White House Reaction

Improved Essays
This documentary was mainly about the start of the war on terror due to the 9/11 attack in New York City. At first I thought this would be reliant on Bush and his actions taken before, during, and after the war. This documentary wasn’t about Bush nearly as much as I had thought, but mainly about Cheney and Rumsfeld. This documentary showed the actions of the White House as well as outside contributors, and what happened in Iraq due to these actions. The war on terror started out great. Supposedly killing Saddam Hussein and pulling down his statue ended the reign of terror that he brought upon the country. However, these actions were just the start of a long and treacherous road. Usually after the takeover of a tyrant, another power comes …show more content…
The United States started off with good intentions to stop Hussein and those who followed him. But in doing so we set off a chain of events that not only hurt Iraq, but our own government as well. I suggest that realism is incorrect by thinking an international power is useful in the way the world works. If people get too tied into one another’s affairs, it creates unforeseen consequences that could end up doing more damage than mending. In the case of intervening in Iraq, I think it was smart to stop the tyranny of Hussein. However, I do not believe it was smart to continue our efforts to rebuild Iraq in the way that we did. I think it would have been much more beneficial for all parties if we helped reform the Iraqi government in a way that helped rebuild their country without placing a high amount of American military force into the country. This would benefit international cooperation, rather than taking all the responsibility upon one international …show more content…
In the case of the Iraqi conflict, Rumsfeld and Cheney were working alone, shutting out other political figures, to further their own interest. In doing this, their policies were primarily egoistic and therefore ineffective in the long run. There are some who say the rational actor model is beneficial when dealing with these self-interest groups. But in my opinion, the rational actor model does not account for egocentric players. These people do not make decisions on cost/benefit for the group as a whole, but rather for themselves alone. This does not help make rational decision making and will hurt the country, like what happened with Rumsfeld and Cheney. This documentary started out as an informative movie focused on what happened in Iraq, but it really was a movie about the issues America has with knowing when to stop forcing their hand in the international system. The Iraq war would have gone much smoother if we knew when we were going too far into the affairs overseas. The documentary shows both the benefits and drawbacks of the mentality of realism in society as a

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Lastly, when the military started working with us, they helped to get saddam out of power. This is important so that the people no longer had their ‘leader’ poisoning their minds. Ultimately, when asked if I believe that the war on Iraq will be looked at as a success or failure, I would argue that it was a failure. Simply, the war was not successful because we didn 't get done what we had intended to do. There is not sufficient democracy in Iraq, the middle east really isn 't anymore evolved now than it was when we first sent troops in, and our relationship with Iraq is still in shambles.…

    • 909 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Is the security of Europe more important to us than to Europe?” The US gives other countries a false sense of reality that they do not need to defend themselves with their own functioning military, because the United States will do the job for them. Some people may argue that the United States had to enter WWI after the sinking of the Lusitania and the Zimmerman Telegram was intercepted, but it was not Americas place to go into the war, and the British, Russians, and French probably could have been able to defeat the Allies on their own. The Triple Entente were reliant on the US to come in and help them with the war and that is exactly why the US should not be a Worlds Police, because other countries need to learn to solve their own…

    • 1084 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Living With Terrorism

    • 2579 Words
    • 11 Pages

    They are similar in the fact that Bush 's approach to the global war on terror was misguided and wasteful and that even though Obama tried to end the global war on terror by shifting from a large scale military intervention to a limited counter-terrorism effort would not be enough to end the war on terror. They also agree that the war on terror is not something that can be easily won, it will be very long and bloody conflict that a majority of Americans don’t want because they believe American resources can be put to better use and as Americans we don’t like seeing US soldiers being killed on foreign soil for a cause they don 't understand. They also agree that a full scale military approach to terrorism will not solve the problem without taking into factors such as regional dynamics and the religious sects of the region, as we saw in Iraq in 2004 and in the 80s with Reagan 's response to the war on…

    • 2579 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    underestimated the Iraqi regime by minimizing the conflict as a continuation of the Persian Gulf War, a sentiment exacerbated by President Bush’s assumption that U.S. Forces would be welcomed as liberators. Such phenomena reveal another weakness in the Pentagon’s planning, a risk that proves to be an invalid assumption in the first days of the war. “When sufficient information is received to invalidate an assumption at a minimum it becomes an additional risk to the operation, which could result in execution of a branch or sequel or the development of a new COA or plan.” General Franks and his planners’ discarded credible intelligence because they believed the Republican Guard was the most formidable foe; however, proved wrong when the Fedayeen forces provided the bulk of resistance on the road to Bagdad. LTG Wallace V Corp Commander sums it up, “we are fighting a different adversary than the one we war gamed and planned to fight.” During the first three phases, the small U.S. footprint of troops posed no serious issues; however, everything suddenly changed when chaos and rebellion ran rapidly through…

    • 2178 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Too much pressure given while making a decision dealing with intervention can end with a bad turn. For example, the war in Iraq was not a necessary intervention. It just made the problems even worse since it wasn’t needed. The IR theories approach intervention in different ways. From a realist approach, they won’t approach it unless they can get something out of it since they believe mortality is power.…

    • 949 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Fred Fleitz Analysis

    • 791 Words
    • 4 Pages

    A liberalist could also see that America 's continuous involvement before with the bush administration was actually what was hurting the balance of power and Obama taking steps towards being less involved could help. Obama has been left to clean up what the Bush administration left and has taken action to not waste American lives on the ground and has tried another, less direct, approach. It completely agreeable that conflict happens but a liberal would agree that peace is achievable and the steps that need to be taken to get there can not be as enforcing as ones to achieve complete power. Another attack like 9/11 could happen but from a liberal standpoint one could gather that the world has moved past that and global security is moving towards a more peaceful future as Obama has gone 7 years without war. Fleitz makes a comment that Syria talks have been overshadowed because it legitimized the US 's interference in Syria and Iraq.…

    • 791 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Darkest Hour Analysis

    • 1263 Words
    • 6 Pages

    This also provides no use to historians, as the bias towards the British alters the facts of what happened in these events. Overall, there are instances of uselessness as a source for historians in the film, due to the use of false dialogue, over dramatization, and bias. To conclude, Darkest Hour has parts that can be a source to historians, but overall cannot be considered a source due to the false dialogue, over dramatization and bias. The film doesn’t really address historical reliability, but what it does, however, is show that the story is always told by the…

    • 1263 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The film was a ploy to try to convince the American people to support a war that was not popular with unpopular veterans. The politics that influenced the filmmakers in this film, were of those that try to recapture the image of America as the protector and the country to stop evil. This film was not able to accomplish any of this due to the fact that the public at this time was beginning to realize this war was not as clear as the movie tried to make it seem and that is was not as simple as a good versus evil fight. The movie also neglected to show the evils that the American soldiers were actually committing and this further alienated the people from the film and the idea behind the…

    • 1856 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Diamond, being a revisionist, seems to think that others (specifically progressivists) see his party as anti-technology, which may or may not be the case. He reduces progressivism to a large, undying, yet unjust party. I wouldn’t consider his definition of progressivism to be the actual definition. But, Diamond’s implied definition is all we have to analyze. This is because we don’t have the facts.…

    • 1040 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Humanitarian Definition

    • 2167 Words
    • 9 Pages

    The reason for this, as Chomsky argues, is due to ‘Wrong agency (as) it’s only Humanitarian Intervention when we do it.” (Chomsky, 2013) By We he refers to the west. He also states the other issue is the U.S opposed these 2 movements. In this way it can be argued humanitarian intervention is almost an excuse or a reason as to why the West can do something the East can’t. The United States of America (USA) used their power to manipulate the world into believing what they are doing was right. When the NATO and the USA intervened to stop the Genocide in Bosnia-Herzegovina this was considered humanitarian intervention, it was considered good, an act of heroism by the west.…

    • 2167 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great Essays