Two wars, both alike in dignity, In fair Iraq where we lay our scene. “A War of Necessity, War of Choice” was written by Richard N. Haass from 2005 to 2008 and reviewed the Gulf War in 1991 and the Iraq War in 2003 (Council on Foreign Relations). He reviews these two wars to understand a critical pivot in American foreign policy—the decision to choose a war of choice rather than a war of Necessity. So, the natural question is, why did Haass write about this? Although some may say Haass wrote this for self-centered reasons [as he was a participant in strategies and planning of a vastly unpopular war], the seemingly evident reason is to ensure future presidents are not able to make another mistake that the Bush administration made as well …show more content…
When discussing the differences between the two wars, he lets the reader know the differences early on, which helps the reader understand precisely what the wars are and are not (Haass, 7). When Haass dissects a war of choice, he masterfully explains the headspaces that many actors were in. His explanation of the legal and international ramifications and their effects on foreign policy are also done with great skill, specifically in sections explaining how the United Nations and the United States population react and can influence wars of choice. However, Haass fails to explain how a war of choice occurs and why they are wrong. He explains that going outside of core issues can lead to corruption, not necessarily why wars of choice are …show more content…
Having an in-depth analysis of the conditions of both wars and a description of said wars preceding an actual analysis of the wars allows Haass better to facilitate a discussion on the differences between the wars. Writing them individually also allows him to address better the environment surrounding each idea. Despite this excellent framework, Haass fails to capitalize on it, often failing to go into depth about crucial aspects of his argument. He explains and elaborates on the decision-making surrounding each type of conflict but never extricates this onto the world surrounding the decision and thus fails to teach the reader about conflicts outside the Two wars primarily mentioned in the book. To correct these issues, Haass could have analyzed the two wars in a vacuum and then related individual aspects to historical or contemporary examples to better influence policy