Critically evaluate the utility of the US use of force in the (2003)‎ Iraq war

Abstract EN

The war in Iraq is a significant event for removing Saddam Hussein from power.

Furthermore, an American strategy built around the principle of regime change would have used the utility of force against Iraq to change the regime of Iraq.

Although, according to many studies the USA sought to support democracy in Iraq but in fact they did not bring any real democracy to Iraq.

The USA attacked Iraq not because of democracy or destruction of mass weapons, the reason was to get natural resources.

Consequently, after invasion of Iraq the situation became even worse to promote and install democracy due to internal conflict and violence.

The utility of the US use of force was counterproductive due to the negative consequences of this force on Iraq.

The US use of force was ineffective because it generated political instability and insecurity after 2003.

Therefore, the conflict started inside Iraq after removing Saddam Hussein from power between Shias, Sunnis and Kurds.

In addition, Al Maliki continue to establish his power inside Iraq.

In this regard, this led to outbreak conflict between political powers.

In addition, the conflict did not end between citizens during and after the war as it supports the group of terrorists in Iraq.

What is more, the conflict between Arab and Kurds have been limited if compared to the conflict between Sunnis and Shias that have created major tensions.

Furthermore, the conflict between Arab and Kurds have been a serious threat especially about the issues of Kirkuk and oil.

Hence, hardship and a turmoil of violence surrounded the Iraqi troops and people.

Despite this, America faced huge cost casualties in terms of military operations and human life.

Thus, this cost had a negative impact on American’s economy