Al-qaeda is one of the largest terrorists groups in the world, allied with many large Islamic terrorist groups. These groups targeted the United States, including other allied countries, and the Twin Towers were one of many, targeted by Al-qaeda, killing thousands in the process. The 9/11 attack was the largest scaled attack on the United States, the attack resulted in nearly 3,000 deaths, and millions worth of damage. Within 24 hours of the 9/11 attack the United States, met with the NATO committee and came up with a decision to go to war with Iraq, and sent thousands of troops within 72 hours after the announcement. Proving that the Iraq/ Afghanistan war was the cause of numerous, deadly attacks on America and NATO allied countries. …show more content…
NATO's goals include the promotion of a democracy and encourages consultation and cooperation and defense and security issues to build trust and, in the long, prevent conflict. NATOS Military interest is committed to the peaceful resolution of disputes. If diplomatic efforts fail, NATO has the military capacity needed to undertake crisis-management operations. These are carried out under UN mandate, alone or in cooperation with other countries and international organizations. NATO helped the Iraqi government build the capability to ensure, by its own means, the security needs of the Iraqi people. Allies decided to extend their training assistance to Iraq by training the federal police to bridge the gap between routine police work and military operations. NATO was given a central role in Afghanistan because of the influence of US officials concerned with the alliance, according to a US military officer who was in a position to observe the decision-making process(Gareth Porter)."NATO's role in Afghanistan is more about NATO than it is about Afghanistan," said an officer, who insisted on anonymity because of the political sensitivity of the subject.(Gareth Porter).One reason for the dovish hints is that European and Canadian public opinion strongly oppose the escalation. In Germany 71% are opposed, and in the UK 56%. In …show more content…
On July 25 - two weeks before the US bombing of Iraq began - the House passed 370-40 an amendment offered by McGovern, insisting that Congressional authorization precede any "sustained combat role" in Iraq for US forces. Currently it seems that a "sustained combat role" for US forces is exactly what the Obama administration and the Pentagon are planning(Robert Naiman).The administration’s contention that the 9/11 authorization covers ISIS is also disputed because ISIS and Al Qaeda separated this year. The administration argues that the split did not abrogate authority to fight ISIS, whose predecessor was long al Qaeda affiliate under Osama bin Laden. The Iraq Resolution or the Iraq War Resolution (formally the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002). There is no requirement in international law that the United States (or any nation) seek permission to initiate any war of self-defense. "The United States government has argued, wholly apart from Resolution 1441, that it has a right of preemptive self-defense to protect itself from terrorism fomented by Iraq. Although this position has been intensively criticized, without any legal finding for support, claims for legality or illegality are merely debates. To prove illegality it would first be necessary to prove that the US did not meet the conditions of necessity and proportionality and that the right of pre-emptive defense did not apply. A major war against a conventional