Free «The Nine War Theories» Essay Sample


            This research theory paper explains the many ways that cause war between and among the countries of the world and the extremely close reason for the emergence of war. There is much in history and the theoretical background that influences the ultimate level of war in the world. Though solutions making these problems are into implementation, there has been a problem with making it prevail. The war between the American government especially, the United States of America and the Iraq government in the Middle East is the two main countries that are discussing, as a form of research for the reasons for war.

               The natural resources to some extent may apply as a reason, because most countries have different natural sources, in that one country may feel. That it would also have confidence in owning such resources by trying to take it as a superpower, thus misusing  the owning government of that resource or   resources on how to use them, and which countries need to purchase the resources and from which country to get it.

The Nine War Theories

            This theory can be approved by either considering the historical or the theoretical justification on how wars are fighting and how they are fighting. In the historical background of the war, we need to know the aspects of the traditions which deals with the historical rules, and  agreements applied across all ages, for instance, the international covenant as the one found in Geneva and Hague, are an example of the historical background. That is setting in order to avoid the kinds of warfare that may arise international courts there are lawyers that are the international prosecuting transgressors that are familiar with the roles of ethics as they focus on the, international agreement for their coherence that is of philosophical in nature.

            The emergence of traditional war also creates a key interest, in the thoughts of philosophers and the international known lawyers from the ages and come out in ways of examining visions and ideas of the philosophical nature in the ethical war’s in the absence of whether to consider their thoughts in contributing toward the body with involvement of the conventions that evolve to guiding and the international warfare. On the other hand, theoretical justification of war gives the learners the various concepts on how to analyze the cooperation as they analyze the various conflicts between and among the nations of the world (Mark, 2005). This is of keen attention because it gives an overview of the strategy, which brings the focus on the environment internally as per actors beginning. In this paper, I will focus on the sovereignty and the states of the nations; I will also briefly come out with the various examining ways in order to prime actors that are non sates thus increasing the rights of the states as a way of employing force to the international arena. In terms of strategic leadership that brings sense to the environment in which their militants operate. Below are the explanations the war theories in which the American and the Iraq governments were trying to impose on each other. In the nine war theories, I will discuss each at a time in order to bring the overview into complete understanding and also the impacts to the extreme negative course of the war to all humanity.


            Militarism is the will of the government or individuals of a country, to obtain the military potentiality, which is a formation to promote, and defend the country with a lot of aggressiveness toward the spirit of nationalism. This has importance of the imperialist and expansionist of ideologies in most nations from all ages to date. The prominent example includes the USA and Iraq, in case there is any problem arising, the troops from the two countries need to fight in order that one of the two nations to emerge victorious over the other (Paul, 1969). This is a fight that was fighting by the militaries where the international law formation does not intervene until there is a need to do so. In other words, peoples' belief that war is not inherently inimical, but it brings a positive influence to the society.


            Realism refers to the skeptic whether the conceptual moral form of justice will be in the application in order to conduct all the affairs internationally. In Realism, people believe that the concepts cannot be used to describe, nor emerge at a level of circumscribing the behaviors associated with the states. Instead, the state emphasizes on the self interest in regard to the security issues. The example form of realism in its description proves that a state cannot act morally, while the other form describes the realism as a way in which the factors of motivation, stands for self interest in the most nations of the world. The so called wars violate the principals of the just wars and that it stands effectively to create realism as a state branch of its own.


            The Just war theory, states that, it must have the authority. To some extent this gives the name legitimate government that leaves a room for the civil war, in a way that they illegitimate entity declares the reasons that are there and fits the criteria toward the Just war. The problems that arise are said to be less “just authority” and most people do interpret it as “the peoples will” as the Geneva conventions. This was considering that one of the parties in the war is high in the contraction, of the party i.e. Known by the international community.

            The international laws demand that prisoners in the war even by when they are capture have the allegiance to the government from detaining the powers. It is a rule by the international standards that when the countries are fighting the prisoners need to be put into detain. In the nonviolent struggle, the Just war requires from the believers that they should look for an alternative solution to the various means of conflict, this method of nonviolent  permit to give the wage to the political struggle without the violence resorting. The political theory and the historical evidence do examine the determination on whether the nonviolent struggle is possibly in expectation in a way that will lead toward the conflicts in the future. In case, the nonviolence is a breakthrough, then the requirements of the just war are not meeting.


            This theory indicates that there, are a variety of the ethical rules that are in absolute, to break these morals are never legitimate and cannot be justified.


            Refers to the belief that the war of any form is not accepting and is of no cost pragmatically. The humanitarian concern is extending to the combatants and the enemy civilians, mostly the conscripts. The Ben Salmon who was sentencing to death during the world war one for the spreading of the propaganda has been including as a Just war critic.

Want an expert to write a paper for you Talk to an operator now Start live chat now  

Right of self defense

            In the life defense theory, the self defense is on the basis of self interest that maintaining the forces that retaliate in justification against the nations represses in order to break principles of the zero aggression, it is imperative morally those nations need to defend its citizens and itself by all the necessary means. Thus, any country emerging victorious over the enemy is giving the term imperative. The Objectivists view the formation of this theory to the effectiveness by ensuring that each country protects its citizens from its enemies. As a matter of fact, when the two involved parties are fighting, there is also a need that the citizens affected to stand strong for the government.


            The moral theory is frequently summarizing in words” the end justifies the means” which stand strong for the just war theory unless the causes becomes less but later necessary, which requires that worst actions may result to self defense causing negative consequences. Reasons for the war on the war theory,

            In the theory war, the first thing that comes in the mind of all human beings when there is war is a horror, suffering, pain, death and destruction. War is something that no any person would like to hear, wish or even think of happening. The individuals who go to war face the extreme possibility of death; or rather mutilation and even who do not fight also face death, even as they feel so ill to losing their loved ones. In the case, all people should be concerned with resolving the armed violence in solving the disputes. The causes of the war are militarism, imperialism, social nature, nationalism and the human nature. The purpose of the war differs from the society views to the government. In most cases, countries have neutrality that is causing the long tradition, hostility and militarism. The level of militarism in the community and the armed force's existence, in a way, seems as an elaborate way in conflict solving. The target of the war between and among the nations globally, is the fact that other nations are there to exploit the way and the peace of others by using the nuclear, weapons to prove to the superior countries that they have less power compared to super power holding countries.

            In the case of the USA and Iraq, the emergence of the war came across because Iraq was suspecting to have nuclear weapons that have negative impacts to the already born and the unborn. The USA wanted to at least reduce the powers of exploitation to all the countries of the world. The hatred speech also led to the because every nation wanted to prove how powerful it is over the other. Though so many deaths and destruction of property happened, there was no better time for those parties to fight than this. The most keen, interest is the level of devouring all the humanitarian efforts that create fear while wondering where to run too just for rescue. In the wider context war can minimize when the weakest and the most amicably countries are defeating, the Middle East nations have nuclear towers, and the super power countries are worrying over what may face the other nations of the world if measures are not  to secure all the people.

Ultimate reason for the war between United States and Iraq and the historical background to a conflict

            The main common reason for the emergence of war in Iraq is the act of terrorism; though this is hugely controversial President Barrack Obama calls it an indeed terrorist war. The war started in 9th September 2011 when the Al Qaeda terrorist crashed the American flights in two of the trade centers of the world Towers, i.e, the pentagon and the Pennsylvania field. This flight was for the white house. The emergence of the war in Iraq involves the intelligence reports that were saying that President Saddam Hussein had superior weapons that were of mass destruction. The saying continues that, the weapons exist and may be hidden under the sand or rather is taking to the other countries. Saddam Hussein, the former president of Iraq was committing acts that are brutal to the citizens of that country. Mass rapes and murders were the most common. Where the most occurrences that emerge as the outcome of his poor governance the massive graves were once reporting in the newscast again and again. There was the need for the entire people commit to their president, but they were not there for him, meaning that, they hated him, and they sentenced him up to death by hanging when caught for the Iraq trial.

            Another cause of the war with the Iraq includes protesting Osama bin Laden, who was also the mastermind in the same time along with other problems that Saddam had done in the past. In the 1990’s Saddam was trying to come up with nuclear weapons, by doing this, He said that he would destroy Israel and in the same year, he invaded Kuwait which was in urge of prompting the United States to intervene and stop him over what he was doing. Beside the two reasons, greed is another cause of conflict with Saddam was during the existence of the largest oil deposits in the world. Saddam own billions of dollars through revenue, he had palaces, heavy vehicles, women that every humanity was admiring, but Saddam had no heart toward the expectations of humanity. He was thinking about himself and himself alone just even considering in the minority around his mere surrounding. The only will of his heart was to build palaces and use the money rather than for defense, instead of helping the people of his nation by removing them out of the poverty that put them to death. At the time, he was planning to invade Kuwait, he told all his commanders to take all the plunders they want, and  anyone they would want, rape any woman, and so they did. Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kuwait and others informed the United States for intervention since they had no any defense that would help them. When all these countries requested for the support, the United States brought their involvement, and when no more threats were there, the United States remained there as a host. In this case, Osama bin Laden, never wanted the infidels in the country of Saudi Arabia. It seems okay to defend his nation from Saddam, but he was in need of making the United States leave when the issue is over. If Saddam and Obama were in cahoots, then, Kuwait was the test to see how the United States would rescue Kuwait in its oppression.

United States Relations with Iraq

            The United States government is in the process of withdrawing its troops from Iraq as President Barrack Obama is promising. Under the Iraq and the United States agreement, the troops need to be out of this nation, but the prime minister of Iraq Nouri al Maliki visits Washington in the process of highlighting the last strategies of the Iraq policy. Though U.S military is drawing down, this does not mean that it is ending the militia relationship with Iraq. The two forces have entered into a relationship comparing, the both parties in considering that security offices are open in Iraq, The personnel will have to assign to the OSC-I to assist in training, equipping, and supporting the armed forces in Iraq, even as they integrate advanced weapons as MI tanks, F-16 fighters into their fighting inventory. The OSCI sites are in operation and are running effectively, in supporting expensive contractors, though it appears hard to maintain these new equipments, there are benefits associated with it because it will remain there in the future. The U.S. is assisting the Iraqi military in satisfying their demands in asserting sovereignty in the nation. In the political arena, Iraqi wasted along with the lines that are imposing the other, playing partner, Prime Minister Maliki is showing the authorization behavior in fear that Baathist may return. The federal government and KRG in Baghdad are contentious due to resolution lacking over Kirkuk and other terrorists over the oil legality contract as signed by the Origin. In addition, the interior defense military remains temporal as it is currently occupying by the Prime minister himself. The role of the U.S. is complicating while playing the Iraq politics, but this mindset issue is somehow leading to the failure of the agreements with the outside political parties, more than it is support to be made to the Iraqi prime minister. In the mind view, the united states need to quit because there are many problems that may arise. The terrorist groups will always be there as they try to intervene in order to understand the common standards of the nation in the relationships embellished in fighting them. They are only significant aspect that the Iraqi needs to consider, the citizens themselves should stand for the best welfare of the other (Nicholas, 2007). If there is any threat that is causing peace to go down, then they should come up with the measures will control the nation to be exploited by any other minor minded individuals at whatever the cost.

The United Nations Resolutions

            The united nation inspectors to some extent were not cooperating with the U.S that maintained in Iraq. The United States thought that the 1441 resolution is calling for unilateral disarmaments in Iraqi and continues to bring frustrations which broke the resolutions tried by all the means, though this was not the view of the Iraqi in the involvement of the courses to cooperate with the U.S and the United Nations (Evans, 2005). There was a need for the united nation to listen to what the council was trying to implement on the peace-keeping issues but never came to pass. The united nation was indeed trying to emphasize on the fight, though there was a talk between Iraq and the united council they did not give the collect answers as to why they do not want to do away with the superior weapons, and this caused the military intervention, as a result of the sanctions.

The 1990 sanctions

            The aim of the council was to eliminate the nuclear weapons that would later bring mass destruction and ballistic missiles by prohibiting the act of terrorism, in forcing Iraq to incur the reparations of war and the depths. That was foreign. Most people had a view that none expresses objective sanction was the Saddam Hussein removal. The U.S opts to replace the regime, and the outcome was not getting from the united nation as a form of resolution, but did mention only view individuals as their supporters. The council committee issue did not complete its terms and  could not import in the Iraq, instead; it provided the means in of importing facilities to Iraq on the basis that were personal,             According to UNSC resolutions that allow the food stuffs, products and medicines for the civilian needs that were essential. The individuals willing to deliver various amenities to Iraq, whether in trade or donation, was requiring to apply for export to the authorities of the personal united nations member states, who later sent letters of application to the committee in charge of the sanctions. The committee was to make its personal decision and keep it a secret, as no any other committee would realize the hidden agendas of the council committee. Anything that was getting military was banning, such as trousers, computers, and tractors among others. Although the committee had its own discretion, in determining what is necessary for the Iraqi through allowing or denying anything toward the population of this nation?


The Critical Outcome of the Iraq War


The Iraq war was occupying the U.S troop starting from 20th march to the beginning of 1st May 2003. Though years have gone since the U.S administration came up with the terrorist war, there came a campaign that had the title “Operation Iraqi Freedom” that required the toppling of the Iraq regime. The first outcome of this war was expensive in material cost and also the human need in the U.S through ages after the war that took place in Vietnam. The spending on this war was approximately 1000-1500 billion U.S dollars, and to almost several times higher of the initial estimation. The number of deaths for fighting troops has brought death and destruction of property. The increasing calamities in Iraq are bringing negative impact they try to bring changes in the areas and the globe at large. There are excess critics against Iraq as they were fighting with United States militants.

            Iraq is overshadowing the violence, and the way, in which they lack stability, the United Nations troop appears to doing unnecessary job for militia disarmament, through persuading the political, sectarian and religious parties in Iraq in order to achieve national reconciliation as chatter (Craig, 2001). It is not right withdrawing all the 155000 troops from Iraq, at a go this reduces the combat troops and forcing it shift to activities that are diplomatic in order to improve the situation. The administration of the United Nations undertakes contracts and come to dialogue with the resistant troops in Iraq including members of the Ba’ath party as a former ruling.


            On the military level, the Iraq clearly demonstrated what happens when a force uses the latest technology in relation to the 21st tactics against opponents that have been training. Ultimately, the Iraq has got few chances against the coalition forces which are shifting intellectually and physically in the act of war. Casualties as a part of the coalition were light, while the Iraq was suffering destruction of formations. Of course, there is morale that has been playing. Most army units were not supporting the Saddam’s regime, thus causing the troops to melt back to the first opportunities. When there was the victory over the coalition, there was a prove that no weapons were  in Iraq, this is up to date causing political phases in the united states, Iraq  and also around the world. The main aim of the fight was to bring stability to the region that is still involving democracy from the outside. The battle was not only in the Iraq ground but also in the media as it was in the congress halls of the United States.


What Our Customers Say

Get 15%OFF   your first custom essay order Order now Use discount code first15
Click here to chat with us