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
39 comments:
Here goes
I don't like this...LoL
This is weird
yay!!!!!
Testing, 1,2,3...lol just kidding. I agree with TRINI; Here goes... :)
Does anyone really understand?????
I understand Jill...LoL
This is not myspace! Amanda, Autumn!
I'll help u Jill...LoL!! I helped w/ Stats...I'll help w/ this...LoL
I GET IT! as weird as it is, i get it. Unfortunately...
So Maurice!!! Hey Maurice!!! How r u??
I got it but I don't like it!!!!!
Haha!!
Does anyone know that trader, Chelle?
Whatzzzz Uppppp!!!!
Should Congress try to Block Pres. Bush's ability to send additional troops to Iraq? P. 17, Global Issues.
Two different views one from Sen. Edward Kennedy and Sen. Johnny Isakson. Kennedy views that Bush has no right to continue sending troops, and he should not be allowed to send more troops to die.He believes Bush has over stepped all boundaries of personal privacy and many other matters. Now Sen. Isakson believes the president has laid out a clear plan that requires more support in Iraq. He believes that Iraqs government needs to live up th their responsiblity. He believes that if we were to pull out the it would be dire to our nation.
Personally I teeter the line between both and have many reservations about sending more troops but then again realize that more troops maybe nessisary to protect our own land.
Torture Debate p. 139
Waterboarding is a form of torture that is used to get information from prisoners. The prisoner’s feet are strapped to a board hanging upside down with his mouth and nose covered. Then water is poured over their face, causing a sense of drowning. The U.S government denies using any such methods on its prisoners. According to human rights groups and the U.S. state department, there are about 160 countries that use torture methods. Many countries now use the U.S. as an explanation as to why they practice torturing, because of the methods that the U.S. used post 9/11. The U.S. has opened itself to possible charges of being a hypocrite by losing its position as the leader in the fight against human rights abuses. Many believe that aggressive interrogation methods are needed to protect against future terrorist attacks. I’m not sure if all torture methods are going to be effective because most will say what is wanted out of them in order to end their suffering. On the other hand it can be used as a deterrence tool; to send a signal to anyone who is an opponent that there will be very bad repercussions.
Alicia E
POL200
March 18, 2008
Journal 1
I read the article about torture in Iraq escalating. The article was on page 144-145 in the shaded box. The article was about Saddam’s brutal legacy and torture in Iraq on the Iraqi citizens. Since the United States have occupied Iraq four years ago, the outcome has not changed. Baghdad morgues have received the bodies of these victims of such torture. These bodies have reportedly had injuries suggesting acid being thrown on them, as well as broken limbs, nails driven into their bodies, and wounds that show power drills being used as torture devices. This torture is usually inflicted by the Shiite ministries, either of the Interior of Defense as well as private militias. In 2006, U.S. and Iraqi troops found an underground prison run by the Interior Defense called Site 4, which was involved in these torture practices. They found that more than 1,400 prisoners were subjected to such abuse, whereas the victims of the Sunni are usually just executed by beheading. The Human Rights Watch report in January of 2005 did a report stating that jailers, police, and intelligence agents were the same as when Saddam was in power. These people were “committing systematic torture and ither abuses.” This article goes on to state that no government can allow this abuse for the sake of security. The Prime Minister of Iraq, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki has been “slow to respond to reports of torture by governmental personnel.”
These problems in Iraq were the reason why U.S. troops are stationed in Iraq not only to show Iraqi officials to handle these things, but also to keep these problems to a minimum. This kind of problem is heinous and atrotious that any human would be torured and treated that badly no matter what that country is going through. Hopefully, our troops will figure out ways to stop this from happening, seeing as how the U.S. seems to be one of the most civilized countries in the world, along with the European cultures. Looking at things like this makes me wonder how our country can be so much more civilized than some of these Middle Eastern countries.
Spanish Blame Bombing on War in Iraq
Pgs 30-31, Grey box
Global Issues
This section was about how the Spaniards blame the United States for the March 11th, 2004 bombing of four rush hour trains in Madrid. This bombing resulted in the deaths of 191 people and injured more than 1700. The US was blamed by the Spaniards because after the 9/11 attacks, Spain’s government, in order to stay in the good graces of the US government, Spain went against the wishes of its own people and sent troops to Iraq. After the 2004 train bombings, that particular government was replaced by Luis Rodrigues Zapatero, who was named the new prime minister of Spain. Zapatero quickly pulled their 1300 troops out of Iraq, putting at risk Spain’s relationship with the United States, because he felt that the war was based on lies and the attack on Iraq was unjustified. He also thought assisting the US made his country a target for terrorist attacks as retaliation for helping the US. Some Spaniards believed that the Iraq war was not Spain’s business and the previous prime minister was only doing what President Busch wanted him too, others believed the war in Iraq was about oil.
I agree with the Spaniards in this particular situation, because the war in Iraq was something that President Busch wanted and he should not have mislead other countries in to believing that the war was based on more issues than it really was. In my eyes it made me feel as though President Busch had ulterior motives in engaging in the Iraq war, so I can understand the feelings that Spain had when they no longer wanted to be involved.
Torture In Different Nations
Pg. 140-141
There are a total of 160 countries that still practice torture. Some countries use it to punish or intimidate dissidents, separatists, insurgents, and religious minorities. The council of Europe accuses the CIA of using its rendition program to send kidnapped terror suspects to be interrogated in 11 cities that are in countries that still practice torture. There are some nations that condon widespread and particularly severe forms of torture. In China the prison guards are forbidden to use torture, but former inmates have reported the use of electric shock, beatings, and shackles. Some of the people that were targeted are Falun Gong spiritual movement, Tibetans, and Muslim Uighur prisoners. In Egypt, victims were kicked, burned with cigarettes, shackled, forcibly stripped, beaten with water hoses, and dragged on the floor. In Indonesia, Security officers in Aceh Province systemically torture suspected supporters of the armed Free Aceh movement using beatings, cigarette burning, and electric shock. In Iran, political prisoners are subjected to something called “white torture” which means they were held in all white cells with no windows with prison clothes and even white meals. In Morocco, terrorism suspects were subjected to torture and mistreatment including severe beatings. In Nepal, government security personnel and Maoist rebels employ torture that includes beating the soles of victim’s feet, submersion in water, and sexual humiliation. In Nigeria, suspect’s involved armed robbery and murder are subjected to beatings with batons, horsewhips, iron bars, and cables. In North Korea, captors routinely tortured and mistreated prisoners by using electric shock, prolonged periods of exposure, humiliations such as public nakedness, being hung by the wrists and forcing mothers recently repatriated from China to watch the infanticide of their newborn infants. In Russia, security forces that were so-called conducting anti-terror operations in Chechnya mutilated victims and dumped their bodies on the sides of roads. In Uganda, government security forces in unregistered detention facilities torture prisoner with caning and severe beatings and b inflicting pain to the genitals. In Uzbekistan, police, prison guards, and members of the National Security Service routinely employ suffocation, electric shock, deprivation of food and water and sexual abuse. In 2005, prison regulations permitted beatings under medical supervision. I believe that torture in any country is horrible. The things that these countries do to prisoners are horrible. Just because someone commits a crime doesn’t mean that they should be tortured. An eye for an eye leaves the world blind. Torturing a prisoner doesn’t make them not commit the crime again. It could kill the prisoner and put another person in prison. No one deserves to be tortured.
Fighting Afghanistan’s Narco Trade pps. 314-315
This article was focused on the drug profits used to help finance the insurgency occurring in Afghanistan. According to the author, the Taliban regime informed the poppy farmers to not grow poppy. They were threatened that upon the return of the Taliban, should they find any poppy grown, those caught would be hung. The amount cultivated decreased exponentially and during the ousting of the Taliban, by 2005, re-growth occurred in record levels. Taliban insurgents have rescinded their threat and currently have no problem with the production of the poppy. They stand to receive about one-third of the proceeds. This money is to be used to finance recruits, weapons, and bombs.
While producing 90% of the world’s opium, the Afghan government wishes to reduce poppy cultivation by 70% by 2011 and altogether by 2016. In order to make this a reality, they must find alternative means of making a living to the villagers and farmers that will be as profitable. Farmers currently pay a “tax” for protection. Monies are also used for hiring smugglers.
Several theories of how these monies can be better spent have surfaced. If Western governments bought the poppy crop, the farmers could then be employed, consequently taking drugs off the world market. Advocates such as the Senlis Council, would support legalizing the poppy crop to protect against drug traffickers. It has been estimated that an additional 20 years to stop the drug trade in Afghanistan, requiring a focus on taking the drug money out of the political process. This action can quite possibly stop the cause of a further depressed economic condition of a very large portion of the Afghan population.
Spanish Blame Bombing on War in Iraq P.30
Spain feels that they should not have been bombed back in 2004. They feel that they were trying to be intimidated by the Basque separatist group ETA. When the bomb hit, it killed 191 people and injured 1700 people. They talk about the 9-11 attack not being a part of the war between Islam and the West. Because the U.S. and Spain are supported either other, Spain went to war with the U.S. The citizens of Spain felt that the relationship with the U.S. is was and is more important then what the people of Spain its self want. They also feel that because they went to war with the U.S. They in turn were bombed as well. Citizens say that the only reason Bush wanted to go over to Iraq was because he wanted the oil over there. Also that they feel he doesn’t want to help the people over there at all. Citizens held rallies over there to get the word out about how they feel and that it is not right for them to be involved in something that does not concern them. They did not respond to the bombing in 04 because they feel that everyone should call for peace. My opinion is that if it does not have anything at all to do with the U.S. or even Spain then we or they should not be there. I do not know that much about what is going on so I do not want to form an opinion on it because of that, but I do stand behind what I say. As long as the other countries leave us alone I believe we should leave them alone.
“Destroyer of Worlds” Pg 60
It discussed Hitler and how he wanted to make a atomic bomb. And how a Nobel Prize winner named Werner Heisenberg failed to do so. He says he miscalculated the amount of uranium therefore that caused his downfall. At the same time the United States was working on their own. They had a 4 physicist working on it. There name where Italian nuclear physicist Enrico Fermi, Danush physicist Niels Bohr and American theoretical physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer, scientific director of the project. The United States successfully tested its first atomic bomb it worked successfully. President Harry S. Truman sends out orders for a atomic bomb to be dropped on Hiroshima. That accrued on august the sixth. Which ended up killing some 140,000 people, three days later a second bomb was dropped on Nagasaki which killed 74,000? The Japanese surrendered on august the fifth teen. I think they should not even have any types of nuclear weapons. The main reason is a there are too many risk at stake. Not just if the wrong people get them but in the process of making a nuclear weapons also. I think there are too many stupid people in high places to have nuclear weapons. I mean they won’t even follow the rules for having nuclear weapons. Therefore I think nuclear weapons should be banned from everyone.
Truman Petway
Lovely Jackson; Blog 1
Cuba’s future
My journal will be on pages 279-280. Since the Cuban revolution anti-Castro Cubans have been fleeing to the United States in search of a better future. Today Fidel Castro is now 80 years old he has shed his green military fatigues for a track suit. Cuba has a population of 11.4 million people and the government has been in a communist state since 1976. In July 2006 Fidel Castro put his brother Raul in charge which was the defense minister of Cuba.
Raul Castro is currently still in charge because of Fidel Castro’s poor health. Many people fill that Cuba will not change until Fidel is dead or incapacitated but, the United States is starting to plan for the new era. According to George W. Bush, “One day, the good Lord will take Fidel Castro away”. Cuba has played a big role in the United States political culture since Fidel toppled Dictator Fulgencio Batista in 1959. Soviet nuclear missiles were discovered in Cuba in 1962, the United States and Russia almost went to war. In the late 1980 and early 1990”s more than 125,000 refugees migrated to Florida and 25,000 ended up in Guantanamo. In 1996 Cuban MiG fighters shot down 2 American airplanes, killing 4 people. The 4 people killed were anti-Castro Cuban-Americans. Because of everything going on in Cuba the American government will never forget the Cuban people or their struggles.
Pg 30-31 Global Issues Journal 1
Spanish Blame Bombing On War in Iraq
On March 11th 2004 four trains were bombed in Madrid killing 191 people and injuring more than 1,700.Spanish authorities tried 29 men for the bombing who claimed to belong to a local cell of Islamic militants aligned with Al-Qaeda. Many Spanish citizens believe that they are paying the price for the U.S. in regards to the War in Iraq.Former Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar, who formed a respectable relationship with the U.S., had gone against the will of the people to keep this relationship stable by going to war with the U.S. in Iraq.The new Prime Minister Luis Rodriguez Zapatero withdrew Spain’s 1,300 troops from Iraq within weeks after his appointment.Many Spanish citizens argue that Spain had no business being involved and that Aznar was just doing what Bush wanted him to do without considering his people.80% of the people opposed the support for the War in Iraq.Many of them feel as though Bush is at war for the wrong reason.They feel as though Bush is more concerned about oil than the people.Spain did not seek revenge for the 191 lives that the bomb took, only a call for peace.
I feel as though a governments main priority is to the people in the country and then to other alliances that they may have.What good is a government official who is more concerned about the well being and safety of another country before his own? Anzar put Spain in an irreversible situation that may only be resolved by Spain’s continue involvement with the U.S. in the War.Iraq has already formed an opinion about Spain and the issue now is trust.At this point the people of Iraq may not trust anyone, especially if you have dealings with the U.S.It’s unfortunate that they have been dragged into this situation and it should be a lesson to all those who have a vote on who will lead their country to think hard and long about the vote you cast because this person can save your country or ruin your life!!!!!
Lance
I read from 212 oil glut to 213 the end of the New Petro states. The two sections talk about the new oil countries. Unlike some of the well know oil rich counties like the Middle East and the US. I spoke of oil in the Caspian Sea, Russia, and Africa. All are hot beds for conflict to break out and civil war to tear these counties apart. Many of these counties are “one bullet regimes” and the government will change. Many of these countries were very poor and the thought of having large amounts of petroleum deposits under their country would mean a better life for all. In a few of the counties in Africa civil war has slowed the production of their petroleum output. Unfortunately greed and corruption fell into place and the people in power did not share in the wealth with the citizens. Many of these poor counties fight over the rights to drill oil. The Caspian Sea is surrounded by several different counties and all are willing to fight for the oil which is around 33 to 200 billion barrel. But even with a low estimated reserve large players are interested in the Caspian sea like Russia, China, and Iran which are just a few of the countries that surround the sea.
I did find it interesting that the world’s fuel consumption dropped between 1973 and 1983 even though there were more vehicles on the roads. But with crude oil at 10 dollars a barrel the people forgot about energy conservation and began to use vehicle with poor gas mileage and with that demand goes up and with supply line tight the supply goes down and we all pay more around the world. With the world’s oil supply being drained by billions of barrels a day I wonder how long can they last and what will happen if it dries up in the near future. I believe we need to find new sources of before the world oil dries up, but with peoples pocket and bank accounts being stuffed with oil money it will be an uphill battle.
What Makes a Person “British”? Pg 118
It all started in north London where some young professionals were engaged in a favorite national pastime, the pub quiz. It is usually a quiz on trivia or sports but this one was different it came from the test immigrants must take when applying for citizenship also known as the, “Britishness test. “This 24 question exam was introduced in 2005 after former home secretary David Blunkett. Out of a 100 volunteers not one passed. The highest score was 17, by Rohan Thanotheran, A Sri Lanka Born accountant who has lived in England since 1962. He thought that the quiz was a desperate attempt by the government to reclaim nationalism at the time. The test has been criticized for lengthening the application process and promoting a siege mentality among Britons towards foreigners. Increasingly irrelevant to people especially of age. Who grew up here and don’t think of ourselves as ethnic categories. They want to give a test to anyone who is mixed or a different nationality. My opinion is that I think it is good to have the test for immigrants. But they should not have the people taking it. I think they need to strengthen the test in math and English. So it sets a standard for the British people. They need to stop stereotyping everyone when they don’t even know the peoples history or background.
Will anti-Americanism wane after President Bush leaves office? p43
This section offers different point of views to way anti-Americanism has escalated over the past several years. Dr. Farish A. Noor believes that anti-Americanism will wane and foreign relationships will improve over time. Dr. Noor recognizes the fact that many countries used to see America as "liberator and savior" now sees America as a country that is "Gung-ho." However, Manjeet Kripalani does not believe anti-Americanism will wane with the passage of President Bush's last day as President. He believes that America has largely have been discredited since 2003 because of America starting an unpoked war with Iraq and it won't take months or even years but decades before America will ever looked upon in a favorable light by developing countries.
Considering the fact that as Americans we are our own embassadors to our own country and we can't get along with each other how can we truly ever expect anti-Amrericanism to wane. We can't. That is just common sense.
Rickey Clay
POL200
Is a total ban on nuclear weapons possible today?
This article, obviously, delved into the discussion of eliminating nuclear powers across the board. Kennette Benedic (who says yes to the issues), and Paolo Cotta-Ramusino (who explains the “nay” voice of the debate), both have intriguing details and beliefs on the issue.
Benedict explains how the possibility of eliminating nuclear weapons, even remotely so, is already heading in a positive direction. Certain treaties have already been put in place to facilitate the issue, (the Test Ban Treaty) which shows signs of understanding and acknowledging the importance of the elimination of nuclear weapons. Benedict details facts of the dropping number of nuclear weapons held by two of the most influential and powerful nations (America and the Soviet Union) since the height of the Cold War. An estimated number of 27,000 powerful weapons versus the 60,000 of previous years during the Cold War (held by these two nations) shows a progressive decline, which has to be a good sign on this side of the argument. During George H.W. Bush’s tenure, the process of dismantling such weapons has been prevalent as thousands of weapons have been eliminated.
Ramusino, on the other hand, remains aware of the benefits of nuclear prohibition, but also believes that these would not in fact be definitively preventive measures. Developing a policy that can assure the number of nuclear production reaching and remaining at “zero” would be a difficult task. Ultimately, the thought of birthing such a concept into our world is more idealistic than realistic. Ramusino explains how the nuclear state is too unstable to be able to determine where certain efforts to eliminate nuclear weapons would lead. With such differing opinions on how to handle “their” nuclear weapons across nations, accompanied by the fact that those who have and those who have not will always play a determining factor, it is hard to realistic gauge how successful such efforts could be.
I personally tend to agree with Ramusino. I hold on to many idealistic beliefs with hope; yet, not faithfully. My realist persona is too overpowering for me to believe in a total ban against nuclear weapons. This is a worldly issue. Yet, when breaking it down on a local level and considering the gun epidemic, the correlation is quite easy to discern. It’s always going to be a battle/debate between the “have’s” and the “have not’s” and skeptics against the idealists. The most disappointing issue that comes to mind, for me personally, is by actually titillating my idealism and imagining a zero-tolerance, wide (world) spread policy on nuclear production. Even if it becomes somewhat of a global law, laws are always broken, rebels are always unearthed because of those same broken laws, and defiance and an inevitability. Total elimination/ban therefore, is trapped in the confines of idealism.
Will the G-8 Summit at Gleneagles ultimately help Afric? Pg. 185.
Many supporters believe that the G-8 summit is an effective way to drive out poverty. Poverty makes the world vulnerable to the spread of disease without reard to borders. Although poverty is still a huge problem in Africa, improvements in education, community capabilities and technology are boosting the capacity of community and non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
On the other hand, Africa is very poor because it is constantly robbed of valuable resources such as gold, diamonds and copper just to name a few. With a corrupt government body, even if these resources were traded fairly through the economic system, the assets and profits made from the selling of these vital resources would not make it to help the people in need.
In order for Africa as a nation to take control of poverty, they must unite, become one voice to stand up for what they believe in and empower the African people to become educated. With education, many will gain the necessary knowledge they need to make a difference.
On the other side of the spectrum, many G-8 critics believe all the energy and resources that is spent to combat poverty in Africa is a waste of time. It has been described as "the blind leading the clueless". Civil wars continue to interrupt Africa's economic growth and development. The African people need to want to drive out poverty and change, but with corruption continually plaguing in the hierarchical positions, it makes it virtually impossible to totally drive out poverty.
Journal 1
Religious Differences (Pg. 35)
The world would be perfect if every country had a Kantian worldview. But that is farfetched from what reality is. There are many differences between all the countries in the world and the differences are not limited to the religious realm.
According to the Global Issues book one of the deepest breaks between Europe and the United States centered on the relationship between religion and government. The European views argue that religion should not play a role in political affairs. Despite of their views the vast majority of Americans continue to believe that it is very important for our elected leaders to be influenced by religious doctrine. A quote in the book says; “An American president who conducts Bible study at the White House and begins Cabinet sessions with a prayer may seem a curious anachronism to his European allies, but he is in tune with his constituents,” write Judt and French scholar Denis Lacorne. While a large majority of the Spanish population voted to legalize gay marriage some conservative American Christians do not agree to this moral issue. A great percentage of Spaniards are in favor of a radical separation between church and state; therefore most policies and traditions that combine both are a shocker to the average Spaniard. But in some countries like Indonesia, Pakistan, Lebanon and Turkey the majority of people believe that the United States is secular and ungodly.
We as a country the United States can not please every one around us. While some countries think that if we use too much religious tenets we are wrong, others believe that we are not doing enough to keep religious doctrine in place. The reason we are the world’s hegemon is because we are ourselves and we believe in the power that is vested in us daily. Although we could use more religious guidance each day; it is not right to make someone abide by doctrines that they do not believe in, just because you think that is what they suppose to do according to your religious beliefs.
Is a total ban on nuclear weapons possible today? Page 65
In this article it focused on whether or not we should have a ban on nuclear weapons as a whole. It discussed the positives and the negative aspects of having nuclear weapons in today’s society. The need to have the nuclear weapons is because we are not sure what the other countries are in possession of and just in case it is always better to have them then not to have and to need the weapons. This article argues that the best way is that the best way to protect one self is for nobody to have these types of weapons, but if another country is the enemy, then how are we to honestly know that they do not have these weapons hidden away somewhere in an arsenal. It has been proven that it could be done in a way that these weapons could be stored away and no one would know about them because that is what the United Nations is set up and designed to do.
The only thing that is preventing countries from producing weapons of mass destruction is two treaties that are in place. In 1972 they came up with a treaty for banning biological weapon and the other treaty was created in 1993 which was for chemical weapons. Therefore to have these weapons would be illegal to all countries and it would also be immoral. As long as we can maintain peace with the other countries then there shouldn’t be anything to worry about as far as the weapons are concerned. But there is always that small possibility of them still having something stashed away in some type of vault just in case another war breaks out and they need to use a weapon of mass destruction.
Susan Jones
Blog 1
Hunger in West Africa
In 2004, there was a drought in West Africa that shorted out the food supply in Africa. During this time the lifting on prices on farm products began, so the shortage triggered a surge on food prices. While the food shortage was already killing children, some of the pop stars began to hold concerts all around the globe, which would raise money and end poverty in Africa. In 2005 it was said “that more than three million people in drought-plagued Ethiopia faced hunger that year unless the country received emergency food aid,” the U.N World Food Program.
I believe that maybe this situation could have been avoided. It was said that there had been warnings of this drought for months. But no one payed attention to this crisis, so instead of acting on this months ago, the people deceided to wait until the problem had already occurred. This is when it was showing that children were already dying in Niger. When that was shown by the broadcasting corporation, it was then that the funds began to flow. If the government would have payed more attention to what was going on , then maybe the children’s lives could have been saved.
Should the United States lift restrictions on travel to Cuba?
One chapter that caught my interest was chapter 11 titled “Cuba’s Future.” From the chapter I chose to write a page about the restrictions on traveling to Cuba on page 284. The Regulations require that persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction be licensed to engage in any travel-related transactions pursuant to travel to, from, and within Cuba. In saying this statement and doing further research on traveling to Cuba and what would happen if Americans were to travel to Cuba I feel that I am in favor of these regulations. One thing that I am not in favor of would be Cuban-Americans not being able to travel back to there country to visit relatives. The law states that Cuban-Americans whom have relatives in Cuba can only visit there relatives once every three years, in my opinion I feel that this limits the relationship with relatives in which they may be very close to. After reading this section I agree with Mario Guzman, it is true that the Cubans who live in Cuba are anti-Castro but are not for removing the restrictions on traveling to and from Cuba. When and if Cuba’s government becomes a democracy and Castro is no longer the leader, I feel that these restrictions definitely should be removed. I personally wouldn’t mind and would like to travel to Cuba one day. But, with the recent restrictions and the secret police that Castro has working for Cuba to make sure Americans are not in the country; Cuba is not a safe country for Americans.
Energy Nationalism
Ch. 8 pg 197-201
On This section of the book talked about energy resources and pricing. In the Middle East oil and politics are very important. Oil prices have rose and fell due to shortages and surpluses this had been happening since 1973 since the world’s first great oil shock. Experts say that the prices may remain high due to the war in Iran and other reasons, like the boom in china. Some countries government like Nigeria and Brazil have invited foreign companies to develop oil regions while others like Kuwait want to keep them out. Some countries like Ecuador have demanded a higher share of revenue from foreign oil companies but without them they cannot expand refining facilities. Shell and BP, two major oil and gas companies are being forced by Russia to give up major positions in their oil and gas joint ventures. Experts say that if Russia and central Asian petro states remain independent, meaning if they stay out of the OPEC, consumer prices for oil could lower because of new sources of oil coming from Africa and central Asia. OPEC wants to set international oil prices. It is said that the world is consuming oil faster than it is finding new supplies. I chose this section because in my opinion the price of gas has gotten ridiculously high. Gas is so high we as American can’t afford to fill up at the pump anymore or even survive. It feels as if we are going through a depression. We as Americans are becoming poor while the government is becoming wealthy off the money that we spend on gas every day. It’s not like we can boycott gas it’s a necessity so we are stuck paying the prices at the pump.
Post a Comment