Iraq | Does Not Prove the Need for a Strong Military
About the Author: Michael T. Klare is an associate
professor of peace and world-security studies of
Hampshire College in Amherst, Massachusetts. He is
the author of American Arms Supermarket and
other books on U.S. military policy.
Whatever the final outcome of events in the
Persian Gulf, Operation Desert Storm has inaugurated
a new paradigm for the U.S. military.
While prior models for combat assumed that
U.S. forces would fight the Warsaw Pact in Europe
or guerrillas in Central America, this model
envisions periodic...
[The entire page is 5956 words long]
Navigate
- Introduction
-
Prelude to the Gulf War: Is Military Action Justified?
- Military Action Is Justified
- Defending America's Oil Supply Justifies Military Action
- Ending Iraqi Atrocities in Kuwait Justifies Military Action
- Destroying Iraq's Nuclear Capability Justifies Military Action
- The Failure of Economic Sanctions Justifies Military Action
- Military Action Is Moral
- Military Action Is Not Justified
- Military Action Is Immoral
- Defending America's Oil Supply Does Not Justify Military Action
- Liberating Kuwait Does Not Justify Military Action
- Destroying Iraq's Nuclear Capability Does Not Justify Military Action
- Maintaining Economic Sanctions May Prevent the Need for Military Action
- Did the Persian Gulf War Strengthen the U.S.?
-
What Are the Military Lessons of the Persian Gulf War?
- Chapter 3 Preface
- The War Proves the Need for a Strong Military
- The War Proves the Importance of International Military Cooperation
- The War Proves the Need for United Nations' Involvement in World Conflicts
- The War Proves the Need for a U.S. Military Presence in the Gulf
- Does Not Prove the Need for a Strong Military
- The War Proves the Need to Seek Political Alternatives to Military Force
- The War Proves Military Force Cannot Solve International Problems
- The War Proves the Need to End Arms Sales to the Middle East
Tell a friend about Iraq at eNotes.
