Invasion Of Iraq Essay

Introduction
This essay will highlight how the US invasion of Iraq was not morally permissible. This will be achieved by showing that the invasion was a form of preventive war, which failed to have a just cause, as there was no need for the US to act in self-defence. The working assumption throughout this essay is that when an imminent threat occurs against a state, that state is justified in responding in self-defence with a pre-emptive war. If there is no imminent threat, then entering a war is not a form of self-defence and therefore morally impermissible.
Why the US Invaded Iraq
Bush gave a speech highlighting that Iraq could attack America at any time with their weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) which were to be destroyed “as a condition for ending the Persian Gulf war” (Bush, 2005, p. 1751). As stated by Bush “The danger [to America] is already significant, and it only grows worse with time. If we know Saddam Hussein has dangerous weapons today – and we do – does it make any sense for the world to wait to confront him as he grows even stronger and develops even more dangerous weapons?” (Bush, 2005, p. 1752).
Just Cause and Imminent Threats
One of the

(McMahan, 2006, pp. 176-7). Similarly, the actions of the US question the use of force against a state that, although considered a violent state, has “committed no actual offence” (McMahan, 2006, p. 178). In the same way that the child has no intention of cheating, Iraq was not “actively posing a threat” (McMahan, 2006, p. 178). Therefore, Iraq cannot be “morally liable to military attack” (McMahan, 2006, p. 175) by the US in the form of self-defence, in the same way that the child is not “morally liable” (McMahan, 2006, p. 175) to be