Introduction
The main aim of this research is to find out the gendered approach that the 2003 war in Iraq by the United States and how this gendering was significant in the constitution of the United States and effects. The speeches of the then President Bush and that of Colin Powel serve to show the gendering an how significant to the United States at that time. The role of gender was very significant in the war in Iraq. In the war, there was misguided perception of the whole of Iraqi population as the main victims of Saddam Hussein’s oppressive rule. The connotation of womenandchildren is used to show that women are powerless and need to be protected. They are grouped so that they are taken to be helpless during the periods of war. During these times, they are seen to be powerless are the reason why governments should go to war. Governments should go to war in order to protect women. In Iraq, the oppression of women was taken to be a national disaster that called for war in the quest to protect the citizens. The oppression that women were going through was taken to be a problem of everyone.
This research will be guided by the following objectives:
Hypothesis
This research paper will be guided by the following hypothesis:
- The war in Iraq was as a result of justifying the need for war to tone women and children oppression
- The war in Iraq was a result of Saddam Hussein’s distorted masculinity which needed a supermasculine being to stop his oppressive acts.
- Liberal democracy is used to reward men with political power which will in the end be used to introduce rational democracy.
- The war in Iraq was for America to gain their supposedly masculine figure and state.
- Men are a sign of power, both political and military power. This is what caused war in Iraq.
Literature review
Many researchers have shown the themes of masculinity as a sign of strength for most wars that have been fought. The United States have regarded themselves as strong and been given masculine strength. This masculinity was almost lost in the period of Iraq war and during the Gulf War. There was a need to regain this status and thus they got engaged in war and regained their status. Women and children are often categorized in groups who are helpless and innocent. There has been a need to have women protection and have them secured and as protected the way men are protected. The insecurity of these women and children gave justification for engagement in war. According to Cynthia Enloe (in Anderson, 2004), the war in Iraq was as a result of the women who needed protection which led to eruption of war in the long run.
There was also another symbolic representation of gender to ignite war in Iraq. This is seen in the way the American Dream put women in highly esteemed places. According to the United States, the first Gulf War was fought in the quest to have women accustomed to the western women way of life. They were required to live in that stage and status. In this regard, oil was seen to be a necessity for mothers to be able to drive their children to leisure places and have good times with other family members. This resulted in Gulf War. It was argued that the lack of oil was an obstacle to women in their service to family members. It was a way of encouraging women to access oil. This is one way in which the Gulf Way was gendered.
Other researches show that the Gulf War was a way in which the soldiers protected their wives and mothers. This is one way in which the invasion and the war in Iraq were gendered. From this, war and gender was used to justify the need to go to war. The soldiers in battle would get comfort in their homes with their mothers and wives, they would be fed by their wives and mothers, and also they would be able to get a world which was free from fear.
There has been research on the use of women in war. It has been disapproved that Muslim women need protection from Muslim men. This is because of the involvement of Muslim women in war. They have been used by Al Qaeda in war. They are seen to be taking the role of suicide bombers during war. Initially, women were the reason for going to war.
Bibliography
Anderson, L. (2004). Shock and Awe: Interpretations of the Events of September 11. World Politics , 56, 303-325.
Anonymous. (2004). US Abuse of Iraqi Detainees at Abu Ghraib. The American Journal of International War , 98 (3), 591-596.
Arendt, H. (1970). On Violence. London and Aylesbury: Compton Publishing Co.
Beckman, K. (2002). Terrorism, Feminism, Sisters, and Twins: Building Relations in the Wake of the World Trade Center Attacks. Grey Room (7), 22-39.
Borradori, G. (2003). Philosophy in a Time of Terror: Dialogues with Jürgen Habermas and Jacques Derrida. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
Bourke, J. (1999). An Intimate History of Killing: Face to Face Killing in 20th Century Warfare. Great Britain: Basic Books.
Brown, J. M. (1999). Gandhi: A Victorian Gentleman: An essay in Imperial Encounter. Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History , 68-85.
Brown, M.-A., & Jo, R. (2002). When your body gets the blues: The clinically proven program for women who feel tired and stressed and eat too much. New York: Rodale.
Butler, J. (1999). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.
Butler, J. (2004a). Precarious Life: The Power of Mourning and Violence. New York: Verso Books.
Campbell, D. (1998). Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Fenner, L., & De Young, M. (2001). Women in Combat: Civic Duty Or Military Liability? Georgetown: Georgetown University Press.
Fredrickson, G. (2003). Racism: A short history. Princeton: Princeton Unversity Press.
Howard, E. (2010). Science vs. Religion : What Scientists Really Think: What Scientists Really Think. London: Oxford University Press.
James, H., & Brody, D. (2010). America: A Concise History. Boston: Boston: Bedford/ St. Martin’s.
Meade, T. A., & Wiesner-Hanks, M. E. (2006). A companion to gender history. London: Wiley-Blackwell.
Meade, T., & Merry, W.-H. (2006). A companion to gender history. London: Wiley-Blackwell.
Murrin, J., Johnson, P., & McPherson, J. (2008). Liberty,Equality, Power: A History of the American People, Compact. Boston: Thomson Wadsworth.
Skaine, R. (1999). Women at War: Gender Issues of Americans in Combat. Romania: McFarland.
Skaine, R. (2011). Women in Combat: A Reference Handbook. New York: ABC-CLIO.
Stewart, J. (2000). Evolution's Arrow: The Direction of Evolution and the Future of Humanity. London: Chapman Press.
Worth, R. (1999). Women in combat: the battle for equality. Romania: Enslow Publishers.
