Answer

IVASION OF AFGHANISTAN 2001 AND IRAQ 2003 BY THE U.S GOVERNMENT.

War has always been part of us, we are born with war running inside us and it is passed from one generation to the other and it will never stop, it will always be part of us. It is not a must that you be in a battle field for you to be part of war, only thinking about war, watching military movies of Taliban’s/ al Qaeda/ al-Shabaab and having that fantasy of war, makes you part of war already. So, both me and you are part of war that will never end. Man started from simple weapons of war and now Nations are competing between Nations everyone invading space and building up sophisticated weapons such as Nuclear bombs and Atomic bombs. We are all part of war and we are going to get most of our evidence based on Afghanistan and Iraq war discussed in details.

Iraq has always been the focus of international attention and has been prominent in the media these days, as the Islamist group, known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), has greatly improved its power supply and contributed internally near the last half of the strategy. The political turmoil and deteriorating security zone, which depicts modern-day Iraq, can be traced back to our attacks on that USA and ISIS, which have recently emerged in Iraq and Syria, during a coup d’état in the US-led occupation, and in the context of al-Qaeda in Iraq. (HeinOnline, 2005)

But why did America invade and take Iraq in the first place? So far, there may have been a divisive debate on what were the reasons for the Bush administration, with the highest rate on all the motives provided. It is also worth noting that the events leading up to the 2003 invasion exceeded only half to explain why the USA chose to launch the campaign, as well as an effort to identify the complex and multifaceted factors contributing to the Bush administration’s choice to invade Iraq, one need to step back and look before 11th September US Spread. Similarly, a close friend and community member said the reasons for effective shipping go beyond a few ways to define an attack, and one should look at illegal things and desires that reflect the same importance. (Deb, 2016)

The 9-11 attacks marked the turning point in the United States and the massive terrorist attacks carried out by a foreign terrorist organization. It also established that these organizations had the need to cause as much death and destruction as possible and now had no stumbling block that could lead to casualties or were organized to maintain the most common military policies in many state states to some extent or otherwise. Thus, it goes hand in hand with the fact that businesses including those would try to collect guns as the worst, which in foreign countries would no longer be as difficult or unthinkable as it was soon. in a bloodless war, the most efficient country had the most destructive work to do, but in the cold global war, in a democracy, small groups of people who have no knowledge of any catastrophic harm. The emphasis, therefore, is no longer on these agencies alone, but on more than their active sponsors. at the top of the list were states that had grievances with the united states, had links with terrorist organizations, were stationed in the Islamic Middle East, had WMD or power to do so, and used it abroad. the only country that was more prominent than Iraq. (Relations., 2021)

On December 16, 1998, a four-day air strike with the help of the United States began to “defeat the military and defense objectives in Iraq that contributed to Iraq’s ability to produce, save, store and supply weapons of mass destruction” (Wright and Hopper, 2005). This US campaign became known as Operation Dessert Fox and was transformed into a phasing out of Iraq’s WMD infrastructure (Wright and Hopper, 2005). Finally, on November 8, 2002, UN resolution 1441 declared Iraq guilty of violating other UN resolutions and gave Saddam another risk of retaliation (Wright and Hopper, 2005). arms inspectors re-entered the united states and, although they did not find a single WMD, the united states kept that Saddam turned around and hid them and hid the fact that there were those designed to give it to you. all the while, the United Nations is preparing for war, as it was thought, at least, the possibility that the Iraqi loaded guns were unacceptable in 9/11 internationally. (Relations., 2021)

Another concern now that the US has proven to be willing to visit the war through Afghanistan, Iraq, and various countries that were once part of the “Axis of Evil,” will generally no longer cooperate as insurance policy in the event of a USA attack (Soderblom, 2004 ). This means that the United Nations may need to strike immediately, before the opposition can find the time and opportunity to make such preparations or incentives for the production of such weapons.. (Kellner, 2007)

In 2001, the USA invaded Afghanistan in pursuit of Terrorist war and NATO guidance with more than 40 nations. For almost two decades, the US has approved its military operations such as ‘Operation Enduring Freedom’ (2001-14) and ‘Operation Freedom’s Sentinel’ from 2015 onwards. during the war effort, more than 100 people, thousands of people and more than 60,000 soldiers were killed. this document makes a special contribution to our navy intervention in Afghanistan because in 2001, it was done by us or on our behalf. Without questioning the military’s compliance with international law, it looks at its negative impacts on Afghanistan’s stability and directs interest in a new paradigm of reconstruction of the struggle.  (Deb, 2016)

The state cannot invade another country without the risk of success. war no longer yearns for justice; it should also be a possible battle. when Bush declared war on Terror, he stressed that the road to success could be long, but said that with the support of our partners, the chances of success were slim. Getting help from the UK and other Western forces accelerated the chances of working quickly. and, from a public point of view, in the early days of military intervention, our presence would be welcomed, with the hope that it would put an end to ‘religious oppression and decades of violence’. Citizens may not have been aware of how long the intervention would last, or how the state of war publishing could be perceived. Early planners predicted that the intervention would be left a few weeks ago in bad weather, almost every month in the spring. perhaps, if all the celebrities had accepted that this intervention would be closed for many years, they would not now follow the navy strategy. while aid objectives as a further reason are regarded as a matter of moral focus, under the motto ‘liberating the Oppressed’, the noble principles of assisting citizens in health and infrastructure issues do not interfere with military intervention.

As Walzer explains, it is now possible for countries not to send their teams to other provinces ‘only to save lives’. The report, which was aimed at the public eye, focused on the hope that justice on September 11 would be completed. This has been intensified by the media’s approach to gaining international attention in the sector. within the words of Captain Diggs, America’s unique military officer, ‘many have made the remaining sacrifices to protect all human beings and the freedom we love. there was no small problem in itself, yet a problem with the same purpose – freedom. This sense of belonging may have been reciprocated by the participants in Operation Enduring Freedom, but it is contrary to the realities of the world. instead of destruction, the Taliban regime spread across the country and any communication with the Terrorist struggle that success was a sham. (HeinOnline, 2005)

In general, there is no real challenge of reconstruction (jus submit bellum) in this Terror war. there is a need for a long-term approach to addressing all aspects of a fully functioning society, protection, management, economy, health care and training. In recognition of their long-term participation, to a certain extent, Western powers are responsible for Afghan jus jus bell bellum. first, because of a new review of civilian casualties, its milestones indicate that military strikes need to be initiated with greater accuracy. Simon and Stevenson suggest that the most acceptable form of natural-based murder will be that of an extended, accurate intelligence that prioritizes reducing human casualties. in addition, UNAMA says the operational process must continue to prevent personal injury. The underlying issue here is how many young people are at risk or are expected to prove themselves in an effort to reduce the risk to citizens. (Relations., 2021)

In conclusion, war will never end we will always be part of war and our leaders are our main trigger for war. Even looking back to the times of Empires, Queens and Kings they are the reason we engage in war trying to satisfy our own interests and show our superiority and power and we end up shading blood. Another major reason being religion, we fight for religion too much to a position we believe dying at war is the entry to heaven. Religion has brainwashed many. And finally, culture is another reason for war, what you believe is not what I believe and this brings about differences among different communities over the world and the end results is war. We need to advance and stop believing in war, we need to live like brothers and sisters and harmony, love and peace will run in our generations.