Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Another extra credit option
Please take the 26-question American presidential selector quiz at the link below.www.selectsmart.com/president/2008.html Then, post your top three candidates who are still viable (not the ideal *1). Finally, provide your opinion about these results. Do they surprise you, or not? Did you learn anything? If so, what, specifically?
You may post this or email to me, as one has already....
You may post this or email to me, as one has already....
Blog Archive
About Me
13 comments:
Views On U.S. Interrogation Tactics
Pg. 142
A wide gulf exists between Americans’ and Europeans’ on how the U.S. treats terrorism suspects. The U.S., U.K., Germany, Poland, and India were all ask three questions. The first question being “is it your impression that the U.S. government is currently allowing interrogators to use torture to get information from suspected terrorists?” The U.S. had forty-seven percent say yes they are. The U.K. had sixty-two percent say yes they did. Next Germany had seventy-six percent say yes. Poland had forty nine percent say yes, last India had thirty-three percent say yes. Germany is the highest that got the impression that the U.S. government is allowing interrogators to use torture when trying to get information. The next question asked was “is it your impression that the U.S. government is making every effort to make sure that interrogators never use torture?” Forty-five percent of people surveyed in the U.S. said yes, twenty-seven percent of people in the U.K. said yes, fourteen percent of people surveyed in Germany said yes, twenty-four percent of people in Poland said yes, and twenty-three percent of people surveyed in India said yes. The next question asked was “is it your impression that current U.S. policies for detaining people it has captured and is holding in Guantanamo Bay are or are no legal, according to international treaties on the treatment of detainees. Fifty-two percent of people surveyed in the U.S., twenty-two percent of people surveyed in the U.K., eight percent of people surveyed in Germany, eighteen percent of people surveyed in Poland, and twenty-eight percent of people surveyed in India said that the U.S.’s policies for detaining people it has captured and held or are holding in Guantanamo Bay are legal. Thirty-eight percent of people surveyed in the U.S., sixty-five percent of people surveyed in the U.K., eighty-five percent of people surveyed in Germany, fifty percent of people surveyed in Poland, and thirty-four percent of people surveyed in India said that the U.S.’s policies for detaining people it has captured and held or are holding in Guantanamo Bay are not legal. The source for these surveys is “American and International Opinion on the Rights of Terrorism Suspects, International Questionnaire.” These surveys were done in June of 2006. I believe that Germany feels the strongest about all these issues or that Germany just doesn’t like the U.S. I believe that the U.S. government is currently allowing interrogators to use torture to get information from suspected terrorists. I say this because I think that the interrogators would do almost everything to information from the terrorist suspects. I think that they would want to be known and help prevent terrorism. I believe that the U.S. government isn’t making every effort to make sure that interrogators never use torture. I believe this because I believe that the U.S. government would do anything for information on the terrorists that were involved in 9/11 and any future terrorism acts. Last, I believe that the current U.S. policies for detaining people they have captured and holding then at Guantanamo Bay id legal as long as they are not using torture.
Lovely Jackson
Blog 7
Cubas Future
The Cuban economy is in need of economic freedom. Cuba experienced economic growth during the second half of the 1990s until 2001. Cuba made most of their money from exporting sugar and nickel until the price on the world market dropped for these items. According to a report prepared by the “Cuba Transition Project” in June 2003 indicates the following:” Living conditions in Cuba have deteriorated, as evinced by an acute housing shortage estimated at 1.66 million dwellings; At least 13% of the population is clinically undernourished, as the state food rationing system now provides for only a week to 10 days of basic alimentary needs; Unemployment reached 12%, based on official data, and as many as 30% of workers are displaced or underemployed” Cuba's once-ambitious foreign policy has been scaled back and redirected as a result of economic adversity after the demolishing of the Soviet bloc. Without its primary trading partner Cuba was relatively remote in the 1990s. Cuba has developed a growing relationship with the People's Republic of China and retains varying diplomatic ties with the European Union. In all, Cuba continues to have formal relations with 160 nations. Cuba provides medical workers to Venezuela and several other countries. The United States put a trade embargo on Cuba and I think this has greatly affected them. According to Lissa Weinmann “Beyond the blood ties, there is a more subtle and significant architecture that supports the status quo. It's a taxpayer-funded "embargo industry" that employs hundreds, if not thousands, whose livelihoods depend on Cuba remaining, well — Cuba. It began during the Reagan years with appropriations for Radio and TV Marti that today top $500 million to beam U.S. propaganda into Cuba. In the case of TV Marti, even $225 million can't buy Cuban viewers since the Cuban government jams the signal. But a half a billion bucks do buy jobs, contracts and political loyalties.
Journal 7
Global Issues pp 432
Consumers Say They Will Support Fair Trade
Americans say that they would pay more for cloths and other products if they knew they weren’t made in sweatshops. Experiments were conducted by the University of Michigan sociologists and Harvard to research if people would pay more for products that were made in “fair labor conditions”. Harvard political economist Michael J. Hiscox became an enthusiast for fair trade labeling because he thinks it might be able to achieve what the World Trade Organization has not. People have lobbied to get these standards into international trade agreements, but developing countries have issues with it because they fear that they would lose their cheap labor advantage in their exported goods. Sports balls are the only manufactured item that has been certified by TransFair USA. TransFair is the lead fair trade labeling organization in the U.S. Cotton goods in Britain are the newest addition to fair trade labeling. In my own opinion, when people take surveys they put down things that they would like to do, but if push came to shove, the higher prices for fair labor labeled products would pose an issue. People already complain about the high prices that they face in the market place. If people could keep it a secret, they would probably tell others that they pay more for products because they don’t want to buy products from sweatshops, but in the store by the cheaper product that came from a sweat shop.It sounds nice to want to help people get out of unfair labor situations, but in reality the average American cannot afford raised prices in the economy.
Rickey Clay
POL200
(pg. 189)
Women Wanted 189
Believe or not, but the education in Third World countries in suspected of having a gender bias; opposed to females. Some believe that a well-educated female could become, for lack of a better word, a powerful tool for a country’s infrastructure and progression movement--especially a Third World country. Statistically better educated women become less vulnerable to contracting STDS (specifically HIV/AIDS) which is a growing issue in many of these countries. “The impacts of education on development…are stronger when girls are educated,” states the Commissioner of Africa. In modern development, the female presence is being focused even on a wider spectrum and generally directed towards the betterment of a country’s progressive movement(s).
It frustrates me to see that there is still a gender bias in many countries which perhaps to aim lowering the importance economically (or even socially) of the female presence. Reading about how China handled pregnancy to enforce the ratio of male babies to female babies to benefit the number of males in the country was enough to raise my red flag, hopefully this education issue being further investigated and reported by the likes of people like Margery Kabuya will have the same effect.
pg. 43
Will Anti-Americanism wane after President Bush leaves office?
This article was written in the form of debate between Dr. Farish A. Noor, the professor of history for The Centre for Modern Oriental Studies in Berlin and Manjeet Kripalani an Edward R. Murrow Press Fellow, Council on Foreign Relations; India Bureau Chief.
Dr. Noor argues that, despite America’s history of liberating floundering governments, especially in Asia, America is seen as the enemy of Islam. President Bush’s “cavalier” attitude toward the concerns of Muslims and the war on terror has created a controversy, but the anti-Americanism that has developed in his wake should dissipate with time.
Mr. Kripalani counters this argument by confirming that the negative feelings of international and domestic citizens toward America have been damaging and may take years to wane. Instead of defending the position, Kripalani states that in a new world order, an image that is less than palatable is of no consequence. “America is still a powerful country.” It is his belief that the nations that take issue with the actions of America will eventually see the bigger picture and embrace America for its economic, technological, and political influences regardless of how they feel about America as a country.
I believe that the anti-Americanism that has been widely seen will wane following Bush’s exit, but I also believe that these feelings will not be completely eliminated. Regardless of the passage of time it may take to change the feelings of those who are displaying acts of anti-Americanism, this administration is going to do everything in its power to raise the statistical facts in its favor. I found it interesting that Mr. Kripalani mentioned the New World Order concept and how America will be seen during this period of reorganization. It may be true that these negative feelings toward America may dissipate with time, but what if it doesn’t and we (Americans) become more of a target?
Should women serve in Combat? Page 313
For women serving in the U.S. military units, there are three choices. The first is to maintain current U.S. policy, with women serving in most military positions, but barred from being in the most perilous ground forces. The second is to eliminate all barriers to women in the military by opening all positions to them. The third is to remove women from all military jobs that might take them near the front lines. As for the first choice, I believe this choice to be the best. The reason I say this is because most women are not built for combat like men are. Even though women do struggle for equal rights, it is import to remember that women are not like men and do require more needs and other things as well were as a man does not. For example, when a woman gets her monthly cycle and she is in combat in the infantry line there is no time for her to run to the bathroom every couple of hours and lay down because she is too fatigued and\or cramping too much to do anything. For jobs like that you are on your feet and moving around for the majority of the day, so a women in this situation could not be able to take care of herself as she would need to .
For the second choice, for the reasons that I stated for the first choice I would not like to decide the policy this way. I do see the point that women should get the chance to do whatever they wish to do and it may not be all that difficult for them to keep up with themselves but it still it is something that can interfere with her daily job. Therefore, that is why I think it should stay the way it is now.
As far as choice three, I do not like this one because even though women should not be out in the infantry or combat areas does not mean that they should be banned from all the rest of the jobs. The book gives a reason because she may have children at home and has an increasing chance to die while in a place like Iraq. The way I see it is that the men that are over there also have children and families back home as well, so on that aspect it is the same as far as all of the male soldiers that have died and have families and children. Also I do not think the policy should take away a woman’s choice to serve her country or not. I think if she wants to serve her country then she should be able to because there are many jobs that women are qualified for and can and are important to the military. This is why I believe that the first choice for the policy is the best choice. Women still get to choose to be in the military but they are able to use their intelligence and bring what they have to offer to serve their country if they choose to.
Does the world community have a “responsibility to protect?”
Pg. 93
IS the role of the community to protect the people? What happens when that responsibility shifts to the international community? By community it is meant the states and internationally it is meant everywhere else. We take on more responsibility that we can handle, we are the U.S. for years have given others are time and money for wars that we had and have no business being in, and given aid to those in need. But do we need to do this or are we trying to act like a “big brother” to all these others? Why, have we done this? We can barely take care of our own; we have children starving, homeless on the streets, and people killing one another. We can barley control our own nation and the people within it so WHY are we so busy helping other people. We need to set better barrier and limits to our own nation until we can get ourselves on the right track then possibly we could help others.
Susan Jones
Blog 6
Majors Shut Out
Government- owned or controlled petroleum companies today control a majority of the world’s hydrocarbon reserves and production. In 2005, the oil companies have taken over seventy-seven percent of the world’s 1.1 trillion barrels of the oil reserves. Major oil firms now only control about ten percent of a global petroleum reserves. During the 1970’s through the 1980’s, the Western oil companies were invited to explore the fields of Alaska, North Sea and the Gulf of Mexico. The key future resources are in Russia and Central Asia is government- controlled. China’s strategy is a major source of concern. China and now India are making efforts in Africa to lock up oil supplies. International oil companies are facing higher taxes or demands which will surrender parts of their stakes in projects. Russia and nations in South America and West Africa that once relied on Western oil companies are now “increasingly calling the shots” said The Wall Street Journal.
I think that the government controlling the oil and gas are hurting the other countries. For example: Shell had to give up controlling interest in the Sakhalin- two pipeline production to Russia’s natural gas monopoly. And with this, Russia wants to know and determine where the gas goes…
Pg. 314-315
Fighting Afghanistan’s Narco Trade
Taliban uses drug profits to finance insurgency
When the Taliban ruled Afghanistan, they used a simple tactic to eradicate the country’s opium poppy crop; they told the villagers “don’t grow poppy cause if we sit it, we will hang you.” Not surprisingly, between 1999 to 2001, the amount of land dedicated to growing poppies decreased. By 2005, poppy crop reached record levels and by 2007 should hit a record high for the third year in a row. The Taliban insurgents are no longer opposed to poppy production mainly because they profit about a third of the money’s to buy recruits, weapons, and bombs. Afghanistan today is now producing more than ninety percent of the world’s opium, which is turned into heroin. Thirty six percent of the country’s gross domestic product last year came from the $2.8 billion in illicit revenue- which goes into the pockets of warlords, traffickers and some governmental officials. The poppy crop has become the primary source of income for millions of rural Afghans. In Taliban controlled areas, poppy farmers and drug traffickers pay a “tax” to insurgents for protection. The smugglers who sneak the drugs out of Afghanistan return with weapons and bombs for the Taliban. Until recently, the U.S. military in Afghanistan refused to get involved in poppy eradication but, the U.S. military now provides logistical support for drug eradication but still do not carry out operations. The NATO’s role is “to establish security throughout the country… not to dilute its focus in eradication and interdiction missions.” What’s the solution? Some believe that if the western governments were to buy the entire poppy crop, it would then employ Afghan farmers while keeping the drugs off the world market. An international security and development policy group called The Senlis Council, advocates legalizing the poppy crop and using it to produce medicines like morphine. According to a U.N. report, it will take 20 years to clean up the drug trade in Afghanistan.
Drugs are such a big part of our society today, whether it be legal or illegal drugs. Many people are dependent on them, but not always for medical reasons. I don’t believe any drug should be legalized unless it has a usefulness in the medical field. Sure everyone says that marijuana is a plant and it’s all natural and it doesn’t hurt anyone, but the fact is that I can hurt people. It can hurt yourself the people you love and innocent people if you are driving while high. I learned from experience that I cannot drive while high because I have almost crashed twice. I’ve learned my lesson and I changed my ways, especially now that I am a mother. I don’t want my daughter to get up in a bad crowd, like her father did, and waste part of her life. I’m trying to keep her as far from all of that as possible. I know she will want to experiment and that is fine I just don’t want it to take control of her life. Life is short and we need to make the best out of it but I don’t think being so messed up to where you can’t remember it is the way to go.
Alicia Evans
Journal 6
Is a total ban on nuclear weapons possible today? Pg 65
Yes: Kennette Benedict- The chances of a total ban on nuclear weapons are certainly better than zero. Eliminating nuclear weapons is still like eliminating the institution of slavery to some people. Some look to Bush to lead a reverse reliance on nuclear weapons as a step towards preventing further proliferation. While they didn’t talk of prohibition, they did call for a world free of nuclear weapons. The height of the Cold War the combined number of nuclear weapons held by America and the Soviet Union totaled over 60,000, now down to 27,000 almost half the original number. The first Bush, H.W. Bush, made a start on America’s nuclear weapons possession after the fall of the Berlin Wall. The Russians can’t afford to maintain as much as they had before. Most understand the danger to their own security of the spread of nuclear weapons and the only way for us to protect ourselves is for nobody to have them. The IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) has shown that it can handle the job. We would also have to deal with the conundrum of enriched uranium being available for nuclear weapons, but there are ways to reduce access to these things. There would have to be security measures but isn’t that for what the United Nations was created?
Support a Global Bill of Rights?
p 486-487
While America has been pushing the idea of a Universal Declaration of Human Rights since 1948 on countries that is culturally different from America; however, many Americans believe that their rights has been routinely trampled on by America. The question "Does America have the right to protect the rights of citizens in other countries when the U.S. Government violates its own Constitution on a regular basis. The following overview reveals just how two-faced the American Government really is.
Articles 1 and 4 states "Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of person" "Everyone is equal before the law and entitled to equal protection of the law." Yet, according to a certain elected government official "The disabled has no rights to live much less deserve equal protection under the law."
Article 3 states "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment." Yet, police brutality continues right here in America, often in front of cameras, and is just as often dismissed by the government due to cover-ups.
Article 12 states "Everyone has the right to own property alone. No one shall be deprived of his property." Yet, the government often takes the land away from their people by citing "eminent domain" just so they can make room for another Wal-Mart.
Article 14 states "Everyone has the right to freedomn of opinion." The kind of responses that I receive from this controversial blog indicates to me whether or not this right implies to all Americans or just a selected few.
Article 20 states "Everyone has the right to work, to choose their work, to reasonable work conditions, and to protection against unemployment." Yet, the government believes that ehe disabled should stick to menial jobs, such as cleaning toilets, because they believe that "The disabled don't have the mentality to do anything else."
Article 21 states "Everyone has the right to equal pay for equal work." Yet, there is a law that dates back to 1938 that gives employers right to pay the disabled worker below minimum wage despite sharing the same responsbilities as their "able bodied" co-workers.
Article 23 states "Everyone has the right to an adequate stardard of living." Yet, many Americans that live in the Central Appalachia has to go without many of these "necessities" due to both the lack of money and concern from the government.
Article 25 states "Everyone has the right to education. It shall be compulsory and free." Yet, the government often view learning disabled students "As a waste of time and money" despite any talent that student might have.
It appears to me before America goes on a crusade to ensure basic human rights in other countries, America needs to ensure that the rights of every American can be met first.
Does China threatens U. S. energy supplies?
Global Issues, Pg. 394
Many authors talk about the rising power of China and the Chinese threat. One area where conflict has frequently been predicted is in China's pursuit of energy security. This topic explores China's energy situation, options available to meet rising demand, environmental impact of these options, and possible ways to mitigate these effects. The idea then determines to what extent China will be unable to meet its needs from domestic sources and have to look overseas. Then, a review of China's most likely overseas suppliers will explain where China's actions could be threatening to U.S. interests, and where fears are overblown. The areas where concern is most warranted is in China's increasing dependence on imports for its oil needs, and its continued reliance on coal usage. The desire to ensure secure oil supplies has led China to deal with Iran and Iraq, despite U.S. desires to isolate these nations. China is also increasing its influence throughout the Middle East, Central Asia, South America, and retains claims in the South China Sea. While actions in these regions are not necessarily threatening, U.S. policy can play a role in keeping it that way.
I believe China has separated its views from many of the global powerhouses by bargaining with other nations that the U. S., France, and Great Britain wishes not to have a business relationship with. For example, China has invested future plans with countries such as Venezuela, Iraq and Iran. Even though the United States and others is fighting a war in hopes of protecting their national interests, the war in Iraq has been an enormous setback costing billions upon billions of dollars the five years its been going on. With the U. S. overly concerned with this historic event, China has decided to continue to make educated decisions in preserving its future. Indeed, China does pose a threat to the United States of America.
New Threats
Truman Petway
Pages 64-67
Our nuclear related developments seriously threaten the fragile stability of two of the world’s most volatile regions. On October 9, 2006 North Korea ad mister the first underground nuclear test this has produced an immense impact on the peace and stability in the Korean peninsula and in north Asia. While this is happing the growing likelihood that Shiite Iran will became nuclear power this has become a matter of grave concern to Sunni powers such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt, to say nothing to Israel. The Jewish is Iran’s number one target, which Iran’s president plans to wipe them off the map. Tehran is making a mockery of the international community’s efforts to solve the crisis surrounding Iran’s nuclear program. The president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map. in north Korea their nuclear test alters the balance of power in northeast Asia. North Korea has been cut off from most of the outside world for decade, first under Kim II-Sung, who transformed Marxist regime into a personality-cult regime, since his death in 1994 under his son .Soon after taking over Kim had signed the so-called agreed framework with the Clinton administration. I think us as the United States should go to North Korea and seize all of the nuclear weapons and material, shut down their facilities also. And if they try to ever again try to make or purchase any nuclear weapons we should take over their country. I think the only way to have maximum nuclear control is keep better tabs on the material and the weapons. That is the only way the United States is going to gain control is this nuclear war.
Post a Comment