The Liberal Internationalism: The Invasion Of Iraq

President Wilson proposed an international organization which compromised with all of the world’s nation’s representatives that would help cease any conflict from escalating. Henry Cabot Lodge did not agree with Wilson’s proposal. He tried to get senate

The League of Nations was set up in attempt to ensure a revived conflict would not arise. Wilson felt by putting this point into place we can avoid going into war with other nations. Unfortunately, Wilson’s plan failed due to the German Army who built their efforts on the European Western Front. However, within a few months the German Army began peace talks based on his Fourteen Points of

According to Teddy, imperialist concepts consisted of securing as many ports and colonies as was possible, to reinforce America as a world power in both military and trade areas. At the close of the short-lived Spanish-American War, the U.S. Government had a new problem on its hands. The powers, that be, could not agree on how to resolve serious issues involving newly acquired colonies. Supporters of imperialism wanted to keep the Philippines, under U.S. control,

Teddy Roosevelt, an imperialist, condemned anyone who was against the takeover of the Philippines (doc5). Before becoming a president teddy Roosevelt saw the United States as a parent to the philippines. After becoming a president Roosevelt felt that the United States needs to be an international police. He recommended his ‘big stick’ policy. This included the Roosevelt corollary as suppose to the Monroe doctrine.

The United States during the early twentieth-century was a heated debate. Constant changes including World War One, the Spanish-American War, and the idea that the United States would join the League of Nations would lead to major debates determining what role the United States should have taken during the constant changing world. This essay is here to go into detail about what the United States should have done during this time period as well as highlight some of the outcomes from a more progressive nation. Imperialism is defined as “The use of diplomatic or military force to extend a nation’s power and enhance its economic interests, often by acquiring territory or colonies and justifying the behavior with assumptions of racial superiority”

America, namely President Wilson realized after World War I that he had to develop a pact with other countries to prevent war from ever happening again. (Shultz, 2014). He crafted the Treaty of Versailles, this included the League of Nations, however; unfortunately for the president America would not join the league. America did not join the League of Nations because of Congress. (Shultz, 2014).

The League was tasked with the responsibility of maintaining world peace; however, the League was ultimately too feeble to quell the Axis Powers’ reign of terror upon the world. As Benito Mussolini once said, “The League is very well when sparrows shout, but no good at all when eagles fall

During the time period of 1895-1920, as the United States entered the 20th century, America based its foreign policies on imperialism and the spreading to other nations. Inquiries on whether the nation should operate its power and influence beyond the North, became the essential topic of national discussion and debate. Although anti-imperialists argued that America was foresaking the republican ideals of the nation’s founders, advocates of imperialism argued that the United States had an obligation to promote democracy, civilization, and free trade to the world. Cases such as the Spanish-American War, china, and Panama demonstrated that when it came to negotiating with other nations, the United States government often started from an idealistic

But what was the more important factor in expanding foreign policy and imperialism during this time period, self-interest or idealism? If the evidence is examined, this becomes crystal clear. Self-interest was the most important factor in driving American foreign policy during this time

“In a moment of decision the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing.” Those are some wise words said by the President during WWII…. Pres. Franklin Delano Roosevelt. This quote can relate to a plethora of issues, when one may have to make an impossible choice and one does not know what to do.

On January 16th, 1991, President George H. W. Bush publicly announced in the Address to the Nation the United States’ participation in the Gulf War. The Gulf War arose when Iraq accused Kuwait—rich in oil—of keeping the price of crude oil low, demanding it to forgive its thirty billion dollar debt in compensation for the acclaimed conspiracy (Smitha, n.d.). In this announcement, President Bush stated the United States’ just intentions for participating, and its goals. President Bush affirmed that other means to make Iraq leave Kuwait had been tried, but were unsuccessful. Thus, the US’s goal in this engagement was “…to drive [Iraq] from Kuwait by force.”

However, the U.S. is not intentionally belligerent to other states, this only occurs when a difference in ideals is presented and poses as a threat. Though U.S. foreign policy mainly accommodates other states, as long as both share liberal ideals. Essentially, Owen’s liberal peace theory does capture the objectives of the Truman Doctrine. Ultimately, The argument Owen makes throughout his liberal peace theory is based on the ideals of liberalism

This belief was heightened after the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Centre, which America linked directly back to Islamic forces, implying that the 9/11 attack was done in spite of the US. Furthermore, this statement is representative of the pro-war American government that unleashed themselves upon Iraq in 2001. It gives the perspective of the American government and their belief that the Iraqi war was justified, in that it was done in self-defence and for the wellbeing of America. This directly opposes the view that their attack and invasion of the country was for their own political and economic gain. Furthermore, it seems that America’s intervention has led to a crumbling among both the economic and political aspect of Iraqi civilisation despite the immense gain America had upon

Carr emphasises the naivety to base the study of international politics on an imaginary view of how we like to see the world. One such naivety I understood from the text was the establishment of The League of Nations, a collective security instrument. A Utopian concept, Carr is critical of the League due somewhat to his belief that it was trying to generalise world politics between “sixty known states differing widely in size, in power, and in political, economic, and cultural development” (Carr, 1939 p. 30). Another criticism of Carr’s toward the League was the notion that more powerful states would use the League as means to ensure their own interests were

The League of Nations was an international organization created 1919 by the American president, Woodrow Wilson, as a part of his Fourteen Points. The League was meant to maintain universal peace and resolve international disputes between nations to avoid a repeat of the First World War. The League of Nations had some successes in maintaining universal peace, however, there numerous failures as well. Some of the successes include the Åland Islands crisis and the Upper Silesia incident. Some of the failures of the League include the events that took place in Manchuria and Abyssinia.