The Army has been ordered to increase its size within the next five years. To do so, it has begun retaining troops.
In addition to the problem of fewer recruits, the new "Couch-potato" generation is posing a difficult challenge for the military to overcome.
Fewer and fewer people are potential recruits.
Promotion has increased due to the need for supervision for the troops, often resulting in incompetent leaders.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1108/p02s04-usmi.html?page=1
What do you think about:
-incompetent leaders
-retention of troops for longer than originally agreed
-the "couch-potato" generation
-increasing the military's size
Thursday, November 8, 2007
Terrorists or Monkeys?
As the United States and Americans fear terrorists, other nations may have bigger fish to fry, or should I say "bigger monkeys to fry"?
It is not the first case authorities have seen: the urban monkeys living in New Delhi have killed. On October 21 of this year, an important political leader died after falling off his first-story balcony from a pack of monkeys. The deputy mayor was peacefully reading his paper when urban monkeys attacked.
The estimated 5,500 monkeys living in New Delhi reside in the temple of Hanuman, the Hindu monkey god. But these monkeys usually don't stay in the temple. The Indian Parliament is has made many attempts at relocated the monkeys, like placing them in monkey "prisons" but that made animal rights group angry, or sending the monkeys away to other states but the neighboring regions refuse, or hiring more monkey catchers but even with a 450 rupees ($10.50) reward per monkey the city only has a force of three monkey catchers.
The monkeys have not only been blamed for the death of public officials but they have also broken into the Ministry of Defence, destroyed secret documents, weaseled their way through airport security and almost caused a complete shut of the airport.
Death by monkeys would seen sad during any other point in time, but seeing that we have a "war on terror" to think about, death by monkey is more than ironic.
We expect to be attack. We watch what color our national security is today, yet we can die from monkeys or chock on a pretzel.
Are we so tight that it is hard for us to accept being killed by monkeys?
Are we so scared of another 9/11 that we can't imagine another way to die?
Can we realize that other nations sometimes have bigger problems than terrorism? (unless you consider the monkeys terrorist)
It is not the first case authorities have seen: the urban monkeys living in New Delhi have killed. On October 21 of this year, an important political leader died after falling off his first-story balcony from a pack of monkeys. The deputy mayor was peacefully reading his paper when urban monkeys attacked.
The estimated 5,500 monkeys living in New Delhi reside in the temple of Hanuman, the Hindu monkey god. But these monkeys usually don't stay in the temple. The Indian Parliament is has made many attempts at relocated the monkeys, like placing them in monkey "prisons" but that made animal rights group angry, or sending the monkeys away to other states but the neighboring regions refuse, or hiring more monkey catchers but even with a 450 rupees ($10.50) reward per monkey the city only has a force of three monkey catchers.
The monkeys have not only been blamed for the death of public officials but they have also broken into the Ministry of Defence, destroyed secret documents, weaseled their way through airport security and almost caused a complete shut of the airport.
Death by monkeys would seen sad during any other point in time, but seeing that we have a "war on terror" to think about, death by monkey is more than ironic.
We expect to be attack. We watch what color our national security is today, yet we can die from monkeys or chock on a pretzel.
Are we so tight that it is hard for us to accept being killed by monkeys?
Are we so scared of another 9/11 that we can't imagine another way to die?
Can we realize that other nations sometimes have bigger problems than terrorism? (unless you consider the monkeys terrorist)
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
World Police
Whilst looking up more sources relating to Jacquie's post on improved relations with France, I found this:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/07/sarkozy.congress/index.html
Sarkozy insists that the USA and France work together, but remain on equal footing.
He called on the USA to acknowledge the international issues that threaten to effect every nation.
Musharraf called for a state of emergency, postponed elections and suspended constitutional rights in the name of the fight against terrorism.
Bush and Sarkozy have taken it upon themselves to threaten Musharraf into retreating.
They are demanding that Pakistan "'have the elections as scheduled, and [Bush wants] [Musharraf] to take the uniform off'".
The article focuses on the revived relationship between France and the USA, but will this relationship last?
Returning to the issue over America's self appointed state as "World Police", is it really our right to get involved?
Isn't it slightly hypocritical that Bush demands Musharraf "take the uniform off"?
While Musharraf might be using more drastic measures, isn't doing so under the same
reasoning as the Patriot Act and the Homeland Security Act?
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/07/sarkozy.congress/index.html
Sarkozy insists that the USA and France work together, but remain on equal footing.
He called on the USA to acknowledge the international issues that threaten to effect every nation.
Musharraf called for a state of emergency, postponed elections and suspended constitutional rights in the name of the fight against terrorism.
Bush and Sarkozy have taken it upon themselves to threaten Musharraf into retreating.
They are demanding that Pakistan "'have the elections as scheduled, and [Bush wants] [Musharraf] to take the uniform off'".
The article focuses on the revived relationship between France and the USA, but will this relationship last?
Returning to the issue over America's self appointed state as "World Police", is it really our right to get involved?
Isn't it slightly hypocritical that Bush demands Musharraf "take the uniform off"?
While Musharraf might be using more drastic measures, isn't doing so under the same
reasoning as the Patriot Act and the Homeland Security Act?
French President visits Washington DC
The French President Nicolas Sarkozy made his first visit to the United States since his election to the presidency in May of 2007.
President Sarkozy spoke to Congress today about France's support in Afghanistan, the drop of the US dollar to the Euro, and criticized the Bush administration on its weak platform on global warming. But Iran was the biggest subject President Sarkozy spoke about. President Bush said that they will "work jointly to convince the Iranian regime to give up their nuclear ambitions for the sake of peace".
He said that his visit was to "reconquer American hearts". He did so by telling Congress that France is eternally in debt to America during WWII. Known in France as "L'Americain" for his love of the American workplace, culture, and core beliefs, President Sarkozy hopes to rebuilt the once great relation between the two nations.
Will this visit help heal the broken alliance left by Iraq and France's previous president Chirac?
Will it lead to better European relations with the United States?
Or was this only a publicity stunt?
Photo courtesy of http://news.bbc.co.uk/
18 year-old kills 8 people in Finland
After the Columbine shooting in April of 1999, the shooting at an Amish school in
Pennsylvania in October of 2006, and the Virginia Tech shooting in April of 2007, yet again there has been a deadly shooting at a school.
This time in southern Finland at Jokela High School on November 7, 2007. The gunman has been identified as Pekka-Eric Auvinen, an 18 year-old student at the school. The gunman, who had no prior criminal record, purchased the gun less than a month before the shooting. Pekka-Eric Auvinen took the lives of seven students and the principal of the school before shooting himself in the head.
Pennsylvania in October of 2006, and the Virginia Tech shooting in April of 2007, yet again there has been a deadly shooting at a school.
This time in southern Finland at Jokela High School on November 7, 2007. The gunman has been identified as Pekka-Eric Auvinen, an 18 year-old student at the school. The gunman, who had no prior criminal record, purchased the gun less than a month before the shooting. Pekka-Eric Auvinen took the lives of seven students and the principal of the school before shooting himself in the head.
He had posted a Youtube video of his plan, giving an eerie resemblance to the Virginia Tech shooting this past year. In the video, which has been removed from Youtube, he shows off his gun and called himself a "social Darwinist". Under the screen name, Sturmgeist, which means storm spirit in German, he explained that "death and killing is not a tragedy... Not all human lives are important or worth saving."
What drives these people to commit such awful acts?
Is there anyway to prevent this from happening in the future? Can the authorities possibly predict this behavior?
Information from http://news.bbc.co.uk/ and a French news broadcast.
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Primaries
The primaries are beginning to heat up.
Having watched them in our own class and created boardgames based around them, I don't feel the need to explain them.
Sen. Barack Obama has been deemed an "impatient" politician who will move legislation faster by changing the system.
He also claims to cut off all "strings" from lobbyists.
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Nov06/0,4670,Obama,00.html
While these two statements would be ideal, how can he guarantee to follow through with them?
Already in our class elections, interest groups have become important.
Hasn't every running candidate promised to make things move faster, or change the status quo?
If Sen. Barack Obama does manage to follow through with these promises, does he stand a chance against Sen. Hilary Clinton, let alone the republican candidate?
Senator Hilary Clinton has been accused of playing the gender card as a shield against her opponents (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/02/us/politics/02cnd-clinton.html?hp) while Senator Barack Obama is enduring the correlation that has been (at first accidentally) drawn between "Obama" and "Osama" (http://mediamatters.org/items/200507120008).
These attacks are underhanded and irrelevant to policies, but will Clinton and Obama's gender and race respectively affect the outcome of the primaries or general election?
For each, how do you predict it will be positive or negative?
Does the emphasis on their gender and race demonstrate the increased highlight on person-oriented politics as opposed to emphasis on policies?
Having watched them in our own class and created boardgames based around them, I don't feel the need to explain them.
Sen. Barack Obama has been deemed an "impatient" politician who will move legislation faster by changing the system.
He also claims to cut off all "strings" from lobbyists.
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Nov06/0,4670,Obama,00.html
While these two statements would be ideal, how can he guarantee to follow through with them?
Already in our class elections, interest groups have become important.
Hasn't every running candidate promised to make things move faster, or change the status quo?
If Sen. Barack Obama does manage to follow through with these promises, does he stand a chance against Sen. Hilary Clinton, let alone the republican candidate?
Senator Hilary Clinton has been accused of playing the gender card as a shield against her opponents (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/02/us/politics/02cnd-clinton.html?hp) while Senator Barack Obama is enduring the correlation that has been (at first accidentally) drawn between "Obama" and "Osama" (http://mediamatters.org/items/200507120008).
These attacks are underhanded and irrelevant to policies, but will Clinton and Obama's gender and race respectively affect the outcome of the primaries or general election?
For each, how do you predict it will be positive or negative?
Does the emphasis on their gender and race demonstrate the increased highlight on person-oriented politics as opposed to emphasis on policies?
Suicide bombing in Northern Afghanistan
Nearly 40 are dead today, November 6, after a suicide bomber blew himself up in New Baghlan, in northern Afghanistan. Among the dead are schoolchildren and political leaders. The White House made a statement that "The terrorist attack today in Afghanistan is a despicable act of cowardice and it reminds us who the enemy is..." The Taliban condemns the attack, claiming no responsibility. The bomber has not been identified for lack of body.
Politicians came to the quiet region of Baghlan to visit a sugar factory. Among the dead are the former minister of commerce, Sayed Mustafa Kazemi, and four other members of Parliment. Many schoolchildren were wounded or killed because they had gathered to welcome the leaders.
This bombing is so unexpected because suicide bombings are normally in southern and eastern Afghanistan. It is also significant because it reflects the growing number of insurgent attacks and reflects the increased efforts of the Taliban to gain power. (Although they deny the bombing.)
With the spotlight on Iraq and occasionally Iran, Americans only remember Afghanistan when there's a bombing even though they are as great a treat as any other country that hates the United States and its policies.
Which country or countries do you think we should focus on?
Politicians came to the quiet region of Baghlan to visit a sugar factory. Among the dead are the former minister of commerce, Sayed Mustafa Kazemi, and four other members of Parliment. Many schoolchildren were wounded or killed because they had gathered to welcome the leaders.
This bombing is so unexpected because suicide bombings are normally in southern and eastern Afghanistan. It is also significant because it reflects the growing number of insurgent attacks and reflects the increased efforts of the Taliban to gain power. (Although they deny the bombing.)
With the spotlight on Iraq and occasionally Iran, Americans only remember Afghanistan when there's a bombing even though they are as great a treat as any other country that hates the United States and its policies.
Which country or countries do you think we should focus on?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)