saying that the massive genocide that was waged by Saddam would only been provided with amnesty through bringing justice into book.
However, we are left to wonder on the exact scope of justified restitution which would have compensated humanity the negative effects characterized by merciless killings, genocides and war attacks by Saddam. On and above t5his, we should not forget about the weapons of mass destruction which included nuclear weapons that were in possession and manufacturing by Saddam. Rationally therefore, this invasion was an important step towards providing democratic amnesty to the global community that had been compromised by Saddam’s leadership.
Both Iraq and the world in general were in fear of Saddam’s authorities. Great attribute should thus go to the United states in its provision of a benchmark towards contemporary democracy to the world. The effects of the invasion were far below the negative consequences of mass killing that had been caused by Saddam.
War Against Iraq: U. N Security Council. Retrieved on 15th May 2008 from http://www. globalpolicy. org/security/issues/iraq/attackindex. htm