The United States and the floundering war on terror Essay

The unify States and the floundering war on scourge - Essay ExampleThe contend on Terror which was initiated as a response to the phratry 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the get together States initi everyy showed great promise in ridding the world and the United States of the risks associated with terrorism. As the war on terror wore on without any definite progress creation gained in battle terrorism and in bringing the terrorists to justice, it became more apparent that the war was becoming an ineffectual office to resolve the terrorist issue. The war against terror appeared to be floundering. This chapter shall hold forth the US and the floundering war on terror. This chapter shall also discuss the challenges being confronted by the Obama Administration and the way forward which can be gained from the years of war. Discussion The September 11 attacks resulted in the launching of the contend on Terror and a support for President George W. provides war against terror. Pri or to the attacks, Bushs administration was criticized for its international military policies. In the commove of the attacks however, a worldwide condemnation for terrorism was seen. And the war on terror raged over Afghanistan and over Iraq for years. It claimed numerous lives and caused the destruction of many communities and structures in Afghanistan and Iraq. As the war went on for years without much progress being gained in managing the terrorist issue, debates and rumblings on the war were slowly being expressed from various interest groups, countries, and organizations. And like other Vietnam War, the war on terror started to flounder and lose popular support. The terrorist attack in 2005 in capital of the United Kingdom which was reportedly initiated by the Al Qaeda group was just one of the indications which pointed to the glaring truth that the War on Terrorism was not working. In 2004, the Bush Administration cancelled its publication of the yearly Patterns of planet ary Terrorism report which would have manifested that the terrorist attacks increased significantly from 175 in 2003 to 625 in 2004 (Gregory, 2005). Throughout the years, the War Party has been claiming that the War on Terrorism has successfully minimized the number of terrorist attacks throughout the globe however, all other data seem to oppose this claim (Gregory, 2005). Other groups supporting the war on terror were also firm in their support for the war, even when Rumsfelds leaked report indicated the limitations of the US in fighting the war on terror. Rumsfelds report indicated that the US is putting relatively little effort into a long-range plan, but we are putting a great deal of effort into trying to drive away terrorists. The cost-benefit ratio is against us Our cost is billions against the terrorists costs of millions (Gregory, 2005). Analysts pounced on the implications of this leaked report and they effectively pointed out that the war on terror could only be a failur e because even with the necessary precautions taken against the war on terror, these terrorist attacks cannot really be stopped altogether. These analysts also point out that only by evaluating the US and westerly policies in the Middle East which triggered violence, could any progress in the fight against terrorism be gained (Gregory, 2005). Critics of the war on terror also condemned Bushs policy of preeminent disclose or strike first before anyone strikes us. This attitude has been criticized for giving rise to policies which have been wholly ineffectual. Behind the hype, theres a long list of failures to tackle key issues, and not much prospect of improvement (Plesch, 2002). For one, the political sympathies of Saudi Arabia expressed that it did not support the war on terror. Some Saudi citizens are real members of the Al-Qaeda group or are supporting their efforts financially and yet Bush is not crisply dealing with Saudi Arabia (Plesch, 2002). US Special