...930785908 Professor Settle GOVT 201 8 November 2013 War and Public Opinion The presentation of the news is a great responsibility. Reporters generally hold themselves and each other to a high standard of fair and balanced reporting. Often times whether intentional or not, reporters personal opinions will cause them to frame their information in favor of one political party or the other. Political spin can be especially powerful during times of war, when the nation’s passions are running high and the lives of our country’s young men and women are on the line. The justification to invade Iraq was based on flimsy intelligence provided by the Bush administration. Leading up to the invasion, news reporters working with this same flimsy information, presented the American people with the Bush administrations justifications for war. In this paper I will show how the way in which an argument is framed can sway public opinion. My topic will specifically examine how the justification for the Iraq war was framed by the Bush administration. In order to do so, I will explain how a majority of American people get their news. I will also cite examples where the framing was so effective that people would have trouble coming to terms with the fact that they were misled, even after being presented with factual evidence. Before we get into the specific questions about the war, we need to cover how and why we get information from the media. So how do Americans get their news information? According...
Words: 1735 - Pages: 7
...or the Just War Theory is a military ethics doctrine derived from Episcopal philosophy of the Roman Catholic Church. As studied today, the Just War Theory is considered hugely informed by the Christian understanding of the justifications of wars of invasion. In ethicist literature as in moral theology and policy making, the Just War Theory is associated with the belief that conflicts can be justified under certain philosophical, political and religious criteria. This paradigm dates back to the times of Marcus Tullius Cicero, a Roman statesman, philosopher, lawyer, theorist and constitutionalist. The connection of the theory to medieval Christian theory and particularly, contemporary Catholicism is in the works of Thomas Aquinas and Aurelius Augustinus Hipponensis (Gutman & Rieff, 2000). The former, also called Thomas of Aquin was an Italian Dominican priest, a theologian and a philosopher. The latter, also called St. Augustine, Blessed Augustine or Augustine of Hippo, was a onetime Bishop of Hippo Regius, a philosopher and theologian. This paper describes the tenets of the just war theory derived from the works of these philosophers and the utility of the theory within contemporary warfare. Specific focus is on the justification of the US invasion of Iraq and the consequences thereof. In the works of these three philosophers, the Just War Theory took a Christian connotation of the Roman Empire’s view of warfare. The Christian understanding of provocation to war and the ethics...
Words: 979 - Pages: 4
...Uncovering The Truth: Wars, Media and Metaphors “If only you can get all the facts out there in the public eye, then every rational person will reach the right conclusion” (Lakoff, 138). In the world today there are many examples via news reports, newspaper articles, and documentaries etc. that support George Lakoff’s claim that “Metaphors Can Kill”. More specifically written works like War Media and Propaganda: A Global Perspective, “Metaphors That Kill”, and The Five Biggest Lies Bush Told Us About Iraq, and Michael Moore’s documentary Fahrenheit 9/11 and his article “What Is Terrorism?” provide perspectives on the impact of wars such as the ongoing American involvement in Iraq and the repercussions that ensue because of them. These exposés also vividly emphasize the important issue of media coverage furthering the interests of government. By using examples of war and tone, media and methods of development, and metaphors and lies, these articles vividly emphasize the importance of the issues involved with governments, as well as the media and clearly educate the audience towards a better understanding of the problems and lies surrounding them. ‘War’ can be defined as a state of open armed conflict between one or more nations over a disputed disagreement. Hidden within this word comes thousands upon thousands of deaths, excessive amounts of wasted money, and immeasurable quantities of losses. The average person would find it incomprehensible to imagine why all this destruction...
Words: 2008 - Pages: 9
...The Iraq War was Unjustified The Iraq War was Unjustified There are many reasons why the war Iraq was unjustified. Until today, Iraq has not been found to have weapons of mass destruction. There are beliefs that former President George W. Bush simply waged war on Iraq because of their oil. Iraq as a country and the former President Saddam Hussein had no link to al-Qaeda terrorist group. The United States congress, based on wrong intelligence from the Bush’s administration agreed unanimously to go to war with Iraq, despite the fact that the Unites Nations disagreed with the decision. Because of the decision to wage war on Iraq, The United States lost most of its allies. “A war on Iraq for the purpose of “regime change” would not be a legal war under international law. Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter states: “All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purpose of the United Nations.” (Miller, 2003). On September 11, 2001, two planes crashed into the World Trade Center. Many Americans died because of the deadly attack. It was one of the deadliest attacks on U.S soil. One plane crashed into part of the pentagon, and the another plane crashed into an open field. Based on these attacks by the al-Qaeda terrorist group, President Bush declared war on the Taliban in Afghanistan in an attempt...
Words: 848 - Pages: 4
...The war to end all wars... on terrorism. The Iraq war was terrible, no one could have seen what was going to happen.So many countries went along with the US, but Canada said no. My thesis is that saying no to the Iraq war was a defining moment for canada because the war was unpopular in Canada and no UN approval, it forced the US to realize that Canada was not the 51 state, and the war did nothing but destabilize Iraq. This is how Canada listen to its people and decide not to go to Iraq. Canada has always been an ally of the US since we became independent from the UK. From WW2 to the persian gulf war and even the invasion of afghanistan after the 9/11 attacks. But, Canada did not join the Iraq war because it did not have the UN approval it...
Words: 897 - Pages: 4
...Realism and the Persian Gulf War of 1990-1991 In the Persian Gulf War of 1991, Saddam Hussein’s quest for regional hegemony pitted his country against the forces of international law. A prime example of where realist theory falls short, Hussein’s forces were trumped by a multilateral coalition of international peacekeeping institutions in one of history’s most lopsided wars. Hussein sought power, and was willing to sacrifice his country’s foreign relations, as well as the health of his own people, to obtain it. In Gulf War I, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq was quickly dismantled in a conflict instigated by its own realist intentions. The theory of realism is based on the three factors of statism, survival, and self-help of the sovereign state. The survival of the state as a whole, rather than its citizens themselves, is the main focus of realism. The realist state is expected to enhance its national power by any means necessary; “A POLICY MAKER’S PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY IS TO CREATE, MAINTAIN, AND INCREASE NATIONAL POWER – THE MEANS AVAILABLE TO A STATE TO SECURE ITS NATIONAL INTERESTS – AT ALL COSTS” (Lamy 71). Oftentimes, this comes at the expense of surrounding states. A realist state is concerned with its own security first and foremost; “THE FIRST MOVE…FOR THE REALSIST IS TO ORGANIZE OWER DOMESTICALLY. ONLY AFTER POWER HAS BEEN ORGANIZED CAN COMMUNITY BEGIN” (Lamy 72). However, once domestic security has been established, the realist state will look to pursue its self-interest...
Words: 1768 - Pages: 8
...were of no great significance in the wider arena. The American public and political classes were unconcerned with previous attacks on the World Trade Centre in 94, the attack on the USS Cole, and the attacks on US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Attacks of 9/11 and the fall of the World Trade Centre’s marked the beginning of the real 21st century. (Brown 04). 9/11 was not simply an act of terror but the most destructive single act of terror since World War 2. Many in the Islamic community saw the attack, as an attack on “the symbolic heart of global capitalism” (Brown 04). 9/11 galvanised the American people, and less then 12 hours after the attacks, president Bush formally declared a “war on terror”. Overnight America’s relationships with Russia, China and India improved. Britain and Australia were also seen as close allies. President Bush and his supporters stressed the need to go on the offensive against terrorists, to deploy the U.S. military, and to promote democracy in the Middle East. (Gordon 07). The U.S is fighting a war on terror and must remain on the offensive. The Bush administration feel, that U.S. power is the foundation of global order, and the spread of democracy and freedom is the key to a safer and more peaceful world. (Gordon 06). Therefore I feel that neo-conservatism and Realism are the theories of International Relations that are most useful in understanding world politics today. Terrorism is a multi-faced problem and requires an aggressive and long-term...
Words: 2090 - Pages: 9
...involvement in war on some occasions. The Just war theory deals with the justification of how and why wars are fought. The justification can be theoretical. The theoretical aspect is concerned with justifying war ethically. The role of ethics is used to examine whether war is justified and if so can the aspects be changed. The just war tradition also considers the thoughts of various philosophers through the ages and examine their philosophical visions of war’s ethical limits and whether their thoughts have contributed to the justification of war. The just war theory was firstly developed by Saint Augustine of Hippo. Looking back at the Bible he realised that although older generations sided with the more peaceful aspects of the Bible (New Testament) the aspects which included violence (Old Testament) could not be ignored. In Mathew 5 it Jesus said “blessed are the peacemakers” however he did not oppose those who crucified him. This links to how war can be justified because Jesus Gods only son did not punish those who purposely killed him without reason. So to punish those with to an extent have a valid reason could be seen as hypocritical. Augustine believed that justified wars were commanded by God in the bible and split his theory into two parts they are; jus ad bellum-just reasons for going to war, and jus in bello-just practice in war. This was then further developed by Aquinas. Jus ad bellum contains seven key points. If these points are met then war can be justified...
Words: 1501 - Pages: 7
... Sovereign states are expected to act as guardians of their citizens’ security, but what happens if states behave as criminals towards their own people, treating sovereignty as a licence to kill? Should tyrannical states be recognized as legitimate members of international society and accorded the protection afforded by the non-intervention principle? Or, should states forfeit their sovereign rights and be exposed to legitimate intervention if they actively abuse or fail to protect their citizens? Related to this, what responsibilities do other states or institutions have to enforce human rights norms against governments that massively violate them? Armed humanitarian intervention was not a legitimate practice during the cold war because states placed more value on sovereignty and order than on the enforcement of human rights. There was a significant shift of attitudes during the 1990s, especially among liberal democratic states, which led the way in pressing new humanitarian claims within international society. The UN Secretary-General noted the extent of this change in a speech to the General Assembly in September 1999. Kofi Annan declared...
Words: 5806 - Pages: 24
...In the war against terrorism, public opinion plays a crucial role. The attacks transformed public opinion and reshaped Bush’s image, the public expressed a stronger willingness to use military force battle terrorism. The Bush administration played a role in successfully convincing the public to support the war by linking terrorism and al Qaeda. Thus, framing the war on Iraq and connecting it with 9/11. Framing the issue this way became a central part of the administration’s discussion of terrorism, America wanted immediate action taken. The fight against terror became a manhunt. This changed the way Americans thought about terrorist organizations and Islam itself. The climate of fear instilled a retaliation wanted by America, the decision to...
Words: 474 - Pages: 2
...Running head: THE IRAQI WAR: WAS IT THE RIGHT THING TO DO? The Iraqi War: Was it the Right Thing to Do? XXXXXX University Abstract The invasion of Iraq was unconstitutional, had no real justification for happening and has severely damaged relations with our allies. Most importantly, Saddam Hussein was considered a threat and it was believed that he had weapons of mass destruction, would take on the U.S in an instant and was accused of having ties to the events of September 11, 2006 and the Al-Quaeda terrorist network. None of this could be proved and it appears as if it were all just convenient statements made by the administration to find a way to make it a justifiable cause. The Iraqi War: Was it the Right Thing to Do? The invasion was unconstitutional, against international law, violated the Christian doctrine of "just war" and has damaged U.S. relations with its allies. It has wreaked havoc in the Muslim world, where there's plenty of havoc already, and most importantly, it has resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people. Frankly, it’s surprising it hasn’t resulted in dropping a nuclear bomb on Baghdad. Claims made prewar regarding Iraq's weapons of mass destruction have all proved to be wrong; the number of terrorists in Iraq has increased rather than decreased and the abuse inflicted on Iraqi detainees contradicts the most basic values the Administration claimed it would bring to Iraq (Savoy, 2004). President Bush’s...
Words: 3164 - Pages: 13
...abroad? What are two factors that propelled America into a dominant military and diplomatic force after World War II? What are the key differences in American foreign policy before and after World War II? What are the main reasons in the changes of pre- and post-war policy occurred? In what manner does the justifications used for America’s overseas involvement during World War II still play a role in United States military action abroad? What example can be provided of such justifications in action? In what fundamental ways in which the rise of the United States to a world superpower has shaped the country’s responses to domestic spending, Fourth Amendment protections, and Americans’ choice of leaders in Congress and the White House on the home front? These previous topics covers the manner of America’s shift of power occurred and the consequences that the United States faces as a result of this elevated status. What are two real-life international incidents where the States have used military action abroad? In 2011, the United States aided in NATO’s successful intervention in Libya. According to the website of foreign affairs, the United States facilitated the intervention, took its led in cutting off funding to Libya as well as freezing Libya’s thirty-two billion dollars of assets, and also instigated the UN’s authorization of the intervention under the justifications of the responsibility of protecting innocent civilians (Daalder, 2013). Interventions of these types are constructed...
Words: 1812 - Pages: 8
...Capstone final project Student’s name Course Title Instructor Date submitted Is United States justified to adopt a first-strike policy against independent nations in war on terrorism? The attack on United States on September 2001 brought the truth and reality of terrorism to the land of America in a way that most people had not imagined. Over three thousand people lost their lives. With that several innocent lives lost, America and other friendly nations joined to condemn terrorism. United States accused Taliban government of Afghanistan of harboring perpetrators. The accusation led the United States to begin military operations in Afghanistan. Many nations accepted the military operations as a justifiable response. The Taliban became an easy target because they were sympathizers of terrorist. After a short successful military operations in Afghanistan, United States turned attention to Iraq. They began to build a case against the regime government of Saddam Hussein. The United States suggested that Iraq had also been supporting terrorist and developing nuclear weapons. It was after those inflammatory suggestions about Iraq that a different debate surrounding military operations in that country started to emerge. In September, 2002, American government published a document titled The National Security Strategy. The President, George Bush, pointed the enemy of twenty century as a shadowy network of individuals who were out to harm the society with inexpensive weapon...
Words: 3168 - Pages: 13
...of the new millennium, the United States has waged war in foreign lands, much of which spawned from the tragic attacks on September 11, 2001. War, in essence, provokes debate of principle. In 2002, when the President asked for authorization to use military force against Iraq, who they believed to be behind the attacks, party lines were drawn. While it was rather normal to see a Republican supporting the intervention in Afghanistan and eventually Iraq, it was exceedingly rare to find a Republican against it. North Carolina Representative Walter Jones took the courageous stand as one of the first Republicans to recant his position; to defy his own party and his constituents in his opposition of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, in an effort to stop the brutal killing of people, which now stands at over 9,000 Americans for both war, plus nearly 210,000 civilians (Lutz); and unsustainable...
Words: 953 - Pages: 4
...white papers to restore the constitution white papers Restore. Protect. Expand. Amend the War Powers Resolution Center for Constitutional Rights The Center for Constitutional Rights is dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Founded in 1966 by attorneys who represented civil rights movements in the South, CCR is a non-profit legal and educational organization committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change. CCR uses litigation proactively to empower poor communities and communities of color; to guarantee the rights of those with the fewest protections and least access to legal resources; and to train the next generation of civil and human rights attorneys. Formed in order to work hand in hand with people’s movements, CCR has lent its expertise and support to a wide range of movements for social justice. We strive to complete the unfinished civil rights movement through targeting racial profiling and other modern-day manifestations of racial and economic oppression and through combating discrimination that is based on gender or sexuality and struggling against government abuse of power. For decades, CCR has pushed U.S. courts to recognize international human rights and humanitarian protections – and we have had groundbreaking victories that established the principle of universal jurisdiction in this country and extended human rights standards...
Words: 3910 - Pages: 16
