Recent orders
The subject of gun regulation is controversial in the view ownership, use, and misuse
Name
Professor
Course
Date
Gun Control
Introduction
The subject of gun regulation is controversial in the view ownership, use, and misuse. Over eighty million people own guns in America, this represents about of all the homes in America are in possession of a gun, or some kind of firearm. The political arm of the society has tried to push for legislation related to gun control and regulation. State gun laws vary greatly from depending on many geographical and political factors, with about sixty percent of Democrats and thirty percent of Republicans swaying towards enacting of stronger gun ownership.
NRA which stands for National Rifle Association was formed in 1871, as a group to assist people improve their skills in marksmanship. The group was later so much heavily politicized in the late 1970s, with newer members of the group wanting to focus more on halting gun control legislation, instead of the original vision of enhancing recreational hunting and an association aimed at safety training.
Political Considerations in Gun Control
The contentious issue of gun control has garnered alot of political debate , that have seen, many books and articles written about the subject. The political debates about gun control are largely about public policy making. The NRA as an organisation has overly politicized the issue of gun control. The US gun control laws are among the most permissive in the western world. Most Americans are quite divided on the subject of firearms control, with some people supporting stricter firearms laws, and those who prefer for the laws to remain the same way they are. The public opinion also is divided on the contentious topic, and how to address the underlying issues on the best approach to apply in gun control policies.
The topic of gun control attracts more debates that mainly revolve on the matters of safety. Since guns are weapons that may be used for a variety of purposes, some can be the the wrong hands and may be used for unwarranted killings. There are some people who would wish to make it more difficult for people to get the kinds of guns that are manufactured the the sole purpose of killing people, and leaving those kinds of firearms that are used primarily for hunting. The Washington legislator faces alot of challenges when dealing with the matter, together with the worry of how the political opponents will scrutinize them on their opinion on the matter.
Federal Laws
Sowell, (123) argues that the Brady Law and The Assault Weapons Ban are some of the most important gun control policies by the federal government. The Brady Law was enacted in 1994; this policy required that a criminal background check was conducted on people, before they were sold a firearm. The law was named after the then press secretary to the president Ronald Reagan, Mr. James Brady. This was a precursor of the assassination attempt on the president in 1981, which was seriously injured. It focused on establishing a national criminal background check system that kept records on criminals’ and the mentally unfit, with the view of not letting them have access to guns.
Most gun control regulation policies come from several parts of the United States Federal law. The Second Amendment to the United States constitution has given rise to the debate whether the amendment only protects the militia service, or whether it protects the personal right to have ownership of firearms. Many events have occurred that have made the government to react to issues related to gun violence, such as the Tucson shooting. In the early twenty first century, the political atmosphere was much not of the notion that some significant changes will happen in the federal or state gun laws. There are many clear indications that public policy changes on gun control can be made, or can be introduced into the congress soon. The main reason cited on why people need to own guns id primarily for personal protection, from criminals, or from whatever sources of threat.
Literally, most debates on gun control began after the aftermath of John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, and Robert Kennedy assassinations. Individual gun rights policies were enacted by the congress known as the Gun Control Act of 1968. The second Amendment rhetoric in the 1970s escalated as an argument against stronger firearms laws. The gun rights granted by the second amendment read as “ A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear firearms, shall not be infringed
However, many political viewpoints are in the agreement that the second amendment guaranteed the right of the government to keep an armed militia to protect the country. Disagreements only come about by whether or not it provides the right of any person to own or use a gun at any place or at any time. Most debates from liberal constitutional scholars have held the view that the second amendment only protects the collective right of the states to keep armed militias. On the other hand, the conservative scholars have held the view of individual rights position that this amendment guarantees the individual’s right to own guns as private property. They support the fact that many restrictions on selling and buying guns infringe on people’s rights. Between 1968 and 1996, about twenty eight states have relaxed restrictions on concealed firearm carrying. By 2000, twenty two states have accepted concealed guns carrying anywhere, including houses of worship (Sowell, 432).
Other federal laws that have been enacted in relation to control and taxation on guns owned by individuals are: In 1943, the National Firearms Act imposed a tax on the sale of machine guns and short barrel firearms; this was as a result of massive public outrage about the gangster activities. The Federal Firearms Act enacted in 1938 required the licensing of gun dealers. In 1968, the Gun Control Act expanded licensing and record keeping, it banned felons and mentally retarded from buying guns, and banned the mail order sale of guns. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms was created in 1972 to oversee federal regulation of guns. The Firearms Owners Protection Act was enacted in 1986; that saw the relaxation of gun sale restrictions, which was influenced by the NRA during the reign of President Ronald Reagan. 1993 saw the enactment of the Brady Handgun Violence Protection Act, which required gun dealers to perform background checks on buyers, as well as creating a national database of those prohibited to own and use guns. Senator Dianne Feinstein sponsored the Violent Crime Control Act in 1994 which banned the sale of new assault weapons for the next decade, while Republican Carolyn McCarthy supported the expiry of the law in 2004. Come 2003 with the Tiahrt Amendment that protected gun dealers and manufacturers from a number of law suits. In the aftermath of the Virginia Tech University mass shooting, the National Instant Background Check System was put in place in 2007, where the congress hoped to close all the loopholes in the national database of those people prohibited owning and using guns (Sowell, 34).
The Pros and Cons of Gun Control
State licensing of gun dealers help law enforcers to al with rogue gun dealers, as it permits easier sanctioning of the dealers. It helps to deal with issues of gun trafficking, and making it more difficult for dangerous people and criminals to have easy access to guns. NRA on the other hand feels that the already existing government’s licensing programs have achieved these desires, and any additional programs will just contribute to unnecessary government bureaucracy.
Gun controls enhance record keeping and retention by dealers and law enforcement agencies, so that data on gun sales may be in gun tracing and assist in criminal investigations. Without such record, it is difficult to know which people own guns who might be criminals, and make it difficult for investigators to perform follow ups on traffickers and members of gangs who buy guns and later resale them. NRA however, is against such registration arguing that it may aid confiscation of guns, and that criminals will never have the opportunity to register their guns legally.
Control of firearms helps in keeping illegal guns away from the streets thus eliminating the excuse by some traffickers who lose their guns. NRA argues that theft victims always report their lost and stolen firearms, and therefore, control would further lead to victimizing the person. NRA insists that such controls would set an artificial time limit if the owner did not realize in time that his or her gun has been stolen or lost. Gun control laws encourage accountability of dealers through dealer inspection and security. The congress would set the specific security requirements, which would enable law enforcers to inspect the dealers’ stores, inventories, and records. Ballistic finger printing and micro stamping technology assist in crime gun identification. The requirement by dealers to test fire each weapon before selling, would improve maintaining criminal database if they submit the expelled shell casing. The unique microscopic markings on each fired bullet provide the law enforcers with the methods of investigating gun crimes and tracing criminals. Whereas NRA believes that the use of such technology would make the rice of guns to go beyond people’s budgets. NRA opposes the use of these technologies because they will require registration and bans on private sales (Sowell, 116).
In view of safety, guns should be sold with child safety locks, as well as including personalized technology on firearms so that only authorized users can operate the guns. NRA thinks that this is an intrusion, and instead supports the idea that voluntary firearms training on safety matters decreases the occurrence of accidents involving guns. Control helps in keeping guns away from the reach of children, and legislation prevents unlicensed people from selling firearms to minors. Legislation also restricts the sale and ownership of military style and semi automatic assault weapons, together with guns and weapons with large capacity magazines. NRA on the other hand believes that such a control would infringe on the right of self defence of an individual, and they are of the opinion that no evidence exists to support the fact that banning assault weapons would reduce crime. Legislation protects employers at the workplace who opt to ban guns at the company’s premises; this would also discourage students carrying guns to schools and colleges. Federal gun controls allow municipalities to pass their own local gun law, which ensures public safety at the local level. NRA has the feeling that such many local controls would violent the tenets of the Second Amendment, and that varying laws from city to city would introduce confusion, and inconvenience citizens who want to travel from state to state, as well as forcing them to memorize each city’s local gun laws.
One segment of the legislation will guarantee individuals to own guns, while another amendment will make it difficult to own guns, making a segment of the people that their constitutional rights are being infringed upon. Guns are used to commit most violent crimes, so restricting ownership tends to reduce the occurrence of such crimes. Though, criminals will still access guns one way or another, thus restriction will leave the law abiding citizens vulnerable too criminals. Ironically, the regions with more relaxed firearms control laws tend to be quite safer than those places with stricter restrictions (Pierce, 155).
Special Groups and control
Women Against Gun Control (WAGC) is a coalition of women founded in 1994; it seeks to encourage other women to exercise their gun rights by arming themselves against potential threats such as rape. A large proportion of the group’s mission was to inculcate in the minds of Americans that not all women share the same sentiments that fewer guns will lead to lesser crimes. Their aim was to discourage American women from believing in the opinions of Hillary Clinton and Diane Feinstein, who the group claimed wanted the American people to believe all women, supports gun control. WAGC is very active politically both at the state and national levels, they conduct alot of research on laws they think is harmful to women’s capabilities to protect themselves against attacks by owning a gun. They have a large presence in the media promoting gun rights and circulating pro gun advocacy materials. They encourage women to train on how to use guns, with several of the WAGC members being the firearms instructors (Wilcox, &, Bruce, pp 1-4)
The belief that guns give women a fighting chance is fundamental to their approach to gun control. The group filed a court briefing before the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2003. Their argument was that any law that “impairs access to firearms for self defence will have a disparate impact on women”. WAGC continued to argue that women possess special interests in owning firearms for self defence since they are the weaker sex who must be afforded protection from men. They also called on women not to buy national brands such as AT&T, Levi-Strauss, Sara Lee, and Starbucks because of their stance on gun control issues.
National Rifle Association (NRA)
Daynes, &, Tatalovich, (155) argues that the NRA was granted a charter in 1871 by the state of New York, and Civil War General Ambrose Burnside became the first president. The primary goal of the association was to promote and encourage rifle shooting on a scientific basis. They developed a training ground on Long Island named the Creed Farm; build a rifle range. Political opposition to encouraging marksmanship in New York force d the NRA to move to New Jersey. In 1903, their interest started growing in promoting the shooting sports within the ranks of American youth, including establishing rifle clubs in schools and colleges. Today Camp Perry in Ohio has become the home of national matches that have seen the excellence in marksmanship.
Over 6000 people compete every year in in pistol, small bore, and high powered events. Stimulated by the Second Amendment, they formed the legislative Affairs Division in 1934. Recognizing the need for greater political defence of the Second Amendment, The institute for Legislative Action (ILA) was formed in 1975. For financial support security, they formed the NRA Foundation to raise funds for gun safety and educational projects for the benefit of the general public. The contributions of the foundation help youths, women, hunters, competitive shooters, gun collectors, law enforcement agencies, and people with physical disabilities. NRA has become a political force to reckon with, and since its inception, it is the premier firearms educational body in the world (Singh, 389).
NRA Controversies
Most controversies of the NRA stem from the Second Amendment and the issues of gun control. There are even controversies that stem out of the NRA itself. Between 1998 and 2003, Charlton Heston who was the president of NRA, had earlier been a supporter of civil rights movement and a revered actor, who was subject to controversial issues regarding his remarks and speeches. He made various political, and he has been criticized by many groups that he had offended, by some thinking that he was addressing how political correctness is a concept that limits free speech and thought. On the other hand his statement could be viewed as prejudiced outcry against minority groups.
Heston was criticized by Moore in response to Columbine High School tragedy for his support for the unrestricted ownership of firearms. Ted Nugent’s Kamp for kids, is concerned with teaching children nature preservation and archery. His speeches have been met with many controversies regarding sex, race, which have put him in conflicts with activist groups. His statement on South African people was deep rooted in prejudice when he talked about apartheid not being cut and dry, that all men were not created equal. NRA has so many celebrities and famous public figures are involved with NRA which has type caste it as conservative, prejudiced, gun long group of people who are out to continue propagating their philosophies. NRA is essentially a civil rights group, aimed at protecting a specific civil right in the Second Amendment (Spitzer, 14).
Conclusion
Gun control laws are not easy to pass in the congress since gun rights groups and other lobbyists wield enough impact on Capitol Hill through contributing to campaigns. These groups such as the NRA have much success in pulling down pro gun control candidates. Gun control advocates contribute less as compared to their rivals. Even the current president Barrack Obama believes in an individual’s right to own arms, conversely, he is also of the opinion that the country must do whatever it takes to eradicate gun violence. Gun control is a controversial issue, with a section of the society needing stricter control laws, while other prefers relaxation of these control legislation. The Democratic party have generally adopted the stance of stricter gun controls, with many anti gun legislations being passed under Democratic reigns or congress. NRA insists that gun rights are a natural civil liberty that must be protected ion the constitution, and would uphold a policy of no gun control.
References
Spitzer, R. The Politics of Gun Control, Chapter 1. Chatham House Publishers, (1995).
Pierce, R. (1982). “Second Amendment Survey”. Northern Kentucky Law Review Second Amendment Symposium: Rights in Conflict in the 1980’s 10 (1): 155.
Wilcox, C. &,Bruce, W. The changing politics of gun control. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 1–4. (1998). Print
Sowell T. Ever Wonder Why? And Other Controversial Essays. Hoover Institution Press. 1st Edition. (2006).Print
Singh, R. Governing America: the politics of a divided democracy. Oxford Oxford University Press. p. 368. (2003).
Daynes, B, and W. Tatalovich, Moral controversies in American politics. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe. p. 172. (2005).Print
Lessons On Ethics
Lessons on Ethics
Author
Institution
Introduction
Taking stock of every progress that is made on the way is imperative in determining whether one’s academic journey is on course. Indeed, this involves the review of the knowledge that has been gained, as well as its applicability to real life situations. This is the only way that an individual would determine the worth of the academic journey, the course units, as well as the concepts, theories and knowledge that has been learnt in such courses. This paper is, essentially, an evaluation of the ethics course undertaken, the concepts learnt and their applicability in real life.
Analytical skill building
This comes as one of the most fundamental progresses that this course has allowed. Analytical skills refer to the capacity of an individual to visualize, articulate, as well as solve uncomplicated and complex problems and concepts, thereby making sensible decisions thereof on the basis of the available facts and information. This course has given me the capacity to apply logical thinking to the gathering and analysis of information, which essentially allows me to design and test varied solutions to problems, as well as formulate plans for the same.
This is especially with regard to the analysis of papers and information. This course involved the perusal of voluminous papers and literary works. A comprehensive understanding of such information required that I ask certain questions prior to getting the information. These include determining the information needed, the time allotted to the papers, what I need to know or even what I know already. Indeed, I am no longer embarrassed of asking the seemingly simple questions even as I allow the research me to the different directions. Considering the importance of such research, I never make assumptions as to the sufficiency of the time allocated, ease of finding the information or even the availability of similar information. Considering the high possibility of occurrence of mistakes and errors, I have learnt to cross reference research and information, as well as look deeper so as to determine the intrinsic or real value of information. This also allows for determination of the authenticity of the sources of information so as to determine what authority the authors of such information have to come up with credible information. The examination of issues such as factory farming necessitates the examination of statistics especially considering its impact on the health of individuals. Such an issue would necessitate a clear line of thought especially when examining the ethical side of it. This is the case for other issues that touch on ethics including euthanasia, abortion and death penalty and issues that touch on the confidentiality of patient information. The course has given me writing skills that would allow me to make a case for any side of the argument pertaining to these issues.
This may be evidenced by the improved quality of papers that I have written in the recent times. Not only are the papers made up of quality information, but also the sources used are credible and authoritative. On the same note, the information is always presented in such a way that the reader would be flowing with the papers rather than skimping though without a logical flow. This would essentially underline why I did not go straight to tackling the sections that are outlined in the instructions but rather gave the reader a soft landing through a carefully thought-out introduction.
Knowledge acquisition
While every course allows for the acquisition of varied skills, the implicit knowledge of the concepts, theories, perspectives and ideas in the course comes as the primary goal. Indeed, any course undertaking would be deemed unsuccessful if at the end of the day the individual did not grasp the fundamental concepts, ideas, perspectives and theories that are outlined in the course. In my case, I would say that I have at least grasped the general ideas of the concepts and perspectives brought out in the course. This is especially with regard to the theories of ethical decision-making, including utilitarianism, altruism, and egoism ethical theory of decision-making. In utilitarianism, an individual would determine the how appropriate a course of action is by examining the benefits and the costs with which it comes. In this regard, the varied options or potential solutions to a problem would be examined and their potential benefits and costs evaluated (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2009). These would then be compared amongst the varied potential solutions, with the one that has the most benefits against costs for the largest number of people being taken. This is irrespective of how unethical or “morally upright” the course of action may be. In this case, the theory states that no action is intrinsically wrong or right, rather this would be determined by the consequences as this theory aims at maximizing the utility of a particular course of action for the greatest number of people (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2009).
Altruism, on the other hand, is a practice where an individual is primarily concerned about other people’s welfare. This has nothing to do with duty or moral obligation that an individual has to other people, rather it revolves around some motivation for an individual to offer that is of value to another person rather than oneself (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2009). In its pure form, altruism would revolve around making a sacrifice for another person while expecting no benefits or compensation, whether direct or indirect.
Egoism, on the other hand, would be the opposite of altruism, as the individual would determine the best course of action by determining the course of action that would bring the greatest good, benefit and pleasure to oneself alone (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2009). In this case, the individual would primarily look at his own good and welfare irrespective of how bad the course of action is to another part.
The list of theories outlined here is simply not exhaustive especially considering the multiplicity of ethical principles described including beneficence, least harm, justice and respect for autonomy among others. These would go a long way in allowing for an analysis of decisions made and the basis for their making.
Practical application
The utility of any form of knowledge revolves around its applicability in real life situations and in tackling day-to-day issues. Indeed, this is the only way that any form of knowledge would be said to be beneficial to any individual. Indeed, the concepts and perspectives that have been examined in this course would go a long way in guiding my decision-making in my daily life. It goes without saying that every day comes with its own challenges and problems with numerous decisions and choices to be made. In most cases, there are conflicting solutions to the varied moral or ethical dilemmas that I come across. It is worth noting that in most cases, the application of the theories examined in the course is not absolute. In most cases, the decisions I make are not merely synchronized to one theory, rather they involve a combination of theories.
For instance, there was this one instances when my neighbor gave me some money and asked me to buy her some lottery tickets. She insisted that I should not mix those coins with mine and I should use those coins specifically to buy her tickets. I am not an ardent buyer of lottery tickets but this time round, I chose to buy some for myself alongside some for my neighbor. When the lottery hour came, I realized that my neighbor’s tickets had won some substantial amount. Of course, my neighbor wanted to know whether her cards had won any money, in which case I had to make a decision on whether to reply in the affirmative or not.
In this scenario, I had to combine varied theories in determining the most appropriate course of action. However, I happen to particularly like the utilitarian theory of ethics as it allows for a logical pattern of decision making. First, I am under an obligation to give out the winning card as the money that had bought it belonged to the neighbor. On the other hand, I had to consider the fact that I was in a financial rut and I could, in fact, do with some extra coins. On the same note, there was no relationship between the coins that she had given me and the tickets that I bought. In this regard, I could comfortably say that I was at liberty to make any decision. Nevertheless, I chose to tell her that they got mixed up, in which case I could not know which one was hers’ or mine. In this case, I would offer to split the money, thereby settling my financial issues and assuaging my conscience with regard to denying her what may be seen as her right. This means that both of us would be happy with the decision, and since the neighbor does not know whether it is her, she is bound to be fine with it.
This is simply one of the moral dilemmas where the ethical theories learnt in the course have been applied alongside other concepts.
References
Thiroux, J. P., & Krasemann, K. W (2009). Ethics: Theory and Practice 11/e VitalSource ebook for Kaplan University (1st ed). Pearson Learning Solutions.
Lessons Learnt From The USs Current Relationship With Iraq, 2003
Lessons Learnt From The Us’s Current Relationship With Iraq, 2003
By (Author)
Name of the Class (Course)
Professor (Tutor)
Name of the School (University)
City
Date
Abstract
The relationship of the United States and Iraq offers a lesson on various diplomatic concepts and the underlying socio-economic and political ideologies. Various scholars have in the past shed light on the sociological aspects of the existing relationship after the decade long invasion and occupancy of Iraq by United States. Theoretical concepts of international relations will be explored to unveil the true picture of U.S – Iraq interaction aftermath. In the interest of researchers, academia and political science, it is imperative that this case is given critical assessment. This issue presents an avenue of intellectual discourse concerning the diverse disciplines that discuss international relations. In view of the social structure, economic policies and political strategies, this debate covers substantial research concepts that are important to ascertain validity and credibility of existing knowledge.
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
Background
The United States’ stay in Iraq has been on the global spotlight for over decade. The question many people ask is what the consequences this has on their relations. Apart from Iraq, United States interest in the Middle East has raised eyebrows leading to in-depth research on various dimensions (Lake, 2009, 19). The Geopolitics of Middle East has been a significant contributor to its overall influence in the global economy. However, its socio-economic policies and political system has been the subject of discussion. Iraq wields a lot of influence in the region, and its political ideologies were being seen as a threat by the west. It is not a matter of retelling the chronology of the U.S invasion of Iraq, but the impacts this has on the global socio-economic and political position America occupy. According to Christol (2004, 47-9), diverse acts of atrocities under the guise of setting the new global order of democracy was met with mixed reactions by Middle East nations and Iraq in particular. In this paper, it is important to note that the raging debate on the theoretical concepts surrounding diplomatic relations is the center stage for international peace agreements.
According to Tate (2010, 128-9), the traditional mentality that international relations were limited to specific disciplines is ruled out. This explains the need to break away from the confines of philosophy, sociology and economics as the only relevant disciplines exploring diplomatic ties. International relations theories should equally not be misconstrued as solely for academia. This means it should be given much attention as it plays a critical role in mutual understandings in cross boundary relationships especially in this wake of open economies. The current relationship between United States and Iraq offers a lot of lessons on feasibility of tested theories concerning international relations. It reflects the complex international interactions that are characterized by divergent socio-economic and political ideologies. Kenneth N. Waltz is one of the scholars who assert the fact that diplomatic history has been marred with elitist decision making.
Statement of the Problem
According Waltz, the consideration is on individual state, and to ideological, moral and economic issues, both traditional liberals and classical realists make the same mistake. They fail to develop a serious account of the international system—one that can be abstracted from the wider socio-political domain. Waltz acknowledges that such an abstraction distorts reality and omits many of the factors that were important for classical realism. It does not allow for the analysis of the development of specific foreign policies. However, it also has utility. Notably, it assists in understanding the primary determinants of international politics. He reformulated realism in international relations in a new and distinctive way. In his book Theory of International Politics, first published in 1979, he responded to the liberal challenge and attempted to cure the defects of the classical realism of Hans Morgenthau with his more scientific approach, which became known as structural realism or neorealism. Waltz insists on empirical testability of knowledge and on falsifications as a methodological ideal, which, as he admits, can have only a limited application in international relations. The case of US attack on Saddam Hussein and subsequent changes in approaches of managing Iraq indicates two sides of international relations theories. These include realism and idealism key in defining the relations among states and U.S – Iraq in particular. A realist theory can be seen as a tradition of speculation about the society or states. However, in international relations the realist theory is based on emphasizing the constraints imposed on politics by the nature of human beings (Ikenberry, et al. 2009, 93). The realist school belief that national self- interest mandate nations to constantly acquire power for the purpose of security and existence. It is usually contrasted with idealism or liberalism, which tends to emphasize cooperation. The negative side of the realists’ emphasis on power and self-interest is often their skepticism regarding the relevance of ethical norms to relations among states.
Hans Morgenthau is of the opinion that power is the undisputable feature which determines states policy on both foreign and domestic policies. The realist theory is also known as the power or traditional theory which is centered on power politics. It is concerned with an explanation of what happened, how it happened which is used to predict the trend of what to happen in the future. The lessons observable from the case of the U.S – Iraq relationship triggers further research into the theories that must be discussed to boost the increasing need for International Corporation.
According to Brennan (2013, 139-40), United States wield political and economic power and therefore play a central role in making decisions on global issues. The capitalism ideology has seen the America make several attempts to sink the communism, and this was the disguised intention of America. Military intervention by the U.S in most of its operation in the Middle East has significantly tainted its image in the international platform. Fingers point at neoconservatives who were well connected as the key architects behind the Iraq war. In regard to Guney (2007, 64), there was a political motive behind the lobbying with economic strategies. It is worth to note the involvement of several U.S presidents during their long stay of U.S military operatives in Iraq. The intertwining realism versus idealism approach dictates the perception of various people towards the U.S on how they handled Iraq.