The 2001 incidents also made other nations act supportive toward U.S.'s decision to wage war against Iraq, with the international public apparently believing that the Americans had been entitled to fight terrorism everywhere. In spite of the fact that the idea of the U.S. waging war in Iraq had a rather vindictive nature, little nations actually appeared willing to condemn the actions performed by the Bush administration. The U.S.'s decision to go to war against Iraq appears to be unjustified, considering the fact that there had been no rational grounds for such an act. The main issue to be addressed relating to the event is whether it is reasonable for a nation to invade another on the basis that the latter either owns weapons of mass destruction or has the capability to produce them. Taking into account the fact that the U.S. had probably been suspicious concerning Iraq's intention is simply not a good enough reason. A new world war would almost certainly commence if all nations were to behave similar to the U.S.

It is curious that the U.S. is aggressive toward other countries that possess weapons of mass destruction, considering the fact that Americans are considered to hold the largest stock of nuclear weapons in the world. The fact that the U.S. currently possesses and had previously used weapons of mass destruction against other countries does not necessarily mean that they had performed evil. Taking the concept of "just war" into account, one might conclude that the U.S. has had all the reasons to use weapons of mass destruction. Also, it is more reasonable for a world superpower to hold nuclear weapons than it is for a country with a destabilized government.

The Bush administration initially accused Iraq of being involved in the production of nuclear warfare. Also, it had been presumed that Iraqi President, Saddam Hussein,...

None of the allegations were proved at the time when President Bush decided to move against Iraq.
The Invasion officially began of March 20, 2003, with a multinational army going to war against Iraq. U.S. President Bush had finally managed to convince the rest of the world that Saddam Hussein had been a threat. There had been some isolated rumors that the U.S. President had had other reasons to go to war against Iraq than those made public. The fact that Saddam prevented the U.S. from taking advantage of Iraqi resources such as oil might have lead to Bush wanting to take Iraqi by force. However, when looking back to the acts of war performed by Saddam, it is not surprising that someone would want to remove the extremist president from power.

It is possible that Bush had been influenced by a just war theory when choosing to invade Iraq and to have its people liberated from an oppressive leadership. Perhaps the U.S. had gone to war against Iraq because of their love for the Iraqis, and, because of their love for the rest of the world. It is divisive whether or not the Iraqi war has been a just one, but, what is clear is that power has been removed from the hands of a man guilty of genocide.

Works cited:

1. Himes, Kenneth R. "Intervention, Just War and U.S. National Security." Theological Studies, Vol. 65, 2004.

2. Wogaman, J. Philip. (1993). "Christian ethics: a historical introduction." Westminster John Knox Press.

Wogaman, J. Philip. (1993). "Christian ethics: a historical introduction." Westminster John Knox Press.

Wogaman, J. Philip. (1993). "Christian ethics: a historical introduction." Westminster John Knox Press.

idem

Himes, Kenneth R. "Intervention, Just War and U.S. National Security." Theological Studies, Vol. 65, 2004.