In an article entitled "Is America Training Too Many Foreign Armies?" posted at Foreign Policy, author John Norris explains why America should choose countries a little more careful before training their armies for combat.
Stated by John, " the failure of the U.S. military training to instill respect for human rights in the Malian army now accused of massacring Arabs and Turegs as it fights its way north into rebel-held territory." Therefore making Americas choice in training this army somewhat responsible for the deaths of those in their way. Thus leading to the conclusion that its not who should get American training, yet who shouldn't.
Another troubling thought stated in this article, "military and economic assistance are treated as quite different creatures. For economic assistance, the U.S. has insisted that aid recipients at least demonstrate some commitment to democracy. This is not so on the military side" So we could be training terrorist or saints. The next Bin Laden or our biggest ally. The decision on who does and who does not receive training has extremely different outcomes when talking about best and worst case scenarios.
So should America not train everyone? Norris says, "a few months spent studying tactics and logistics in Kansas or Georgia rarely seems to slow down a power-hungry colonel when he is hell bent of toppling the elected government that just threatened to cut his budget." Therefore making it an ultimate judge of character and trust on who to train and who not to train.
Like many others have, I have put my trust into someone or something and it has abused or misused it. Much like that of the case in U.S. military training being used to slay innocent people for a pointless cause. So I can relate to how those trainers feel. For it becomes harder and harder for me to trust anyone after being stabbed in the back.
In conclusion, U.S. leaders should be a little more cautious when handing out deadly tactics and strategies to the unknown. For as you can see, it doesn't always end in our favor.
Tuesday, December 3, 2013
Thursday, October 17, 2013
current connection 1.2
In a recent article, "Over scheduled Children: How Big a Problem?" written by Bruce Feiler, much is discussed as to whether children are too busy in this day and age.
An example from the article, "“As a general principle, there is a line between a highly enriched, interesting, growth-promoting childhood and an over scheduled childhood,” This makes me believe that some parents and teachers "try to hard" or push too much on young students to become better; however, this adds stress to their already busy life. Therefore not helping, but hurting their chances at success.
Another example, "The real problem, he said, lies with parents, especially highly successful ones who have a high degree of control over their own lives and who try to take similar control over their children’s lives. " Busy parents trying to give their children "something to do" really just make them have more and more on their plate. Making school work, the more important of the two, lower on the totem pole as to after school events.
Bruce states, "the basic idea is that it’s great to have a computer, it’s great to have software, but if you overload a computer with software it breaks down." Giving the basic idea that a child is fine under a normal load, yet too much will break them down. Giving children too much to do takes them from a normal life or even the homework already assigned.
Personally i do not think i was "over loaded" as a child. Yet more and more cases are upcoming of parents over bearing their children with sports, music lessons, or anything you could think of. To me this is wrong. If it is the child's idea fine, but activities should not be used as a day care.
In conclusion, parents, teachers, even coaches are over scheduling students. With practices after practice then a ton of homework to be done there is hardly time to take a breather.
An example from the article, "“As a general principle, there is a line between a highly enriched, interesting, growth-promoting childhood and an over scheduled childhood,” This makes me believe that some parents and teachers "try to hard" or push too much on young students to become better; however, this adds stress to their already busy life. Therefore not helping, but hurting their chances at success.
Another example, "The real problem, he said, lies with parents, especially highly successful ones who have a high degree of control over their own lives and who try to take similar control over their children’s lives. " Busy parents trying to give their children "something to do" really just make them have more and more on their plate. Making school work, the more important of the two, lower on the totem pole as to after school events.
Bruce states, "the basic idea is that it’s great to have a computer, it’s great to have software, but if you overload a computer with software it breaks down." Giving the basic idea that a child is fine under a normal load, yet too much will break them down. Giving children too much to do takes them from a normal life or even the homework already assigned.
Personally i do not think i was "over loaded" as a child. Yet more and more cases are upcoming of parents over bearing their children with sports, music lessons, or anything you could think of. To me this is wrong. If it is the child's idea fine, but activities should not be used as a day care.
In conclusion, parents, teachers, even coaches are over scheduling students. With practices after practice then a ton of homework to be done there is hardly time to take a breather.
Wednesday, October 16, 2013
current connection 1.1
Lauren Miller, author of "High School Homework: Are American Students Overworked?" a teen writer, talks about how high school teachers assign entirely too much homework, which benefits no one.
From Miller's article, "The average student is glued to his or her desk for almost seven hours a day. Add two to four hours of homework each night, and they are working a 45 to 55 hour week!" While Miller says students should receive no more then ten minutes of homework per grade level. This leaves students over working themselves daily in order to come close to a good grade.
Yet another statement from Miller, "Too much homework is sapping students' strength, curiosity, and most importantly, their love of learning." Teachers seem to think that assigning more homework is beneficial; however, it takes the fun out of learning. School, supposed to be a fun place of learning, has burdened students with hours of homework and made them hate school itself.
Miller states, "Teachers who assign large amounts of homework are often unable to do more than spot-check answers." Therefore the majority of hard work students put into homework are merely skimmed over, while each student spends much of their time doing it. If the teacher only plans to skim over it, what is the point in assigning it?
Personally, fifteen to forty five minutes of homework does not seem like that much. Yet when you are assigned that amount from each and every class the problem turns into a mountain of unfinished work. For example, try studying for a math test, while also typing a current connection, then completing your speech for oral communications in one night. This just seems to overload my mind.
In conclusion, teachers should not only think about the amount of homework they assign yet the total amount assigned before they ask for a four page paper.
From Miller's article, "The average student is glued to his or her desk for almost seven hours a day. Add two to four hours of homework each night, and they are working a 45 to 55 hour week!" While Miller says students should receive no more then ten minutes of homework per grade level. This leaves students over working themselves daily in order to come close to a good grade.
Yet another statement from Miller, "Too much homework is sapping students' strength, curiosity, and most importantly, their love of learning." Teachers seem to think that assigning more homework is beneficial; however, it takes the fun out of learning. School, supposed to be a fun place of learning, has burdened students with hours of homework and made them hate school itself.
Miller states, "Teachers who assign large amounts of homework are often unable to do more than spot-check answers." Therefore the majority of hard work students put into homework are merely skimmed over, while each student spends much of their time doing it. If the teacher only plans to skim over it, what is the point in assigning it?
Personally, fifteen to forty five minutes of homework does not seem like that much. Yet when you are assigned that amount from each and every class the problem turns into a mountain of unfinished work. For example, try studying for a math test, while also typing a current connection, then completing your speech for oral communications in one night. This just seems to overload my mind.
In conclusion, teachers should not only think about the amount of homework they assign yet the total amount assigned before they ask for a four page paper.
Friday, April 5, 2013
Reflection time
I am in English 11 and have been asked by Mrs. Gilmore, the number one English teacher ever to be created, to write a short story. The idea is to create your own character, scene, setting, plot, and even world if you are that creative.
To begin, the easiest and most rewarding thing accomplished so far is the creation of my character, Chief Squatsalot. It is easy to just start with a thought and bring it to paper when the only rules is the length of the story. The reward is to know that i have successfully completed the first part in writing a detailed short story. To be rewarded for an easy assignment is amazing, even from the best teacher ever.
However the character was easy, the plot is a completely different story. Before you can start writing you have to think with the end in mind. For example, you can't expect your story to just fold out without knowing what will happen in the end. Details do not just connect themselves in the line you want without planning ahead. Therefore some forethought before writing will be followed by an optimum story.
Furthermore, my character, Chief Squatsalot, is an Indian chief of tribe Lotsoftrees. He is rather tall, with a built body tone and a little bit of an overextended stomach from all the offerings of food from his loyal tribesmen. The members of the tribe jump at his word, do anything and everything needed without a murmur of dissatisfaction, and most of all stand by him in good and bad times. The one detail of the Chief is his preference of clothing. A simple triangle of leather is worn at the waist and the rest is left bare for tanning purposes.
In conclusion, with the best teacher, easy writing conditions, and a mind full of thoughts, this short story will surely give me a passing grade followed by a nod of approval.
To begin, the easiest and most rewarding thing accomplished so far is the creation of my character, Chief Squatsalot. It is easy to just start with a thought and bring it to paper when the only rules is the length of the story. The reward is to know that i have successfully completed the first part in writing a detailed short story. To be rewarded for an easy assignment is amazing, even from the best teacher ever.
However the character was easy, the plot is a completely different story. Before you can start writing you have to think with the end in mind. For example, you can't expect your story to just fold out without knowing what will happen in the end. Details do not just connect themselves in the line you want without planning ahead. Therefore some forethought before writing will be followed by an optimum story.
Furthermore, my character, Chief Squatsalot, is an Indian chief of tribe Lotsoftrees. He is rather tall, with a built body tone and a little bit of an overextended stomach from all the offerings of food from his loyal tribesmen. The members of the tribe jump at his word, do anything and everything needed without a murmur of dissatisfaction, and most of all stand by him in good and bad times. The one detail of the Chief is his preference of clothing. A simple triangle of leather is worn at the waist and the rest is left bare for tanning purposes.
In conclusion, with the best teacher, easy writing conditions, and a mind full of thoughts, this short story will surely give me a passing grade followed by a nod of approval.
Friday, February 22, 2013
cc#4 unfinished
In a recent magazine by New York Times, called Upfront, an article called "The Gun Debate" author Patricia Smith enlightens readers of the gun debate, gun laws, and the possible future of gun control.
Patricia tells about December's tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut, an how it is prompting a new look at the nation's gun laws. The weapon used in the Newtown shooting was a very popular assault rifle called the AR-15. Adam Lanza, the criminal in this case, used the AR-15 to kill 20 children and 6 adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, of the 6 adults his mother was included. A statement from the article, "Gun dealers say it's the most popular rifle in America." In my opinion, just because Lanza used this particular rifle in the shooting should in no way affect another citizen from legally owning it, which is what the gun laws will enforce.
The debate over guns in America date back as far as when the first gun was brought here. President Barack Obama states, "No single law, no set of laws can eliminate evil from the world or prevent every senseless act of violence in our society." This statement somewhat contradicts Obama's stand on gun control for he is directly implying that it will not prevent evil, senseless acts of violence. A well known statement, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." is where i stand in the matter. I understand if people have guns it is easy to commit a crime, yet if guns are taken law abiding citizens will be the only ones left defenseless for the criminals already disobey the government's laws.
Patricia tells about December's tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut, an how it is prompting a new look at the nation's gun laws. The weapon used in the Newtown shooting was a very popular assault rifle called the AR-15. Adam Lanza, the criminal in this case, used the AR-15 to kill 20 children and 6 adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, of the 6 adults his mother was included. A statement from the article, "Gun dealers say it's the most popular rifle in America." In my opinion, just because Lanza used this particular rifle in the shooting should in no way affect another citizen from legally owning it, which is what the gun laws will enforce.
The debate over guns in America date back as far as when the first gun was brought here. President Barack Obama states, "No single law, no set of laws can eliminate evil from the world or prevent every senseless act of violence in our society." This statement somewhat contradicts Obama's stand on gun control for he is directly implying that it will not prevent evil, senseless acts of violence. A well known statement, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." is where i stand in the matter. I understand if people have guns it is easy to commit a crime, yet if guns are taken law abiding citizens will be the only ones left defenseless for the criminals already disobey the government's laws.
Sunday, February 10, 2013
current connection #3: Korean threats
In "LA Times" article by Barbara Demick and Ken Dilanian, called U.S. promises action after North Korea's blatant threats, citizens are informed of actions between North Korea and the United States concerning nuclear missile testing which was made clear that the target is our homeland.
"The United States and China reacted sharply to the latest torrent of belligerent language from North Korea, which called the U.S. its "archenemy" and said it planned to conduct another nuclear test despite international sanctions". The definition of sharply must be growing differently each day, for my opinion of sharply would be a forceful way to prevent anymore nuclear testing which has already been stated will one day be targeting the United States of America. When a country plainly states we are a target for nuclear destruction wouldn't that be deemed necessary for forceful reactions.
"Calling the United States the "archenemy of the Korean people," the commission said, "We are not disguising the fact that the various satellites and long-range rockets that we will fire and the high-level nuclear test we will carry out are targeted at the United States." This quote pulled from the article, explains the numbing fact that yet another country is becoming a nuclear power, and yet another country intends on destroying the western civilization we call home. For the second time in our nation's history we are looking North Korea in the face of a potential war.
With North Korea under the new ruling of Kim Jong Un rather then his father Kim Jong Il, it was expected to be a more moderate course yet it has turned into war threats supported by nuclear tests. The surprising step taken by Korea's long time ally China recommending the resumption of the six-nations talks on North Korea's nuclear program. Although North Korea is not wealthy, two nuclear tests have been conducted. The first in the year of 2006 followed by the second in 2009.
Personally it is a very important topic to thoroughly study for the sake of our nation will be determined by the outcome of events. North Korea testing long distance nuclear weapons, stating directly that the target is our homeland, evidence as such tends to worry the mind. Whether the U.S. retaliates or not will be upon us soon. Advising a war is not my position yet if it saves us from nuclear destruction my vote will be positive.
In conclusion, with North Korea's leaders growing more and more insane through generations, if nuclear threats and tests do not cease it will be a head on collision between nations to see who the top dog is.
"The United States and China reacted sharply to the latest torrent of belligerent language from North Korea, which called the U.S. its "archenemy" and said it planned to conduct another nuclear test despite international sanctions". The definition of sharply must be growing differently each day, for my opinion of sharply would be a forceful way to prevent anymore nuclear testing which has already been stated will one day be targeting the United States of America. When a country plainly states we are a target for nuclear destruction wouldn't that be deemed necessary for forceful reactions.
"Calling the United States the "archenemy of the Korean people," the commission said, "We are not disguising the fact that the various satellites and long-range rockets that we will fire and the high-level nuclear test we will carry out are targeted at the United States." This quote pulled from the article, explains the numbing fact that yet another country is becoming a nuclear power, and yet another country intends on destroying the western civilization we call home. For the second time in our nation's history we are looking North Korea in the face of a potential war.
With North Korea under the new ruling of Kim Jong Un rather then his father Kim Jong Il, it was expected to be a more moderate course yet it has turned into war threats supported by nuclear tests. The surprising step taken by Korea's long time ally China recommending the resumption of the six-nations talks on North Korea's nuclear program. Although North Korea is not wealthy, two nuclear tests have been conducted. The first in the year of 2006 followed by the second in 2009.
Personally it is a very important topic to thoroughly study for the sake of our nation will be determined by the outcome of events. North Korea testing long distance nuclear weapons, stating directly that the target is our homeland, evidence as such tends to worry the mind. Whether the U.S. retaliates or not will be upon us soon. Advising a war is not my position yet if it saves us from nuclear destruction my vote will be positive.
In conclusion, with North Korea's leaders growing more and more insane through generations, if nuclear threats and tests do not cease it will be a head on collision between nations to see who the top dog is.
Friday, February 8, 2013
current connection #2: French Military campaign
In a recent article in the "LA Times" by Shashank Bengali, Ken Dilanian and David S. Cloud, called U.S. moves to bolster French military campaign in Mali, information about American troops ferrying the French into Mali for the latest conflict with Al Qaeda is given to the public.
"U.S. officials said they also were making plans to send drones or other surveillance aircraft and provide help with aerial refueling of French fighter jets, which bombed columns of Al Qaeda-allied militants in northern Mali for a fourth straight day Monday". America may not be physically involved in the Mali conflict but is clearly supporting the French in their task of stopping Al Qaeda from taking over Mali completely. In theory America will eventually become involved, if of course there is an immanent threat to our homeland.
There is growing concern in Washington about "rebel advances" which has lead the Obama Administration to back the French after several months of inactivity. Which in my opinion leads to ideas of slowly but surely involving ourselves in yet another terrorist act dealt against weaker nations. While in the midst of removing troops in Afghanistan, it seems definite they will just transfer continents to partake in the same war just another location, due to cause more casualties on both sides.
Unlike recent times of inactivity in this conflict, "We have promised [France] that we will ... provide whatever assistance we can to try to help them," Panetta said. This statement leads me to believe that physical U.S. action will soon be taken. With a war already in our hands plus the action being taken in Mali, this could be a devastating money pit for our nation.
This article is an attention grabber in my opinion for anytime our country could be on the verge of war it should interest everyone especially teenagers for they are the next possible warriors to take charge. Many young adults are some what careless when it comes to wars, or struggles in our country but do not yet realize the world they are unaware of will soon turn into their own world.
In conclusion, this article is very important for the simple fact of it informs readers all over the country of the possible war front that is approaching us.
"U.S. officials said they also were making plans to send drones or other surveillance aircraft and provide help with aerial refueling of French fighter jets, which bombed columns of Al Qaeda-allied militants in northern Mali for a fourth straight day Monday". America may not be physically involved in the Mali conflict but is clearly supporting the French in their task of stopping Al Qaeda from taking over Mali completely. In theory America will eventually become involved, if of course there is an immanent threat to our homeland.
There is growing concern in Washington about "rebel advances" which has lead the Obama Administration to back the French after several months of inactivity. Which in my opinion leads to ideas of slowly but surely involving ourselves in yet another terrorist act dealt against weaker nations. While in the midst of removing troops in Afghanistan, it seems definite they will just transfer continents to partake in the same war just another location, due to cause more casualties on both sides.
Unlike recent times of inactivity in this conflict, "We have promised [France] that we will ... provide whatever assistance we can to try to help them," Panetta said. This statement leads me to believe that physical U.S. action will soon be taken. With a war already in our hands plus the action being taken in Mali, this could be a devastating money pit for our nation.
This article is an attention grabber in my opinion for anytime our country could be on the verge of war it should interest everyone especially teenagers for they are the next possible warriors to take charge. Many young adults are some what careless when it comes to wars, or struggles in our country but do not yet realize the world they are unaware of will soon turn into their own world.
In conclusion, this article is very important for the simple fact of it informs readers all over the country of the possible war front that is approaching us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)