George W. Bush's Decision To Invade Iraq

1960 Words8 Pages
Tony Bui POL 3767 Essay #6 Like Father, Like Son From 1989 to 2008, the United States of America has observed three Bush presidencies; one term served by George H.W. Bush, and two served by his son, George W. Bush. During their time office, each encountered incredibly different, yet historically significant crises. And although not identical, both presidents implemented relatively similar decision-making processes with regard to policy decisions made toward the same nation: Iraq. President George H.W. Bush’s decision to invade Kuwait and President George W. Bush’s decision to invade Iraq will serve as the focal points of this analytical essay. Elements of presidential character, groupthink, analogical reasoning, and risk acceptance were…show more content…
George W. Bush, immediately upon waging a successful military campaign against Afghanistan, the primary harbor and sponsor of the September 11 terrorist attacks against the United States, decided that Saddam Hussein must be removed from his position of power in Iraq. George W. Bush, fresh of a “high” resulting from a combination of the “rally-around-the-flag effect” and the swift domination of Afghanistan, saw the opportunity to inject his worldview into U.S. foreign policy. Bush encompassed a worldview similar to his father’s (but amplified, in a sense), and saw the United States as a “heroic liberator,” compelled by God to deliver peace and democracy to evil, misguided nations through force if necessary. (Hybel 127) With such an unwavering worldview guiding the way, decision-making on whether or not to invade Iraq was predicated on regime change. Undoubtedly, George W. Bush, like his father, viewed the war in very personal terms. The man he intended to dispose of (Hussein) had threatened to assassinate his father, deceived the United States, and, as Bush viewed, served as the primary impediment to peace and democracy in the Middle East whilst employing an evil totalitarian regime notorious for widespread human rights violations. Bush eventually began probing for intelligence analyses that would justify his case for war against Iraq. This “cherry-picking” for information is…show more content…
George H.W. Bush was effective in gathering the support of the international community via the United Nations and various allies, while his son acted, for the most part, unilaterally. The Gulf War ended shortly, and was restricted to liberating Kuwait for Iraqi occupation so as to prevent an attack on Saudi Arabia (which would adversely affect the American economy), while the Iraqi war was preemptively initiated to prevent an “inevitable” domestic attack via weapons of mass destruction and/or terrorism. George H.W. Bush effectively balanced the pros and cons associated with the risks involved with (militarily) forcing a regime change in Iraq, while his son did not. Yet the most vital lesson to be gleaned from both Middle Eastern crises is tied to the similarities in the decision-making processes of the two different Bush administrations. To echo the recommendation of Hybel and Kaufman, “a readiness to reflect on alternative options and a willingness to reevaluate one’s original decision before it is finally implemented are essential to rational decision-making.” (Hybel 151) The prevailing tendencies of both Bush administrations to stifle dissenting opinions, shape historical analogies to fit their personal, emotional, and ideologically-driven policy objectives, while only accepting intelligence/evidence that
Open Document