On August 2, 1990, the Iraqi army guided by Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, on of the richest oil countries. This was the first major international crisis after the Cold War (“The Persian Gulf War”, 2012). After a long process of diplomatic talk and sanctions, the President of the United States, George Hebert Walker Bush, along with the support of the U.S Congress and the United Nations, decided to declare war on Iraq. During his declaration of war speech, Bush expressed that It was a forceful choice, as there was no other way left but to drive Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait with force (pitythefool, 2008). As a result, the coalition led by the U.S won the war in a short time period. However, were the overall effects of the 1991 Persian Gulf War positive or negative for the United States?

Political Perspective

The 1991 Persian Gulf War had several positive impacts for the U.S from a political perspective. The first Persian Gulf War was not only limited to Iraq and Kuwait. It was also an issue of high political importance for the United States. One of the reasons why the region was so important to the U.S is because the U.S depended on Kuwait for the access of cheap oil. By trying to conquer Kuwai, Saddam Hussain was a direct threat to the economic ties between the U.S and Kuwait. Furthermore, the U.S was afraid that Saddam’s territorial expansion would not stop with Kuwait but would continue into Saudi Arabia (Kimmel, 1998), which is also rich in oil reserves. Thus entering the war, the U.S maintained the positive relations in the region with countries of vast oil reserves while securing their future of oil imports.
A significant reason why the U.S entered the war is because the United States believed that the outcome of Kuwait’s conquest would affect political affairs on an international scale. A possible large-scale conquest by Iraq would affect other countries in the Middle East (Kimmel, 1998). Israel was one of the countries that Saddam had threatened to attack after Kuwait. By doing saw, he was hoping for Egypt and Syria, two members of the U.S coalition, to change sides and support his attack over Israel. It is very important to emphasize the continuous support that the U.S has provided Israel with. After all, they have been giving Israel $3 billion dollars of yearly grants since 1986 (Mark, 2002). If more countries had supported Iraq, then the Israeli-United States relations would have been at severe risk. The war could have escalated on an international level, with several countries supporting both sides. However, the U.S swiftly defeated Iraq’s military, leaving Saddam’s regime and political position over the region unstable. The U.S further developed its ties with the countries of the Middle East by selling them weapons in case they needed to protect themselves (Bayman & Waxman, 2000). By stopping Sadam’s advance the U.S successfully maintained the international ties in the region, but also made sure to avoid any threats aiming at unstable international issues which would directly fall under their responsibility. President George Herbert Walker Bush was the one who inspired the formation of an international coalition against Iraq’s military attack over Kuwait. Joining countries to fight for the same cause is a challenge. The coalition itself was a victory for the United States because it included several countries like France, Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United States, and the United Kingdom whose political aims sought conflict with each other. The leading qualities of the U.S politics made these countries overcome their personal interests during a problematic stage, and consider their benefits as a group. The U.S served as an inspiration for the other countries to join the war against Saddam Hussein and fight for the same cause. Many of Saddam’s inspirational points for Iraq’s military cause were that the U.S could not be an obstacle for them, since the U.S did not know how to end a war (McDonald, 2003). Unlike in the Vietnam War, where the U.S never finished what it started, the purpose 1991 Persian Gulf War was quickly and efficiently accomplished, while considering involvement as a group (“The Persian Gulf War”). Therefore, the U.S regained their lost leading title of international affairs after the flop of the Vietnam War by taking the most responsibility in the group (“The Persian Gulf War”). Considering the issue on a political perspective, the U.S involvement in the first Persian Gulf War had several positive impacts. The U.S role as the leader of international affairs was reaffirmed. President Bush’s initiative for an international coalition proved to be successful despite the differences in the political beliefs of the group. The military and political impressions of the Cold War episode were just a thing of the past. Most importantly, their regained international leading reputation came along with the protection of the sphere of influence in the Middle East and their access to the abundant and cheap oil resources

The Economic Perspective The second part of the impact of the 1991 Persian Gulf War on the U.S refers to the economic aspects during and after the conflict. On the verge of war, President Bush made a speech regarding the economic implications of the United Sates in the Middle East area. Specifically, he referred to the fact that half of the U.S imported oil was coming from Kuwait. If nothing would have been done to interrupt the advance of Iraq, the takeover of Kuwait from Iraq would have been a direct threat to America’s economy (Kimmel, 1998). The secured U.S political sphere of influence over Kuwait allowed the U.S to keep the oil trade on track.
Even though the U.S won the war, because of the war circumstances in the region, the oil trade was abruptly interrupted. Not only Kuwait, but several other countries in the region decided to rarefy the oil trade. Even after Kuwait was liberated from Iraq, the oil production fields were out of function. Kuwait had to deal with all the reparations that had to be done because of the war. As a result, there were several negative short-term economic outcomes for the United States. The absence of oil trade was directly felt in the consumer confidence index in the United States. Because of the unreliable political situation, people were undecided what to do with their money. The political situation made the consumers hold their money back as also show the statistics based on the University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment. On July 1990, the U.S consumer index marked 88.2. After that, on August 1990 it drastically fell 76.4. The precipitation continued in October when it hit 63.9, the lowest ever in a decade (Silk, 1991). This was one of the toughest economic circumstances of the American consumer.
Because of the oil trade blockade, it was preordained for the oil prices to rise. Very shortly after the war started the oil prices went up from $18 to $40 a barrel. The drastic change in oil price lessened the people’s usage of fuel consumptive machineries. (Silk, 1991). Specifically the airline industries witnessed dramatic losses. Jet fuel went up from 60 cents per gallon to $1.40 per gallon by mid October. If it weren’t enough, Trans-Atlantic flights dropped by 50% because people felt unsafe from the war circumstances (Silk, 1991). The war brought difficult economic times along with the difficult economic prices of fuel.
Negative short-term consequences were also felt in the housing area. New house sales went down by 13% in 1990, marking the lowest point since 1982. The sales for existing houses dropped by 4.3%. Home prices fell as much as 20% in numerous areas of the country. The median value of a U.S home reached up to $95,500, a decrease of 3.5% further contributed by the yearly inflation rate. Even though the housing crisis was differently felt in terms of prices in different parts of the country, overall the housing sector was also economically damaged by the war (Belsky & Kovaleski 1991). While normally, war encourages great demand of goods and services. This wasn’t the case with the 1991 Persian Gulf War because the war was mostly fought with old reserves of weapons and ammunitions (Behar & Baumohl, 1991). However, the long awaited positive outcomes on the U.S economy came with the long-term effects of the war.
After August, the consumer confidence index started to quickly rise. On January 1991, according to the Consumer Sentiment of the University of Michigan, the consumer confidence rate marked 66.8. The rate continued an increase in the following months. (Silk, 1991). This was a very important increase because the consumers who make up around two-thirds of the economy of the United States (Behar & Baumohl, 1991). One of the leading financial writers and economist of the United States, Paul Erdman, describes the 1991 Persian Gulf War as the spark needed to bring the U.S economy back on track:
The American nation refound its confidence on the Persian Gulf battlefield. That confidence is seeping down into the national psyche and could help bring on an economic renewal. The war showed we don't have to play second fiddle to anybody, that we don't need the Germans and the Japanese to help us accomplish something (as cited by Behar & Maymohl, 1991).

Indeed, the quick victory of the U.S over the war encouraged people to bring back the consumer index at higher rates, stronger than before. The year 1991, marked the beginning of several rate increases in the U.S economy. The Industrial stock market index, Dow Jones, marked a raise of 23% since October 1990. In 1991, daily trading values in the stock market had a mean average of 195 million share, 29% higher than in 1990. This was not the point where the U.S economy came back at its best but it was the beginning of a new era of economic prosperity. The war acted as a psychological stimulus so after war people could buy their postponed TV, car, or refrigerator (Behar & Baumohl, 1991). After the war, the oil prices dropped even further. In 1991, the price per one barrel of oil dropped to $15. One barrel of oil before the war cost $18, and during the war it cost $40 per barrel. People felt more relieved because of the deduction in costs. Moreover, the long tortured airline industry also experienced drastic decreases on prices for jet fuel (Behar & Baumohl, 1991). Airline demand got back to normality, considering the more reasonable prices and the absence of war. 1990 was a devastating year for the U.S housing economy. However, in 1991 the hosing market began e constant revamp. According to the Federal housing Finance Agency, the 1991 purchase only housing index reached 100.69, compared to 95 in 1990. Because of this increase, people became more confident to invest their money in the housing sector. The index’s increase continued for several years. The year 2008 was the only time period when the index decreased in value. Furthermore, the prices remained at the decreased level for a short amount of time after the war. Consumers benefited from the cheap housing prices and also from the positive atmosphere that the quick and successful outcome of the war brought them (Behar & Baumohl, 1991). Record values were observed in tourism after the war. Suddenly, a flow of bookings to travel out and in of the country emerged. In terms of international tourism with direction inside and outside of the United States, an overall of 40,000 rescheduled flights and 20,000 additional ones were estimated only between January and February 1992. People felt safer and more eager to visit places because of the tranquilized political atmosphere (Morris, 2001). The cost of the war was one of the most interesting discussion points when the war ended. The United States spent a total of $15 billion dollars during the 1991 Gulf War. However, one of the smartest decisions that President Bush made was to scale the Persian Gulf conflict as an international issue. Therefore, after the UN got involved, several aids whether in ammunition or money-wise came to the U.S’ help. The total value of the material given to the U.S, whether it was money or supplies, totaled $54 billion. By the first quarter of 1991, the U.S foreign budget went from a fiscal deficit of $23.4 billion to a surplus of $10.2 billion. The rest of the money was used for the country’s military reparations Overall, it is economically correct to say that the United States made a profit from the 1991 Gulf War (Silk, 1991). If entering the Persian Gulf War was a major boost for the economy of the United States, then the country made the right choice. It is true that during the time that the war was fought, the country experienced many economic difficulties such as dealing with high oil prices and loosing consumer confidence. However, after the United States had quickly won the war, the economy of the country started to get back on the right track. Oil cost cheaper then before, big and small investors felt safe to invest their money, the airline industry got back to normality, and the stock market swiftly surpassed the digits of the pre-war era. Moreover, the cost of the war was paid by the international donations of the U.N, resulting in a surplus. These factors all contributed to the general positive atmosphere about the safe economic future of the country.

Public Opinion The U.S involvement in the first Persian Gulf War had also an impact on the American public. The memories of Vietnam were still deeply embedded on everyone who experienced the war through the media. The prolonged war and the numerous U.S causalities had caused the public to be extremely sensitive to the losses of U.S human life on the battlefield. Therefore During the 1991 Gulf War, the U.S public opinion felt a danger of being conquered, even though the Iraqi troops were being demolished on the battlefield ( Mueller, 1991). In a Gallup Poll taken after the war, 79% of the people agreed with President Bush and supported his decision of entering the war. It appeared that after the war, everyone had clear perceptions of what their expectations were. However, different figures were recorded in several Polls taken days before the war started (Mueller, 1991).
A poll taken before the war started recorded that 63% of Americans agreed for the country to go to war. Interestingly this percentage dropped by 19%, from 63% to 44%, when the question suggested that at least 1,000 U.S human causalities might be the cost of entering this war (Mueller, 1991). The public opinion appeared to widely support the war, but the support certainly decreased when the time would come for the U.S army to stop the missile bombardment and engage in man-to-man combat. However the U.S citizens felt unsafe with the presence of Saddam Hussein. For them, his presence was a danger for the interests of the United States (Mueller, 1991). The U.S army accomplished the main point of interests of the public, which was to defeat Saddam Hussein. Throughout the progress of the war, the public opinion started to be more supportive for President Bush. During the first attack of the U.S on Iraqi troops, 86% of the Americans supported the way President Bush was handling the issue. Interestingly, as many daily polls and interviews reported, the support statistics immediately rose when military attacks succeeded and the support fell when military preparations were being made. Approval of President’s Bush reached the point of support equivalent to the approval that President Franklin D. Roosevelt gained after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Among the public, 77% claimed that they felt proud of the stance that the United States had taken in the Persian Gulf War (Claymer, 1991). The public opinion was satisfied with the decision that their President had taken with their military’s performance.
Patriotic feelings about the country resolving the issue through war were also very high during the war period. For the people of the United States this was an opportunity to regain the pride they lost during the Vietnam War(Lewis, Jhally & Morgan, 1991). ABC News carried out a long series of polls covering the time during the start, development, and end of the war. Throughout the continuous coverage that ABC News provided, public support for the war never went below 59%. The war support hit its climactic range when the war was about to end, with its values ranging from 61% to 69% (as cited by Mueller, 1993).
The entrance and the quick end of the war proved to the public that the U.S knew how to quickly and proficiently win a war of high importance (Lewis, Jhally & Morgan, 1991). Even though some people were skeptical about the military solutions or about the actions of the President, nationalistic views embedded deep in the majority of the perception of the Americans resulted in major public support. American political activist Grace Paley stated that “the entrance and the outcome of the war proved to the public that America knew how to avoid another Vietnam. It was a convenient point to produce public support” (as cited by Kimmel, 1998). After the war the U.S gained the public support it had missed since the war in Vietnam.

Conclusion
The decision to go to war of President Bush was a very risky one for the stability of the country. It would either bring the beginning of a new era or push the U.S further into recession and political risk. Despite the risk, President Bush wielded the situation with professionalism; at the same time he maintained his promise to quickly end the war for the benefit of the country. Looking in retrospective, the war had some short-term negative consequences but long-term positive consequences. In the short term, the economy of the state was negatively affected by the war. Important factors like oil pries rose up, causing public dissatisfaction. Nevertheless, President Bush held tight the situation and used the war as a spark of a new economic cycle. The international cause of the U.S to maintain peace brought prosperity to the country of Kuwait and firmness to the United Nations with the U.S leading. Along every decision, the public continuously supported President Bush for his leading role in the war. In addition, the cause of the war received wide public approval before, during, and after the war in an increasing pace respectively. The U.S gained the lost prestige of Vietnam. The overall effects of the Persian Gulf War were certainly positive for the United States.

References
Bayman, D., & Waxman, M. C. (2000). Confronting Iraq : U.S. policy and the use of force since the Gulf War.
Behar, R. R., & Baumohl, B. B. (1991). Victory's dividend. The New York Times.
Belsky, G. G., & Kovaleski, S. F. (1991). What the war means to all your finances.
(Cover story). Money, 20(3), 74.
Claymer, A. (1991, January 22). War in the Gulf: public opinion; poll finds deep backing while optimism fades. The New York Times.
Federal Housing Finance Agency. (n.d). Retrieved December 17, 2012, from http://www.fhfa.gov/Default.aspx?Page=87 Kimmel, L. (1998). The Persian Gulf War -- Oil, the environment and diplomacy.
Retrieved from http://www.leighkimmel.com/writing/academicpapers/gulf.shtml
Lewis, J., Jhally, S., Morgan, M. (1991, February). The Gulf War: a study of the media, public opinion and public knowledge. University of Leeds. Retrieved November 22, 2012, from http://icswww.leeds.ac.uk/papers/vp01.cfm?outfit=pmt&folder=30&paper=738
Mark, C. (2002, October 17) Israeli-United States relations. Retrieved from http://www.policyalmanac.org/world/archive/crs_israeli-us_relations.shtml Mueller, J. (1993). American public opinion and the Gulf War: some polling issues.
Public Opinion Quarterly, 57(1), 80-91.
Mueller, J. (1991, January 19). A quick victory? It better be. New York Times.
Morris, C. (2001, October 18). Bloodied but unbowed - tourism's battle with terrorism. Retrieved from http://www.hospitalitynet.org/news/4009872.html
PitytheFool(2008, March 19) George H W Bush announces war against Iraq (January 16 1991). Retrieved November 24, 2012, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFrnQHaQWoA
Silk, L. (1991, August 16). Economic scene; the broad impact of the Gulf War. New
York Times.
The Persian Gulf War. (n.d). Retrieved November 21, 2012, from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/bush-gulf-war/ The Persian Gulf War. (2012). Retrieved November 22, 2012, from
http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=2&psid=3374